Four - Critical commentary

Summary

Feminist commentators, NGOs and political advocates condemn the use of rape and sexual violence. Critical analysis includes reservations regarding theorising on rape in conflict, recognises legitimate concerns about the limitations and inappropriateness of judicial systems and gendered international law. It recognises the suffering of women in adversarial court proceedings, and notes the omission of mention and lack of understanding of tactical rape. Despite these legitimate concerns, I am convinced that imperfect and incremental normative change is significant.

Critical analysis

Hilary Charlesworth and Christine Chinkin examined the boundaries of international law from a feminist perspective. They believe that international law excludes appreciation of women's concerns. Gendered attitudes inherent in law, supposedly applying to both men and women, really ignore or fail to recognise the differing needs of the two genders. International law is ‘a mechanism for distributing power and resources in the international and national communities.’ Quoting Elizabeth Grosz, Charlesworth and Chinkin argued the ‘international’ in international law is a ‘veiled representation and projection of a masculine which takes itself as the unquestioned norm’. While I argue that international law is a logical starting point in achieving recognition and response to tactical rape, it does have serious limitations when applied to women. Charlesworth and Chinkin have informed this understanding by providing sound feminist analysis of international law.

They are convinced that feminist analysis has two major roles: ‘one is deconstruction of the explicit and implicit values of the international legal system, challenging their claim to objectivity and rationality because of the limited base on which they are built’. This conviction could lead to elemental revision of all international law. The second role is reconstructing explicit and implicit values, which ‘requires rebuilding the basic concepts of international law in a way that they do not support or reinforce the domination of women by men’. Gendered formulation and application of international law impedes justice for women, but there has been at least some progress in applying international law more inclusively.

Geneva Convention IV says that state parties must protect women ‘against any attack on their honour, in particular against rape, enforced prostitution or any form of indecent assault’.