Those who document, investigate, report, research, monitor and otherwise gather and use information about systematic and conflict-related sexual violence (SCRSV) should be guided by existing law, minimum standards and best practices on how to properly undertake such work.

There are numerous technical publications from different sectors which reflect such guidance and best practices. They include the International Protocol on the Documentation and Investigation of Sexual Violence in Conflict (2017). However, there are persistent reports that some actors are unaware of or do not follow the applicable law and available guidance.

Survivors have described some of the problems from their perspective. Those who document or gather and use information about SCRSV – for purposes ranging from advocacy, human rights monitoring and fact-finding to media reporting, academic research, transitional justice, strategic and criminal litigation – have also identified problems concerning the safety, use and effectiveness of documentation. The problems identified include:

Why is the Code Needed?

  • Repeated and unnecessary re-interviewing of survivors

  • Interviews carried out by untrained or unskilled interviewers and interpreters with rushed, ineffective, unsafe or otherwise harmful methods

  • Documenters being unaware of the ways in which such methods can cause harm to or re-traumatise survivors

  • Unclear or rushed informed consent procedures which do not give survivors the full information on options and risks, or the time and space to make their own choices

  • Survivors not receiving promised feedback on outcomes

  • Lack of medical and psycho-social support which survivors may require following their experiences or because of the effects of re-traumatising interviews

  • Insufficient planning and mitigation measures regarding security and other risks and local contexts, including meeting survivors in places where the interview can be observed, overheard or interrupted by others.

Ineffective, unsafe or otherwise unethical documentation practices, however well-intentioned, cause or amplify harm suffered by survivors. While often not recognised, it also harms their chances to access justice (e.g., if repeated interviews result in inconsistent or inaccurate records). It undermines respect for other human rights of survivors and may undermine their trust in the rule of law and other governance and crisis-response systems. Information-gathering practices which disrespect such minimum standards are rarely effective and do not add value of the kind promised to survivors.

Miriam Lewin, journalist and political activist, speaking about how information-gatherers and users can reduce the burden on survivors by adhering to the standards in the Murad Code