In South Sudan, women’s bodies have long functioned as battlefields. Through civil war, intercommunal violence and localised conflicts, state and non-state actors have repeatedly used sexual violence to terrorise civilians – especially women and girls.
Conflict-related sexual violence (CRSV) in South Sudan is much more than a humanitarian issue. It exposes deep protection failures by the state and international peacekeeping and accountability frameworks meant to safeguard civilians.
|
|
Recent Institute for Security Studies fieldwork suggests that the violence is evolving beyond traditional conflict settings. Sources described an increase in attacks by youth gangs, largely in the capital Juba, who rape and gang-rape young girls. Assaults are sometimes recorded and circulated on social media, reflecting the growing intersection between physical and technology-facilitated gender-based violence.
Fieldwork respondents pointed to the trafficking of women and girls from Ethiopia, the Central African Republic and Sudan. Sexual exploitation and abuse also occur around artisanal mining sites in areas such as Jebel Iraq, west of Juba and Kapoeta in the country’s southeast.
|
|
|
|---|
Displaced women face heightened risks when collecting food, water or firewood outside protected sites, particularly in insecure rural areas. Communities in the northern Nasir and Leer counties are disproportionately vulnerable.
The current crisis should be considered in the context of the country’s various peace agreements. The 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement, ending Sudan’s 21-year conflict and establishing South Sudan as a separate country, did not cover justice for CRSV and violations perpetrated by both the Sudanese Armed Forces and the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA).
Consequently, when civil war erupted in South Sudan in 2013, CRSV continued to be perpetrated by forces aligned with the government, the Sudan People’s Liberation Army in Opposition (SPLA/IO), the South Sudan People’s Defence Forces (SSPDF) and militias. Victims were often targeted along ethnic lines. Sexual violence became embedded in strategies of punishment, intimidation and collective dehumanisation.
Amnesty International has documented instances of rape and gang rape, often accompanied by mutilation and the killing or abandonment of victims, including elderly women, young girls and pregnant women.
The persistence of CRSV is tied to its tolerance within weak military structures that fail to treat sexual violence as a punishable offence. Despite military tribunals, both the SSPDF and SPLA/IO have shown limited willingness to investigate or prosecute perpetrators, even in documented cases involving groups of soldiers.
This culture of brutality is fuelled by distorted social norms, gender inequalities and the devaluation of women and girls. CRSV is normalised and used as a reward for male combatants, especially youth.
The conflict’s fragmentation into multiple armed groups and localised violence has intensified the problem. Between July and September 2025, the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) documented a 147% increase in civilian victims of CRSV compared to the same period in 2024.
The real number of survivors is unknown and includes women, men and children. Widespread underreporting is driven by stigma, fear of reprisal and a dysfunctional justice system. Also, state and non-state actors restrict access to verification teams, UNMISS personnel and local organisations.
The enduring legacy of this violence is seen in the children born of wartime sexual assault, who continue to experience exclusion and inadequate support. There is also the silent crisis of sexual violence against men and boys, whose experiences are obscured by stigma, shame and entrenched expectations of masculinity.
South Sudan has made some progress through court martials, mobile courts and specialised judicial mechanisms to prosecute sexual violence. Convictions were secured in 2018 and 2022, alongside the creation of a dedicated Gender-Based Violence and Juvenile Court in Juba.
But these gains are limited in a justice landscape marked by poorly trained and gender-insensitive police, weak investigations and enforcement, and corruption.
The nature of the 2018 revitalised peace agreement and its selective implementation are also obstacles. Although chapter five addressed accountability, parties prioritised reconciliation and reparations while ignoring criminal justice and civilian protection. This creates a paradox in which alleged perpetrators are elevated to political stakeholders and custodians of justice, forcing survivors to seek redress through institutions that lack independence and credibility.
UNMISS’s recent mandate renewal also raises concerns. Its terms continue to prioritise protecting civilians, humanitarian access and human rights monitoring, but troop numbers were reduced, and references to CRSV and the Women, Peace and Security agenda were removed.
This reflects a wider United States-led rollback of gender and Women, Peace and Security commitments in the multilateral system. Mandate language is critical as it defines peacekeeping priorities. Previous missions show that contested or diluted protection provisions lead to uneven implementation, particularly around civilian protection and responses to sexual violence.
To address South Sudan’s deepening protection crisis, four priorities merit attention.
First, the UNMISS mandate must retain explicit CRSV provisions. The gap between language and operational reality must be closed by ensuring adequate protection capacity, sustained monitoring and unrestricted humanitarian access in high-risk areas.
Second, efforts to address sexual and gender-based violence should be linked to broader constitutional, governance and rule of law reforms. South Sudan’s challenge is not simply the weakness of young institutions, but the persistence of political arrangements that allow violence, impunity and state capture to endure.
Third, elite impunity must end. CRSV responses must move beyond political settlements that absorb perpetrators into state structures without accountability. It is vital to strengthen specialised courts, support survivor-centred justice mechanisms and advance the Hybrid Court. The state must also improve national systems for data collection on sexual and gender-based violence to reduce reliance on humanitarian reporting.
Finally, international partners should expand long-term assistance for local civil society organisations and survivor-led networks, which remain the most consistent source of support.
Titilope F Ajayi is a Senior Research Consultant in the Central Africa Observatory at the Institute for Security Studies (ISS). Kuyang Harriet Logo Mulukwat is a Fellow at the Rift Valley Institute and Gender Lead at Peacebuilding Opportunities Fund2.
(This article was first published by ISS Today, a Premium Times syndication partner. We have their permission to republish).
