The paper: content, structure and methodology

oversight. Such a process would also contribute to lasting peace. Research has shown that involvement of and advocacy by women engaged in peace processes positively influenced agreements to address GBV and prosecution of GBVrelated crimes.56

Eliminating GBV, upholding women’s human rights and facilitating access to justice for GBV survivors are core obligations of States and international actors. They, particularly under CEDAW and relevant regional treaties, apply under all circumstances, including in complex settings. However, measures or programmes to ensure access to justice for GBV survivors need to be tailored to women’s specific needs and vulnerabilities and must be relevant to contextual complexities. This highlights a key learning from decades of implementing gender justice and rule of law initiatives – that there is no ‘one-sizefits-all’ approach.57

On this note, this paper provides a deeper understanding of the specific challenges women face in accessing justice for GBV in complex settings and highlights tailored approaches for better protection, prevention and response, especially by justice systems.

The content in this paper is based on a literature review, qualitative interviews and focus group discussions in six countries [Afghanistan, Honduras, Papua New Guinea (PNG), the Philippines, South Sudan and Tunisia] experiencing complex challenges (such as health emergencies, conflicts, organized crime and climate disasters), and the inputs of experts. The situations included in this study are complex not only because of the prevailing social and political environment but also because of the complexity of justice systems in each of the countries examined. This paper also examines other crucial factors overlaying such complexities such as the role of non-State, private or religious actors, as well as customary and informal justice systems, in the way women and girls experience GBV and consequently their justice seeking pathways.

By focusing on complex settings, this paper seeks to contribute to research and understanding of what interventions work to effectively respond to GBV, uphold women’s rights, and facilitate access to justice for GBV survivors. This is particularly critical as despite numerous initiatives to prevent and respond to GBV in the past 25 years, relatively few have been rigorously evaluated and there are significant evidence gaps on the effectiveness of programming approaches. This is partly due to numerous methodological challenges associated with data collection, particularly in conflict and fragile settings.58 Given the prevalence and impact of GBV on women and girls, there is a need to build the evidence base to effectively address it through inclusive, gender sensitive and locally relevant interventions that are not only compliant with human rights standards, but are tailored to complex situations.

The paper is structured as follows:

• Chapter 1: Access to justice for GBV survivors in complex settings: key concepts and framework of analysis

• Chapter 2: International standards on ensuring justice for GBV survivors

• Chapter 3: Justice mechanisms addressing GBV across the six focus countries

• Chapter 4: Legal frameworks to address GBV

• Chapter 5: Constraints and opportunities for women’s access to justice in complex settings

• Chapter 6: Services for GBV survivors in complex settings

• Chapter 7: Primary prevention of GBV in complex settings

• Chapter 8: Key findings and recommendations for advancing women’s access to justice in complex settings

The paper is aimed at informing the work of policymakers, development practitioners and justice actors, including lawyers, judges, court administrators, as well as those training judicial and legal professionals. It is also targeted for use by those working with justice institutions and processes such as women’s organizations, national human rights organizations, humanitarian actors, researchers, activists and others engaged in justice sector reform.

The research set out to meet the following three research objectives:

• Identify the main challenges for justice mechanisms in addressing GBV in complex situations.

• Explore approaches that work or show promise for improving access to justice for survivors of GBV in complex situations. • Highlight justice innovations that have been shown to increase the effectiveness of the justice system in responding to GBV in complex situations.

To this end, a mix of methodological approaches was adopted through a desk review of key documents, primary qualitative data collection, and an expert group meeting to review emerging findings and recommendations. All primary data collection was conducted before 15 August 2021. As such, the main findings of the report were produced before the Taliban takeover in Afghanistan, and before the adoption of a new constitution in Tunisia, following a referendum on 25 July 2022.

Box 4: Summary of research methods

Desk review

International legal standards, reports, overview of survivor-centred practices in rule of law and justice programming.

Country context studies

National and international researchers provided an overview of the legal, policy and institutional context related to GBV in each of the six countries.

51 key informant interviews

In-depth, semi-structured interviews with 57 interviewees across the six study countries (in some case, two people from the same organization or institution were interviewed at the same time). A diverse range of stakeholders were interviewed from government (13), civil society (21), academia (9) and multilateral organizations (8). In total, 50 women and 7 men were interviewed.

6 focus group discussions (FGDs)

FGDs were conducted with 35 participants, which included members of the judiciary (4), lawyers (13), representatives from women’s organizations (11), forensic specialists (2), international humanitarian practitioners (3) an academic (1) and a gender specialist (1). FGDs were conducted in Afghanistan, Honduras, South Sudan and Tunisia.

Expert group meeting

An expert group meeting with 30 participants was convened on 22 July 2021.

The desk review focused both on documents specific to the six focus countries (Afghanistan, Honduras, PNG, the Philippines, South Sudan and Tunisia), and others that were global in scope, reflecting justice trends and promising access to justice approaches outside of the study countries. Key stakeholders were identified across each of the six study countries for key informant interviews and focus group discussions among justice and legal professionals, government officials, GBV service providers, multilateral agencies, donors, non-governmental organizations, civil society organizations (CSOs), women’s rights activists and researchers. Semi-structured interview questionnaires were given to key informants in 51 interviews, and 6 focus group discussions were conducted with a total of 35 participants across the

six study countries. Participatory data collection tools such as free listing and open-ended stories were prioritized in the FGDs. Informed consent forms were distributed and discussed with all participants in the interviews and FGDs. Towards completion of qualitative data collection, the research team presented emerging findings and recommendations to a global group of experts for their review.59

Sample selection: The countries of focus in the research – Afghanistan, Honduras, South Sudan, the Philippines, Tunisia and PNG – were selected to include a range of fragile and complex situations such as post conflict, organized crime, plural legal systems, aftermath of climaterelated natural disasters, and health emergencies. The aim was to select a set of countries that are as diverse as possible, approximating a “most different systems” design.60

Thus, the following criteria were applied in country selection:

• Lends itself to illustrating either promising practices or particular challenges on one or more analytical dimensions – legal frameworks, opportunities for women’s access to justice, provision of services and primary prevention.

• Covers a range of complex situations.

• Provides geographical diversity, with at least one example each from Africa,

Asia and the Pacific, Central and South

America, and the Middle East and

North Africa (MENA) region.

• Adds to existing knowledge.

• Ensures access and feasibility of the research. For the purpose of the study, a case was understood as a particular intervention or approach, whether sectoral (limited to the justice sector) or inter-sectoral, that shows promise in supporting access to justice for GBV survivors in complex situations in one country (e.g., the aftermath of Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines or the COVID-19 pandemic in Tunisia).

Although an effort was made to achieve a diversity of countries, the ability to draw general conclusions was impacted by the lack of a representative set of cases, volatile and fast changing contexts – as was experienced in Afghanistan – and access to and availability of data. All data was collected during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the lockdowns imposed in several countries, such as the Philippines, made it impossible for the researchers to travel to gather community-level data. These limitations were mitigated through the adoption of the aforementioned data collection and validation methods.