About the Report

This report informs the international community on the 

continuum of sexual violence in Peru, current legal practices in 

domestic courts, and the barriers that victim-survivors face in 

seeking justice. The recommendations are based on testimonies 

from victim-survivors of the internal conflict between Shining 

Path and the counterinsurgency in the 1980s and 1990s. 

About the Authors

Jelke Boesten was a Jennings Randolph Senior Fellow at 

USIP during 2011–12. Her work focuses on Latin America, 

particularly the Andes, and sub-Saharan Africa. She has 

published extensively on gender issues in Peru and is 

completing a manuscript called “Rape in War and Peace: 

Rethinking Sexual Violence and Justice in Peru.” Melissa Fisher 

is a Pickering Fellow with the U.S Department of State. In 

2011–12 she worked at USIP with Jelke Boesten on the project 

Rape in War and Peacetime Peru. Fisher is currently earning 

an MA in International Development Studies at the George 

Washington University and holds a BA in Political Science from 

the University of Notre Dame.

2301 Constitution Ave., NW • Washington, DC 20037 • 202.457.1700 • fax 202.429.6063

Special Report 310 June 2012

© 2012 by the United States Institute of Peace. 

All rights reserved.

Contents

Continuum of Violence 2

Sexual Violence and the International Community 4

Transitional Justice in Peru 5

Conclusion: Justice and Citizenship 7

Jelke Boesten and Melissa Fisher

Sexual Violence and 

Justice in Postconflict 

Peru

Summary

•	 Wartime sexual violence in Peru is linked to peacetime gender inequality, which is strongly 

influenced by inequalities based on race and class. These inequalities perpetuate the exclusion of victim-survivors of sexual and gender-based violence in the country’s current postconflict transitional justice period, subject victim-survivors to postconflict violence, and 

reinforce tolerance for sexual violence in peacetime. If the international community and 

the Peruvian government recognize and address these inequalities, then Peru may witness 

a reduction in sexual and gender-based violence. 

•	 Wartime rape can involve a range of acts, motivations, meanings, perpetrators, and victims. 

Peruvian legal and social definitions of sexual violence need to be inclusive of such variations and recognize that the internal conflict produced victim-survivors among women, 

men, and children. 

•	 Domestic institutions should stop dismissing rape as a common crime and start prosecuting 

rape in war as a crime against humanity, as Peru formally recognized when it signed the 

Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Building on existing legislation would 

send signals to the international community and to victim-survivors of the war that Peru 

takes its citizens’ rights in both war and peace seriously. 

•	 Sexual violence precedes and survives conflict, which creates a continuum of violence. 

National policies framed within an understanding of this continuum would be better able 

to guide international, nongovernmental, and community-based organizations operating in 

Peru regarding programs that address intimate partner and family violence. Such programs 

are essential for breaking cycles of violence. 

•	 Reparations and criminal justice are tools of redress that recognize suffering, resilience, 

and citizenship. While Peru is currently using these tools, they do not seem to apply to 

United States Institute of Peace www.usip.org

SPECIAL REPORT
2 

victim-survivors of sexual and gender-based violence. An inclusive politics of justice would 

break through this historical marginalization. 

He had me as his wife, I served him as his wife for one week, in the evenings they 

came to look for me saying—go and denounce us! And he took me to his bed, 

every night of the week they forced me to have sex with him, I had to cook and 

serve him; they imprisoned me in the kitchen and in that room.1

Peru’s internal conflict between the insurgent group Shining Path (Sendero Luminoso) 

and the army between 1980 and 2000 produced an estimated 69,280 deaths and disappearances, 80 percent of which were young men of indigenous descent. This suggests that 

those in the impoverished and marginalized Andean population, traditionally excluded from 

full citizenship by the racialized hierarchies that structure Peruvian society, became both 

participants in and victims of a very destructive spiral of violence. The state’s counterinsurgency matched Shining Path’s extremely violent methods. In December 1982 the government declared several Andean regions to be in a state of emergency, giving the military free 

rein in large parts of the country, particularly the impoverished and marginalized regions of 

Huancavelica, Apurímac, and Ayacucho. Almost immediately after the army took over, the 

region sank into chaos, characterized by violence and fear and producing large numbers of 

victims. Women suffered tremendously as witnesses, victims, survivors, and family members 

of the tortured and disappeared. Evidence suggests that the armed forces and police systematically used rape and other forms of sexual violence, such as forced nudity, sexual torture, 

forced prostitution, abortion, and sexual slavery, to subjugate the population. Shining Path 

also perpetrated sexual violence against the population, although in a comparatively less 

systematic manner.2 Women were both peace activists and Shining Path militants.

The stories of wartime physical and sexual violence perpetrated during Peru’s twentyyear conflict, as told to its Truth and Reconciliation Commission (2001–03), resonate in 

peacetime understandings of gender relations and violence against women. In the quote 

above, the phrase “took me as his wife” is a metaphor for rape; soldiers have suggested that 

women “asked for it” because of their racial background. Today some women report that their 

husbands have beaten them in retaliation for their perceived infidelity while imprisoned by 

armed factions, even though they were gang raped or forcibly prostituted. Peru’s women did 

not ask to be raped and beaten—not before, during, or after war. Nevertheless, little is done 

to address the situation, and perhaps consequently, postwar sexual and domestic violence is 

extremely high and largely unpunished in Peru. A lack of reliable statistics over time makes 

it impossible to compare levels of pre- and postwar sexual violence. Nevertheless, multiple 

nonstatistical indicators show the need to look at wartime rape from the point of view of 

existing peacetime inequalities based on gender, race, and class.

In Peru, socioeconomic position, geographical origin, education, consumption patterns, 

dress, and language inform a person’s position on the ethnic ladder in a racially hierarchical 

society. Race is interpreted as based on the above characteristics, plus physical characteristics such as height and skin, hair, and eye color. Gender refers to society’s perceptions of 

women’s and men’s roles, and how these influence power relations and sexuality. In Peruvian 

society, as well as many others, race, class, and gender intersect in defining inequality, and 

these characteristics need to be accounted for when analyzing rape in war and peace.

Continuum of Violence

In 2001, Peru’s transitional government set up a Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC). 

The testimonies given to the TRC showed how soldiers and police used sexual violence against 

the local population to terrorize and torture, and in particular, how rape served as a weapon 

The views expressed in this report do not necessarily 

reflect the views of the United States Institute of Peace, 

which does not advocate specific policy positions.

To request permission to photocopy or reprint materials, 

e-mail: permissions@usip.org

About the Institute

The United States Institute of Peace is an independent, 

nonpartisan institution established and funded by Congress. 

Its goals are to help prevent and resolve violent conflicts, 

promote postconflict peacebuilding, and increase conflict 

management tools, capacity, and intellectual capital worldwide. The Institute does this by empowering others with 

knowledge, skills, and resources, as well as by its direct 

involvement in conflict zones around the globe.

Board of Directors

J. Robinson West (Chair), Chairman, PFC Energy •

George E. Moose (Vice Chairman), Adjunct Professor of 

Practice, The George Washington University • Judy Ansley,

Former Assistant to the President and Deputy National Security Adviser under President George W. Bush • Eric Edelman,

Hertog Distinguished Practitioner in Residence, Johns Hopkins 

School of Advanced International Studies • Kerry Kennedy, 

President, Robert F. Kennedy Center for Justice and Human 

Rights • Ikram U. Khan, President, Quality Care Consultants, 

LLC • Stephen D. Krasner, Graham H. Stuart Professor 

of International Relations, Stanford University • John A. 

Lancaster, Former Executive Director of the National Council 

on Independent Living • Jeremy A. Rabkin, Professor, 

George Mason School of Law • Judy Van Rest, Executive Vice 

President, International Republican Institute • Nancy Zirkin,

Executive Vice President, Leadership Conference on Civil Rights

Members Ex Officio

Michael H. Posner, Assistant Secretary of State for 

Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor • James N. Miller, 

Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Policy •

Nancy McEldowney, Acting President, National Defense 

University • Richard H. Solomon, President, United States 

Institute of Peace (nonvoting) 
 3

of war. However, the testimonies also show that the diverse experiences of sexual violence 

during the war do not all fit the script of rape as a weapon. The line between coercion and 

consent was often perceived as blurred. Parallels between wartime and peacetime sexual 

violence also prompt questions. Is the rape of women by neighbors, uncles, or stepfathers 

an issue of domestic violence or a crime against humanity? Is the abuse of young girls during wartime exploitation or rape—coercing them to participate in parties and engage in 

sex, without using explicit physical violence? Where do the sexual torture of men and the 

murder of transsexuals by armed groups fit into this framework?3 Little information is available on sexual violence against men, but emerging data suggest that it may have been more 

widespread than previously thought. Accordingly, the script of wartime rape may need to be 

more inclusive of different forms of sexual violence, and different victims and perpetrators. 

Focusing solely on female victim-survivors of violence reinforces the idea of weak 

women and violent men and fails to consider other victims of sexual violence. In addition, 

it overlooks how perpetrators are drawn into using such violence. If we want to go beyond 

the idea that men rape because they can, then it is essential to improve our understanding 

of why soldiers rape.4 Sufficient evidence suggests that systematic sexual violence in Peru 

was encouraged, if not ordered, from above.5 But we still need to better comprehend how 

men become capable of such violence. Looking at what sexual violence offers is useful here. 

To young men with few chances in life, being part of the military may be an opportunity 

for upward mobility. In a society stratified by gender, race, and class, exerting power over 

indigenous women can confirm heterosexual masculinity. Committing sexual violence may 

compensate for one’s own powerlessness. 

The TRC report also shows that new soldiers were forced to commit extreme violence 

as part of their training.6 As Erin Baines points out with regard to Uganda, the situation 

of war creates a gray zone of culpability, in which there may be little space for resistance 

to perpetrating violence. Military peer pressure, threats, and actual harm exercised on 

soldiers influence their actions.7 In Peru, observes Eduardo Gonzalez Cueva, “soldiers who 

are abused because of their race or class and who are taught to associate masculinity and 

violence, Indianness and brutality, poverty and victimization, learn how to abuse others 

on the same grounds. They will learn to exert sexist violence over women, racist violence 

against indigenous groups, and class violence against the poor.”8 One of our interviewees, a 

man born in 1976 from rural Ayacucho, told how he was forced into the military in the early 

1990s after his family attempted to keep him out. He tells us that his time in the military 

was “still another trauma”: “the dog you have in your house is treated better. . . . We, well, 

the blanket under which we slept, we also had to sweep the floor with it.”9 He confirms the 

violence and discrimination soldiers faced within the military. The gray zone of perpetrator and victim has to be recognized, especially in dealing with veterans after war, and may 

improve understanding of soldiers’ actions—though such an understanding cannot replace 

accountability or absolve individual perpetrators, nor should it be used as a reason to overlook some soldiers’ opportunism.

Looking at soldiers’ experiences also highlights that sexual violence is more than a strategy of war, as it also reproduces and exacerbates existing inequalities. Likewise, the theory 

of rape as a weapon of war obscures normalized and tolerated forms of violence and thus 

the persistence of violence in peacetime. Testimonies of victims and perpetrators show that 

sexual violence was used opportunistically, enforced hierarchies among soldiers, women, 

and population groups, was not seen as violence and was blamed on women, and perpetrated by husbands and neighbors. Postconflict sexual and gender-based violence increased; 

women who experienced sexual violence during the war often continued to experience it at 

home.10 Sexual violence both preceded and survived the political conflict. The continuum 

of violence along the lines of race, class, and gender makes the effective prosecution of 

Sexual violence is more than 

a strategy of war, as it also 

reproduces and exacerbates 

existing inequalities.
4 

wartime rape even more important: Not only survivors’ sense of justice, but the judgment of 

all current and future cases of sexual and gender-based violence are at stake. For indigenous 

women historically perceived as lower-class citizens in Peru, access to justice and effective 

prosecutions could break the traditional discriminatory order of Peruvian society and write 

their experiences into national memory. Justice in such cases may show that the state takes 

the security of women seriously and considers all, including indigenous women, as equal citizens. Reparations and access to justice are essential mechanisms in providing such redress.

Sexual Violence and the International Community 

Recent studies confirm much impunity for sexual violence in the world, which impedes 

women from exercising their rights. A comparative report recently published by the InterAmerican Commission of Human Rights concludes that despite policies and laws to address 

violence against women, evidence shows that judicial response is deficient or absent, 

especially considering “the scope of the problem” in the Americas.11 Michele Bachelet, 

executive director of UN Women, observes that “where laws and justice systems work well, 

they can provide an essential mechanism for women to realize their human rights.”12 The 

report continues to outline how access to justice has helped improve the lives of women 

around the world, but it also emphasizes that sexual violence during conflict is partly made 

possible by the impunity with which men rape in wartime. If this impunity is not addressed 

in postconflict situations, violence against women can continue unabated, and women’s 

human rights continue to be violated.13 The same can be said for sexual violence against 

men, children, and the transgendered, which are often obscured by societal taboos. The 

World Development Reports from 2011 and 201214 stress the need for accountability in 

relation to domestic violence as well as wartime sexual violence in transitional societies. As 

Yakin Erturk, the UN rapporteur for violence against women until 2010, concluded regarding 

the situation of women in the Democratic Republic of Congo, “If the sexual violence associated with war is addressed in isolation, gender-based discrimination and violence endured 

by women in ‘peace’ will be grossly neglected and the war on women reinforced.”15 Impunity 

for wartime sexual violence is widely associated with high social tolerance for such violence 

in peacetime. 

The international community has developed a number of treaties and conventions 

designed to protect victims of sexual violence and gender discrimination, particularly 

women and girls. The 1992 UN Convention on Human Rights declared rape a form of torture 

and a violation of human rights. Rape in war is internationally viable for prosecution under 

the International Criminal Court’s jurisdiction on crimes against humanity, according to 

the Rome Statute of 1998. The international criminal tribunals for the former Yugoslavia 

and for Rwanda, ICTY and ICTR, respectively, have been instrumental in further defining 

international human rights law and practice in relation to conflict-related sexual violence. 

Since the start of the new millennium, four UN Security Council resolutions—1325, 1820, 

1889, and 1960—mandate the inclusion of women in peace processes and the protection 

of women and girls in conflict and postconflict settings.16 Such resolutions may help shape 

international humanitarian law and thereby set international standards of adherence to 

human rights. However, in practice, the resolutions apply only to contemporary conflicts, in 

which the international community plays a role in peacebuilding. The international community can do little more to forge transitional gender justice than provide guidelines for states 

through resolutions. Victims of previous violations of human rights in Peru must depend on 

domestic courts to translate evolving international law and ideas about transitional justice 

into national judiciary processes.

Impunity for wartime sexual 

violence is widely associated 

with high social tolerance for 

such violence in peacetime. 
 5

Transitional Justice in Peru

What does justice in relation to sexual violence mean in practice? As a signatory to international conventions and treaties and with its own legal frameworks in place, Peru is obligated 

to prosecute crimes of sexual abuse and bring justice to victims. The Peruvian Truth and 

Reconciliation Commission (TRC), established in 2001 and reporting in 2003, made great 

efforts to include a gender perspective in its investigations.17 Its findings of systematic 

wartime rape generated criticism from feminist and human rights circles, but they have not 

compelled the judiciary to the point of taking action. The TRC recommended prosecuting 

crimes against humanity as part of advancing transitional justice and reconciliation, assuming that alongside a series of other transitional justice mechanisms such as establishing 

historical memory and reparations, formal justice is essential to lasting peace.

Reparations 

The TRC recommended that the state set up a comprehensive reparations plan (plan integral de reparaciones, or PIR) for victims of sexual violence during the armed conflict, but 

progress on distributing individual and collective reparations for victims of sexual violence 

is mixed.18 In the first phase of reparations, 1,900 elderly victims of the armed conflict 

received between 5,000 and 10,000 soles (about $1,893 to $3,787) and 46 received between 

500 and 3,333 soles (about $189 to $1,262).19 In 2012, the government expects to pay 

out 140,000 soles in individual and collective reparations.20 A council for reparations—the 

Registro Único de Víctimas (RUV)—oversees a registry of approximately 2,046 victims of 

rape and 756 victims registered for other forms of sexual violence, including sexual slavery, 

forced unions, forced prostitution, forced abortion, attempt or threat of sexual violence, 

torture of pregnant women, torture of sexual organs, and forced nudity.21 However, the legal 

code for implementing the reparations plan does not recognize victims of other forms of 

sexual violence. The lack of a more inclusive discussion about what sexual violence is, and 

who is a victim of it, are of great concern to human rights organizations. The RUV’s regional 

offices closed on December 31, 2011, leaving approximately 23,000 pending cases of victims 

still waiting to receive the certificates necessary to claim reparations.22

In postconflict settings like Peru, reparations can transform the lives of victims of all 

forms of violence, especially women still suffering the consequences of sexual violence. No 

matter how the victims use the financial compensation, the existence of reparations links 

historical and political violence to state accountability. By paying reparations, the state 

condemns the systematic perpetration of sexual violence and acknowledges its victims, 

sending out a message of inclusion. For this reason, UN Women strongly recommends including women in “reframing the political participation and design of all postconflict justice 

mechanisms,” including reparations programs.23 In Peru, reopening reparations offices and 

changing policy language currently preventing victims of forms of sexual violence other 

than rape from accessing reparations should be among the top priority for policymakers 

invested in postconflict transformation.

Justice

In addition to their importance for the individuals involved, prosecutions consolidate the 

rule of law and intolerance for violations of human rights. This form of justice is especially 

important in cases of sexual violence, as messages of impunity reverberate in homes and in 

the streets. The absence of prosecutions and sentences for sexual violence can lead people 

to conclude that sexual violence does not constitute a violation of human rights or deserve 

judicial attention. Of course, continuing sexual violence in peacetime, and violence against 

women more generally, reinforces gender inequality in all spheres of life. 

The Peruvian Truth and 

Reconciliation Commission 

findings of systematic 

wartime rape have not 

compelled the judiciary to 

the point of taking action. 
6 

In Peru the TRC registered 538 reports of rape. Of these, only sixteen were investigated 

and presented for public prosecution; of those sixteen cases, three were accepted by the 

pretrial chambers, while the other thirteen continue in preliminary investigation with the 

public prosecutor. As of May 2012 one case awaits trial in Lima and another awaits trial at 

the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. The other cases show no movement. This lack of 

progress is not because Peru’s judiciary does not work or because all human rights violations 

go unpunished. Former president Alberto Fujimori (1990–2000) is completing a twenty-fiveyear sentence for corruption and human rights violations, and many others are awaiting trial 

for wartime human rights violations. The prosecutions of all human rights violations by the 

Peruvian armed forces are contentious and difficult to follow through, as recent developments have shown. However, cases of sexual violence are persistently ignored. 

Victim-survivors working with Estudio para la Defensa de los Derechos de la Mujer 

(DEMUS), a nongovernmental organization (NGO) in rural Huancavelica, say they seek collective reparations and formal recognition of their experiences in the years of violence; 

however, the women indicated that they would need substantial external support to be able 

to pursue courtroom justice for the violence done against their own bodies.24 There are 

several reasons why women are reluctant to cooperate with the justice system: shame, lack 

of trust, lack of time and money, lack of external support. All help explain why cases are 

not judicialized. However, with the right professional and material resources, this problem 

could be solved. Local human rights NGOs have convinced Peruvian women in several cases 

to step forward and testify. But despite such efforts, prosecutors and judges do not press 

charges, for three reasons.

The first reason involves the definition of the crime. Prosecutors and judges tend to 

define cases of rape as a common crime instead of a violation of human rights and a crime 

against humanity. This definition decontextualizes the act from a situation of systematic 

violence and terror, nullifies contextual arguments that can prove the likelihood of sexual 

violence, and is according to many prosecutors not worth prosecuting, as common rape 

crimes have a statute of limitations of nine years and carry only a four-year sentence.

The second reason involves lack of evidence, based on the idea that one cannot prove 

that sex has or has not been coercive—a familiar argument everywhere in the world, in war 

and peace. In wartime, however, the ICC has developed investigative protocols clearly indicating that the context of war, especially if systematic rape is observed, should be part of 

the evidence. As suggested above, this does not hold if the crime is prosecuted as a common 

crime instead of crime against humanity. The issue of evidence is linked to the widespread 

idea—not only in Peru, and not only in war—that rape is only rape when there is lasting 

and visible physical harm done. This definition excludes the threat of force or other obvious 

uses of force. In addition, physical evidence may disappear; in one case, a Peruvian court 

demanded a new physical examination of a woman who was raped eleven years earlier. The 

emphasis on physical evidence also dismisses psychological evidence. Psychological assessments can show how damaged and credible people are, but understanding of both terms differs widely. This difference has led to quite extraordinary judgments of women’s testimonies, 

especially from state-appointed forensic psychologists. One woman was deemed “hysterical” 

and manipulative instead of traumatized. How to interpret and value forensic psychological 

evidence is also of concern to cases of peacetime sexual violence in Peru.25

The third reason involves the perpetrators of sexual violence. Prosecutors have claimed 

no evidence of a perpetrator’s identity as many soldiers wore balaclavas and used nicknames. However, investigations show that women often knew names, and definitely dates 

and places, meaning that one could trace exactly which soldiers were stationed at the scene 

of the crime at that moment if access to military archives were granted. At present, such 

access is denied. Military influence over the executive and the judiciary impedes cases of 

Prosecutors and judges tend 

to define cases of rape as a 

common crime instead of a 

violation of human rights and 

a crime against humanity. 
 7

violations of human rights that involve the military: the Ministry of Defense refuses to open 

archives and even claims that the relevant information has been destroyed.

In summary, there are two main impediments to trying cases of wartime sexual violence. 

One is associated with the postwar moment more generally, which is the difficulty of dealing 

with military power and past violations of human rights. The other involves the normative 

framework that permeates society in times of war and peace. Rape as a weapon of war 

is effective because it generates communitywide shame: The line between coercion and 

consent is perceived as blurred. This blurring becomes especially visible when we know that 

many raped women are abused at home, and their husbands often perpetrate such acts of 

violence out of resentment toward the past. 

But interpersonal violence is also high in families and relationships that lack firsthand 

experience of the war, as well as among judges, prosecutors, and other professionals in 

charge of Peru’s security and justice system. According to a recently published investigation 

that amalgamates statistics from several Peruvian institutions concerning reports of sexual 

violence, 68,818 reports were received over the last ten years, an average of 6,881.8 a year, 

or 18.8 a day. These numbers place Peru very high on the world ranking of registered cases 

of sexual violence—number sixteen—and in the number one spot in South America.26 Few 

reported cases are processed judicially, and even fewer lead to convictions: an average of 

642 per year calculated for 2006–09, which amounts to less than 10 percent.27 Experts 

estimate that only 16 percent of victims of sexual violence report it to the appropriate 

institutions. Hence, the numbers are the tip of the iceberg. Impunity is high and likely to 

feed into high rates of sexual and other forms of violence against women and girls in both 

war and peace. Justice through national legislation regarding women’s rights and human 

rights is a tangible tool for evidence-based transformation. However, it can only serve that 

cause if broader changes take place in society to make that possible.

Conclusion: Justice and Citizenship 

Impunity with regard to sexual violence is grounded in gendered normative frameworks, 

which directly result in difficulties in gathering evidence and prosecuting rape as a crime, 

in most of the world, in times of war and peace. Peru is a relatively strong democratic 

state with a relatively well-functioning judiciary and legal guarantees that should protect 

women’s rights. Nevertheless, none of the cases of wartime sexual violence that have been 

investigated thoroughly have appeared before court. Impunity surrounding sexual violence 

in Peru is underpinned by two major elements: the political-military influence exerted over 

the judiciary, and a normative framework grounded in particular ideas about gender, sex, 

and violence, as well as race and class. In discussing the main reasons the public prosecution 

claims to refrain from pressing charges, both elements are visible, and linked. The first point 

is specific to prosecuting war crimes, crimes against humanity, and violations of human 

rights perpetrated by the military. The second and most prevalent constraint to prosecution 

is related to peacetime normative frameworks regarding gender, race, and class. 

The inability to realize gender justice suggests that international and national mechanisms for dealing with gender discrimination and gender-based sexual violence have not 

focused on transforming violent domestic structures and identities. International law 

provides mechanisms to build cases for prosecution, following the ICTY and ICTR, but few 

domestic prosecutors and judges are sufficiently familiar with these frameworks or willing 

to apply them. Over the years, Peru has adopted international law through a series of initiatives, such as the National Council for Human Rights (1986), the National Commission for 

the Study and Application of International Humanitarian Law (2001), and the establishment 

of juridical competence in violations of human rights in the national criminal court. These 
8 

initiatives have helped the successful prosecution of high-profile perpetrators of grave 

violations of human rights, such as the former leader of Shining Path, Abimael Guzmán, and 

ex-president Alberto Fujimori. Less high-profile cases of military and police involvement in 

the systematic perpetration of violations of human rights and crimes against humanity, and 

especially in sexual violence, encounter considerable difficulty. 

Domestic judicial reform across the board takes time, resources, and energy to train lawyers, investigators, and judges in handling cases of wartime and peacetime sexual violence. 

The application of international human rights law in Peru may help public prosecutions, as 

international law offers a clear legal framework to identify violations of human rights and 

supports the prosecution of perpetrators of sexual violence. However, human rights law 

focuses narrowly on what war and peacetime violence is and cannot always be applied to 

cases in need of redress. Local and contextual complexities can only be addressed in domestic courts. Hence, strengthening the independent domestic judiciary is paramount. 

Sexual violence in war is a complex issue involving wartime political and military structures and peacetime inequalities and ideologies. Women bear the brunt of wartime and 

peacetime sexual violence, which is in need of recognition and redress to provide inclusive 

security and future safety. Violence perpetrated against men and transsexuals also needs to 

be recognized and discussed, and forms the other side of the same coin: inequality based on 

understandings of gender. But structural inequality based on race and class are likewise in 

need of attention, both as factors that may lead to the perpetration of sexual and genderbased violence as well as vulnerability to such violence. The background to and impact of 

wartime sexual violence is particular to each conflict, but there are general lessons to be 

learned as well.

Recommendations

The above conclusions point to key areas in which the international community could assist 

postconflict countries in addressing wartime rape and peacetime gender inequalities: 

•	 Invest in gender awareness training of rule of law and security institutions: the police, 

military, and judiciary.

•	 Promote the inclusion of compulsory international human rights law education in all law 

degrees.

•	 Support policies and services to tackle interpersonal violence.

•	 Support civil society organizations working on human rights for cases of sexual violence.

•	 Support a comprehensive reparations plan for sexual violence.

•	 Support platforms for research and civil society initiatives that specifically work with 

youth and affected communities to promote cross-generational change on perspectives of 

accepted cultural norms and sexual violence. 
 9

Acknowledgments 

We thank USIP for providing us with the resources to work on this project, and Kathleen 

Kuehnast at the Center for Gender and Peacebuilding for her trust and continued support. 

In Peru, particular thanks goes to the organizations who provided information and support 

Instituto de Defensa Legal, Comisión de Derechos Humanos, Paz y Esperanza, Estudio para 

la Defensa de los Derechos de la Mujer, and especially to Gloria Cano at the Asociación de 

Promoción de Derechos Humanos.

Notes

1. Archives of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, Defensoría del Pueblo, Lima (Arch. TRC onwards) Manta y 

Vilca, “Individual Investigations,” at Annex 33, Testimony 300556.

2. See the Final Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) at www.cverdad.org.pe. The commission 

concluded that the armed forces, including the police, were responsible for the majority of acts of sexual violence; 

Shining Path initially strongly opposed the sexual abuse of the population as a strategy of war, though it did 

deploy sexual torture. See TRC Report, vol. 6, chap. 1.5.

3. The little known sexual abuse and torture of men in captivity has been more widespread than previously thought. 

See Maria Jennie Dador Tozzini, El otro lado de la historia: Violencia sexual contra hombres en el Perú 1980–2000 

(Lima: Consejería en Proyectos, 2007); for numbers, see Michele Leiby, “Digging in the Archives: The Promise 

and Perils of Primary Documents” Politics & Society 37, no. 1 (2009), 79–81; For the murder of transsexuals by 

the MRTA and others, see TRC Final Report, vol. 2, chap. 1.4, 432–33.

4. In 1975, Susan Brownmiller published her provocative and by now classic book Against our Will. Men, Women and 

Rape. (Ballantine, New York). Brownmiller viewed rape in all circumstances as rooted in the same social problem: 

Men dominate women, they use sexual violence to assert this domination, and—crucially—they do so because 

they can (14). Brownmiller’s discussion of rape throughout history and her analysis of attitudes toward rape as 

reproduced in history, military discourse, popular media, culture, police reports, and courts is still relevant and in 

large part still reflects attitudes today. However, her analysis that men rape because they can is not sufficiently 

helpful in understanding the nature of sexual violence, as it disregards all those men who do not rape, the rape 

of men and sexual minorities, the racial or ethnic dimension which often plays a role in rape, especially in war, 

and the differentiation of rape regimes throughout the world. 

5. Michele Leiby, “Principles, Agents, and Wartime Sexual Violence: An Analysis of Variation in Peru, 1980–2002,” 

paper presented at the annual meeting of the Political Science Association, Washington DC, Sept 2010.

6. Narda Henríquez and Julissa Mantilla, Contra viento y marea: Cuestiones de genero y poder en la memoria colectiva 

(Lima, Perú: Comisión de la Verdad y Reconciliación, 2003).

7. See Erin Baines, “Gender, Responsibility, and the Grey Zone: Considerations for Transitional Justice,” Journal 

of Human Rights 10, no. 4 (2011), 477–493. Her work on Uganda further explores this concept related to 

contemporary conflicts.

8. Gonzalez Cueva, Eduardo, (2000). “Conscription and Violence in Peru,” Latin American Perspectives, 3, 88-102. 

9. Proyecto Varones, Entrevista numero 3 ̧Quinua, 6 de agosto, 2011.

10. Jelke Boesten, “Analyzing Rape Regimes at the Interface of War and Peace in Peru,” International Journal of 

Transitional Justice 4 (2010), 110–29.

11. Inter-american Commission of Human Rights (CIDH), Acceso a la justicia para las mujeres victimas de violencia 

en las Américas (Washington, DC: CIDH, 2010) 52, http://www.cidh.org/women/acceso07/indiceacceso.ht. 

12. UN Women, Progress of the World’s Women 2011–2012: In Pursuit of Justice (New York: United Nations, 2011), 3, 

http://progress.unwomen.org/pdfs/EN-Report-Progress.pdf.

13. UN Women, Progress, 84.

14. World Bank, World Development Report 2011: Conflict, Security, and Development, and World Bank, World 

Development Report 2012: Gender Equality and Development, www.worldbank.org/wdr/. 

15. UN Human Rights Council, “Report of the Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women, Its Causes and 

Consequences,” and Yakin Erturk, “Addendum—Mission to the DRC,” A/HRC/7/6/Add.4, summary, available 

at www2.ohchr.org/english/issues/women/rapporteur/annual.htm (accessed May 12, 2012), cited in Kimberly 

Theidon and Kelly Phenicle, “Gender, Conflict, and Peacebuilding: State of the Field and Lessons Learned from 

USIP Grantmaking,” Peaceworks, September 2011, U.S. Institute of Peace, Washington, DC, 76.

16. Kathleen Kuehnast, Chantal De Jonge Oudraat, and Helga Hernes, eds., Women and War (Washington, DC: 

USIP Press, 2011).

17. Narda Henríquez, Cuestiones de genero y poder en el conflicto armado en el Perú (Lima, Perú: Consejo Nacional de 

Cienci y Tecnología, 2006); Henríquez and Mantilla, Contra viento y marea; Meza Christosomo, “Las mujeres y la 

violencia sexual en el conflicto armado interno,” in Violencia contra la mujer durante el conflicto armado interno: 

“Warmikuna Yuyariniku” (Lima, Perú: Asociación Pro Derechos Humanos, 2005), 11–30.

18. Colleen Duggan, Claudia Paz y Paz Bailey, and Julie Guillerot, “Reparations for Sexual and Reproductive Violence: 

Prospects for Achieving Gender Justice in Peru and Guatemala,” The International Journal of Transitional Justice 

2, no. 2 (2008), 206. 

19. María Elena Castillo y Elías Navarro, “Víctimas de la violencia política aún esperan por una justa reparación,” 

La Republica, March 8, 2012, http://www.larepublica.pe/08-03-2012/victimas-de-la-violencia-politica-aunesperan-por-una-justa-reparacion.

20. Minister of Justice Juan F. Jimenez Mayor to the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights, Washington, DC, 

March 26, 2012. 
10 

21. Estudio para la Defensa de los Derechos de la Mujer, DEMUS, “Mujeres de Huancavelica entregan cartas al 

Presidente Ollanta Humala exigiendo incorporación de las victimas de violencia sexual en la ley PIR,” NotiDemus, 

March 20, 2012, http://www.demus.org.pe/notihome/notihome01.php?noti=191&ms=1.

22. Consejo de Reparaciones, Registro Único de Víctimas, “Consejo de Reparaciones acuerda interpretación del plazo 

de determinación de beneficiarios del Programa de reparaciones económicas,” press release, February 2012, 

http://www.ruv.gob.pe/noticias_107.html; Editorial, “Las reparaciones que no llegan,” La Republica, February 11, 

2012, http://www.larepublica.pe/politica/editorial-11-02-2012; Coordinadora Nacional de Derechos Humanos, 

“Defensoría del Pueblo expresa preocupación por posible cierre del Registro Único de Víctimas,” press release, 

December 20, 2011, http://derechoshumanos.pe/?s=reparaciones&buscar=buscar.

23. UN Women, Progress, 103.

24. Estudio para la Defensa de los Derecho de la Mujer (DEMUS), Reconociendo otros saberes: Salud mental 

comunitaria, justicia y reparación (Lima, Perú: Editorial Línea Andina SAC, 2008), 119–20.

25. Jelke Boesten and Betsy Flores Sandoval, “Violencia doméstica y política social en el Perú 1990–2010: ¿Qué ha 

cambiado?” Working Paper no. 5, University of Leeds, 2011. 

26. Jaris Mujica, Violaciones sexuales en el Peru 2000–2009: Un informe sobre el estado de la situacion (Líma, Peru: 

PromSex, 2011). The institutions include the police, emergency centers, and the Ministry of Women and Social 

Development.

27. A recent study of thirty-one judicial cases of violent rape presented under new, supposedly improved judicial 

rules showed only one of these cases led to the perpetrator’s imprisonment; see Defensoría del Pueblo, 

“Violencia sexual en el Peru: Un análisis de casos judiciales,” Serie Informes de Adjuntía, Informe no. 004-2011-

DP/ADM, 2011. 

Of Related Interest

•	 Lessons from Women’s Programs in Afghanistan and Iraq by Kathleen Kuehnast, Manal Omar, 

Steven E. Steiner, and Hodei Sultan (Special Report, March 2012)

•	 Women and War: Power and Protection in the 21st Century edited by Kathleen Kuehnast, 

Chantal de Jonge Oudraat, and Helga Hernes (2011)

•	 Gender, Conflict and Peacebuilding by Kimberly Theidon and Kelly Phenice with Elizabeth 

Murray (Peaceworks, September 2011)

•	 The Other Side of Gender: Including Masculinity Concerns in Conflict and Peacebuilding by 

Kathleen Kuehnast and Nina Sudhakar (Peace Brief, January 2011)

•	 The Role of Women in Global Security by Valerie Norville (Special Report, December 2010)

•	 Rape in War: Motives of Militia in DRC by Jocelyn Kelly (Special Report, May 2010)

United States 

Institute of Peace

2301 Constitution Ave., NW

Washington, DC 20037

www.usip.org

An online edition of this and related 

reports can be found on our Web site 

(www.usip.org), together with additional 

information on the subject.