This article critically examines the treatment of sexual violence against children within the framework of international criminal justice, with a particular focus on how the gender of victims shapes visibility, prosecution, and judicial recognition. Through a comparative analysis of landmark cases from the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), and the International Criminal Court (ICC), it reveals a persistent gender bias in the interpretation and application of international criminal law. While crimes such as rape and sexual slavery committed against girls have gradually gained legal recognition as genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes (as seen in Akayesu, Foča, Ongwen, and Ntaganda), sexual violence against boys remains largely underreported, underprosecuted, and often categorized under gender-neutral terms such as torture or inhuman treatment, as observed in the Čelebići case.
The article argues that this disparity does not stem from the legal texts themselves, which define sexual violence in a gender-neutral way, but rather from how legal actors interpret and implement these norms. It further demonstrates that entrenched gender stereotypes, which associate masculinity with power and femininity with victimhood, have created an implicit hierarchy of victimhood in international jurisprudence. The author calls for a shift in prosecutorial priorities, targeted support mechanisms for male child victims, and the elimination of judicial bias through comprehensive training that addresses gender dynamics. Ultimately, the article contends that achieving gender-neutral justice in the context of conflict-related sexual violence requires not only legal reform but also a transformation of the institutional mindset that shapes international criminal adjudication.This article critically examines the treatment of sexual violence against children within the framework of international criminal justice, with a particular focus on how the gender of victims shapes visibility, prosecution, and judicial recognition. Through a comparative analysis of landmark cases from the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), and the International Criminal Court (ICC), it reveals a persistent gender bias in the interpretation and application of international criminal law. While crimes such as rape and sexual slavery committed against girls have gradually gained legal recognition as genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes (as seen in Akayesu, Foča, Ongwen, and Ntaganda), sexual violence against boys remains largely underreported, underprosecuted, and often categorized under gender-neutral terms such as torture or inhuman treatment, as observed in the Čelebići case.
The article argues that this disparity does not stem from the legal texts themselves, which define sexual violence in a gender-neutral way, but rather from how legal actors interpret and implement these norms. It further demonstrates that entrenched gender stereotypes, which associate masculinity with power and femininity with victimhood, have created an implicit hierarchy of victimhood in international jurisprudence. The author calls for a shift in prosecutorial priorities, targeted support mechanisms for male child victims, and the elimination of judicial bias through comprehensive training that addresses gender dynamics. Ultimately, the article contends that achieving gender-neutral justice in the context of conflict-related sexual violence requires not only legal reform but also a transformation of the institutional mindset that shapes international criminal adjudication
