Women in Sudan's Civil War: Systematic Targeting and Sexual Violence

Last updated: 5 October 2026

Photo: Sudan_2009-2010_Scotti-Anderson - SIM USA

Sudan women conflict analysis reveals that women and girls face a double burden in the civil war: the same general violence as all civilians, plus systematic gender-based targeting including rape, sexual slavery, forced marriage, and abduction. Furthermore, the RSF has used conflict-related sexual violence (CRSV) as a deliberate tactical weapon — targeting women on both ethnic and gender grounds. As a result, women from non-Arab Darfuri communities (Masalit, Fur, Zaghawa) are at the intersection of ethnic and gender persecution. This article documents the specific patterns of gendered targeting, the legal framework for women's asylum claims, and practical guidance for representatives.[1]

For related reading, see the detailed Sudan sexual violence article.

Patterns of Gender-Based Targeting

The gender-based targeting of women in Sudan's civil war follows documented patterns. First, sexual violence during ground assaults: RSF fighters rape women and girls in their homes, at checkpoints, and during village raids. Second, abduction and sexual slavery: women are taken from their communities, held by RSF fighters, and subjected to repeated rape — sometimes for weeks or months. Third, forced "marriage": RSF fighters compel women to be their "wives" — a form of rape and enslavement dressed in a social label. Fourth, trafficking: women and girls are moved across borders (Sudan-Chad-Libya) as part of broader criminal networks enabled by the conflict. Furthermore, the targeting has a clear ethnic dimension in Darfur — non-Arab women are specifically sought.[2]

Pre-existing gender discrimination compounded by war

Sudan's civil law and customary practices already discriminated against women before the war. Public Order Laws criminalised women's dress and movement. Family law gave men control over women's lives. Furthermore, women who experienced CRSV faced severe social stigma — risking rejection by family and community. As a result, survivors of sexual violence in Sudan face a layered crisis: the initial violence, social stigma, family rejection, and the collapse of all support services. Therefore, the war has dramatically worsened pre-existing gender inequality rather than creating it from scratch.[3]

Legal Framework: Gender Persecution in Asylum Law

Gender persecution is recognised in the Refugee Convention through the particular social group (PSG) ground, the political opinion ground (where feminist or women's rights advocacy is the reason for targeting), and the intersection with race/nationality (for Darfuri women). The UNHCR Guidelines on International Protection No. 1: Gender-Related Persecution (2002) confirm that women can constitute a PSG "of women" in a given country where the group has defined and recognisable membership. Furthermore, Islam and Shah [1999] UKHL 20 established that Pakistani women constitute a PSG — a principle applicable to women in Sudan who share gender as an immutable characteristic. As a result, gender-based claims are legally well-established.[4]

"Women who have been subjected to rape or sexual violence in the context of armed conflict may be considered refugees if they have a well-founded fear of further persecution on Convention grounds."UNHCR Guidelines on International Protection No. 1: Gender-Related Persecution, 2002

CRSV Survivors: Special Considerations

Women who survived CRSV face specific challenges in asylum proceedings. First, re-traumatisation: interview processes can trigger flashbacks, panic attacks, and dissociation — affecting consistency and completeness of testimony. Second, shame and cultural norms: many Sudanese women are unable to disclose sexual violence in initial asylum interviews — particularly if a male interpreter or officer is present. Third, stigma: survivors may fear that disclosing the attack will harm their standing in their community, including in the diaspora. Furthermore, Sudan's social norms around CRSV mean that disclosure is associated with dishonour rather than victimhood. As a result, a woman who initially does not disclose CRSV and later does must not be automatically disbelieved — late disclosure is normal and explained by trauma and stigma.[5]

Displaced Women: Routes and Risks

Women displaced by the war face gendered risks at every stage. During flight: attacks by armed actors at checkpoints; rape by soldiers and militias. In displacement sites within Sudan: lack of safe sanitation and lighting makes women vulnerable to attack. In Chad: overcrowded camps; limited protection; trafficking. On onward journeys through Libya: sexual violence by traffickers and guards. In Europe: may arrive traumatised, without legal representation, in detention. Furthermore, women who are separated from family support networks are especially vulnerable. As a result, the entire displacement journey is itself a risk factor that decision-makers should recognise as consistent with women's accounts.[6]

Building Evidence: Women's Claims

Evidence in women's asylum claims should include: detailed account of the gendered violence experienced (with professional support where needed); country expert report addressing the targeting of women in Sudan and the specific region; UNFPA and UN SRSG-SVC documentation of patterns; medical/psychological report under the Istanbul Protocol; and UNHCR Guidelines (2002) cited as authority on gender PSG. Furthermore, where the applicant is a Darfuri woman, her ethnic identity claims should be built alongside the gender claim. As a result, a well-constructed women's claim combines multiple Convention grounds and multiple evidence strands. Therefore, specialist legal representation and early expert commissioning are essential.[7]

Conclusion: The Strongest Claims in Sudan's Asylum Context

Women from Sudan — particularly from Darfuri ethnic communities — face some of the most severe and well-documented persecution in the world today. The convergence of ethnic targeting and gender-based violence creates multiply-grounded asylum claims. Furthermore, the UNHCR recommends protection for all Sudanese, with women and girls flagged as especially vulnerable. As a result, asylum claims by Sudanese women should be decided on a presumption of protection. Therefore, refusal rates for Sudanese women's claims should be very low — and where refusals occur, they are highly likely to be overturned on appeal.