The roundtable was addressed by Khrystyna Kit, Co-Founder and Head of JurFem, The Ukrainian Women Lawyers Association. Khrystyna shared her insights on women’s movements and organisations in Ukraine, and how they have been an important driver for change, including during active conflict.

The women’s movement in Ukraine has a long history, with the first formal Ukrainian women’s organisations founded in 1884. Following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, women’s rights organisations (WROs) and civil society organisations (CSOs) have responded to ongoing and emerging challenges.

This has involved collaboration between CSOs, WROs and Ukrainian state authorities. For example, collaboration between civil society organisations, the General Prosecutors Office and international experts has strengthened Ukraine’s strategy for investigating conflict-related sexual violence (CRSV). This includes the preparation of guidance for working with survivors to build trust within the justice system. Civil society organisations will also advocate for improved practice and the development of new strategies where there are policy gaps.

The WPS agenda has been implemented in Ukraine during ongoing active conflict, including before Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022. Ukraine’s second Women, Peace and Security (WPS) National Action Plan (NAP) was adopted in 2020 and updated in 2022 following the full-scale invasion, making it one of the few countries that has adopted a WPS NAP during active wartime.

The 2022 NAP update included response to Russian crimes, particularly CRSV, as well as developing and strengthening mechanisms to support the 70,000+ women who have served in the Ukrainian armed forces since 2022. Supporting women veterans was another key update in the plan, as well as ways to strengthen women’s participation in decision-making processes and peacebuilding.

Ukraine has a unique approach to implementing the WPS agenda through its NAP, with regions in Ukraine having their own 1325 action plan for WPS. This approach towards decentralisation started in 2014. When a new NAP is approved, regional and local action plans are developed which include specific activities and measures to be implemented by local authorities. This ensures that the NAP is responsive to the different challenges experienced in different regions of Ukraine, for example those near the frontlines of conflict or where critical social infrastructure has been destroyed as a result of war. 1325 regional coalitions, bringing together WROs and regional representatives, further advance implementation of the agenda.

In 2025 the Ukrainian Government started work on the third NAP, collaborating in consultation with WROs to co-own the process. Khrystyna stressed the important role of civil society in delivering on WPS commitments in Ukraine, explaining that in regions where civil society organisations are less active, implementation of regional actions plans is noticeably weaker.

Russian aggression toward Ukraine has shown that women do not only need to be protected as victims of violence and conflict, but are leaders in responding to conflict, serving in the military and advancing the manufacture or arms. However, more women still need to be involved in decision-making and negotiations.

Read more about WPS implementation in Ukraine here.

Chaired by Baroness Hodgson of Abinger, the event heard from Nargis Nehan, Former Minister of Mines & Petroleum & Founder of FARAGEER; Dr. Orzala Nemat, Founding Director of Development Research Group; Dr. Ziba Mir-Hossseini, Scholar Specialized in Islamic Law, Gender and Development; and Ms. Masooma Khawari, Former Minister of Communication.

Opening the session, Baroness Hodgson stated the urgency and importance of discussing the ongoing crisis in Afghanistan. This was reiterated by speakers who highlighted the dire situation in the country and the urgent need for coordinated action to restore the rights of Afghan women.

Findings from recent research by FARAGEER, conducted by consulting 800+ women inside Afghanistan across 20 provinces we presented. Findings showed how the Taliban have used the suppression of women’s rights as a tool to control Afghan society, manipulating religious ideology and feminist theory to mobilise support for the system of Gender Apartheid.

This system of Gender Apartheid and religious extremism has socio-political and humanitarian implications on Afghan society as a whole. Speakers shared how Taliban control is turning men against women, building an atmosphere of fear, and rising domestic tension in the country.

It was shared that the Taliban has silenced the voices of Afghan people with violence. Speakers underlined that inaction by the international community, alongside continued engagement with the Taliban has emboldened the group who see no consequences as a result of its actions and rights violations.

One speaker noted that while the Taliban presents its policies or stance as the only Islamic view, this ignores the fact that there is no “one” Islamic position on women’s rights. It was further noted that Islamic law has always been shaped by human interpretation and by the societies in which they developed. What the Taliban is doing is taking up one selective patriarchal interpretation of Islam and using that to justify a system of Gender Apartheid.

It was noted that, because gender-based subjugation is an intrinsic part of Taliban’s governance structure, dismantling the former will lead to the regime’s collapse. It was argued that Islamic jurisprudence has tools to challenge the Taliban’s interpretation and resistance to the regime can be mobilized through religion.

The session closed with a collective call to action on principled engagement, codification of Gender Apartheid as a Crime Against Humanity and calling on the UK Government, alongside other states, to consult Afghan civil society on a regular basis.

‍ ‍

Chaired by Baroness Hodgson of Abinger, the event was joined by speakers Lauren Aarons, Senior Gender Adviser, Amnesty International; Hanya Aljamal, award winning humanitarian worker and current MA candidate of Human rights law at Goldsmiths from Gaza; Dr Ewelina Ochab, Programme Lawyer, the International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute; and Kifaya Khraim, Advocacy Unit Manager, Women’s Centre for Legal Aid and Counselling.

Israel’s genocide on Gaza is inflicting compounding harms of women and girls. Women and girls bear the brunt of collapsing healthcare and mass displacement; medical staff describe an exponential rise in maternal and neo-natal health conditions; women with cancer and life-threatening illnesses facing interrupted or inaccessible care; and the repeated closure of the Rafah and other crossings are further reducing already limited aid deliveries and medical evacuations.

A report released by Amnesty International in 2024 stated that Israel’s actions and omissions in Gaza amounted to genocide under international law. This finding was made two years ago but continues in 2026, with people in Palestine continuing to be killed after the agreement of a ceasefire. Importantly, beyond increasing levels of violence, Israel continues to impose conditions on the people of Gaza that are incompatible with life.

Experiences of healthcare in Gaza cannot be separated from experiences of killing, loss, detention, grief and trauma, as they form the backdrop to all reproductive decision making. UN Women have reported at least 927 attacks on health facilities and ambulances in Gaza. The destruction of infrastructure has damaged reproductive healthcare, with only 37% of reproductive health centres functioning. Anaemia is widespread because of malnutrition, and many new mothers can no longer breastfeed, instead forced to spend their savings on formula. Beyond maternal care, cancer patients in Gaza have also been unable to receive treatment because of hospitals being attacked. Transfers of urgent cancer cases to the West Bank for treatment had previously taken place, but this has also stopped.

Women in Gaza have been left destitute, relying on their husbands or other male providers for financial support. Many women have been exposed to sexual abuse and extortion because of this new vulnerability and speakers shared that fear for safety and extreme poverty is creating a new drive in cases of early marriage.

Attacks on women and girls also take place in the West Bank, where women’s belongings have been looted and they have been forced to undress and sexually assaulted. There have also been documented instances of Israel soldiers abusing children, including young girls travelling to school. Furthermore, organisations in Palestine have documented the use of sexual violence to forcibly transfer Palestinian communities. Women and men in detention centres face systematic rape and sexual assault.

The international community has an obligation to respond to what is happening in Gaza. Speakers called for UK to stop acting in a ‘business as usual’ fashion and to fulfil its internal obligations regarding genocide. This would include calling for sanctions on those responsible, acting on existing International Criminal Court arrest warrants and implementing a comprehensive arms embargo.

At the same time, the UK much scale up the reproductive healthcare support it provides. This would include support women in Gaza to be evacuated to receive treatment. The UK Government should also support Gazan women’s rights groups responding on the frontline.

The discussion was informed by expert speakers: Pari Ibrahim, from the Free Yezidi Foundation, Sareta Ashraph, and FYF legal advisor & Garden Court Chambers, and Dr Ewelina Ochab, from the International Bar Association Human Rights Institute. Baroness Hodgson of Abinger chaired the discussion, providing opening remarks and welcoming each speaker.

In August 2014, Daesh (ISIS) attacked the Yezidis in Sinjar, unleashing what we now know to be a full-scale genocide against the ethno-religious minority community. Thousands of men and elderly people were killed, and their mass graves continue to be discovered to this day. Around 6,000 women and girls were taken away as sex slaves and still today more than 2,500 are still missing.

The last 11 years have seen some efforts to document the atrocities and bring the perpetrators to justice. However, recent months have seen new challenges that need to be addressed. Among others, in September 2024, UNITAD, the mechanism to collect and preserve the evidence of the crimes, was closed. Absence of public trials in Iraq and the closure of UNITAD have left many Yezidi survivors hopeless regarding prospects for justice and accountability.

The crimes committed by ISIS in Iraq are well documented and understood, however achieving justice and accountability has been difficult. Securing legal justice requires high levels of logistical coordination, including finding those responsible for crimes and bringing them to an appropriate jurisdiction. There is currently no specific process dedicated for prosecutors to gather the necessary information required for cases.

The UK has been slow on progress for pursuing accountability for crimes committed against the Yezidis. It should look to European counterparts, such as France, for examples of accountability mechanisms for those responsible for genocide and crimes against humanity. In the UK, trials cannot be held in absentia which creates challenges for accountability given that large numbers of perpetrators remain in camps in Iraq and Northern Syria, declining to be brought to the UK for prosecution. In March 2026, however, France held the trial in absentia of Sabri Essid, a French ISIS foreign fighter. This was the first trial in the country relating to the genocide against the Yezidis and, while held in absentia, it was an important milestone for victims and to ensure that discussion about who is responsible for the crimes committed against the Yezidis continues.

Despite challenges, policy makers, civil society and legal specialists are working to examine prosecutions for British foreign fighters who joined Daesh in Syria and Iraq and have since returned to the UK. After a long process of inquiry by Parliamentarians, the UK Government recently confirmed that less than 10% of those fighters who returned to the UK had been convicted for terror-related offences. The Government also confirmed that these prosecutions had been obtained without using evidence from UNITAD, despite the UK having invested in the UNITAD framework to gather evidence.

Parliamentarians and civil society questioning why the conviction rate is so low, and what precedent this sets for atrocity crimes. The Joint Committee on Human Rights published a report last year entitled ‘Accountability for Daesh crimes’ which was critical of UK responses of Daesh atrocities. Challenging impunity is crucial, as impunity for the past is an early warning sign for future atrocities being in the future.

There have been efforts to advance opportunities for prosecuting in the UK through an Amendment to the UK Crime and Policing Bill, however this did not receive support from the Government. As communities and civil society continue pushing the Government to make reforms, Parliamentarians were urged to table the Crime and Policing Bill Amendment where there are future opportunities to do so.

As a people Yezidis have suffered from centuries of misinformation and hatred, however there were times in which Yezidi communities lived with others peacefully. Organisations like the Free Yezidi Foundation are working to tackle root causes of violence against Yezidi communities, such as false narratives and stereotypes and they believe that outreach efforts happening now will support future generations. The Yezidi community deserves justice and accountability for the crimes committed against them. It was shared that Yezidi communities rely on international support, including from the UK Parliament and Courts and that this must continue.

Baroness Hodgson, Co-Chair of the APPG on WPS, opened the meeting, welcoming participants and guest speakers. The purpose of the discussion was to understand how responses to CRSV have shifted in recent years and to bring together policymakers to discuss the best strategies to continue to support effective actions to both respond to and prevent CRSV.  

Professor Christine Chinkin, Founding Director of the Centre of Women Peace & Security at LSE, provided an overview of how CRSV has come to be recognised within international legal and political frameworks, including as part of the WPS agenda. Despite progress in recognising CRSV as a tactic and instrument of war within law and policy, including through survivor-informed approaches, CRSV not only continues but is increasingly prevalent. Chinkin emphasised an ongoing need to recognise how militarism and militaristic values can create an environment in which sexual violence in armed conflict becomes acceptable. WPS resolutions have arguably failed to address this link in recent years, but it is more crucial than ever as militarism rises globally.

Simon Collard-Wexler, Minister Counsellor at the Canadian High Commission, also provided remarks. During a moment of great turbulence globally, multilateral institutions are under pressure and global responses to CRSV have weakened. Preventing CRSV is a core element of peace and cannot be viewed as a separate or standalone issue. In the current global context, countries must show collective leadership, strengthening their commitments to tackling CRSV and advancing the WPS agenda more broadly. In Canada, the latest WPS National Action Plan (NAP) was launched in 2024 and has CRSV and sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) as key areas of focus.

During broader discussion among participants, a representative from the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office discussed ongoing work in the UK as part of the Preventing Sexual Violence in Conflict Initiative (PSVI) while a representative from the Ministry of Defence shared the work being done by the department to tackle CRSV, including through the UK WPS NAP which is currently being refreshed. Participants also discussed justice and accountability for perpetrators of CRSV. Stigma around CRSV is a central issue that limits access to support for survivors and hinders justice and accountability efforts, and different states have adopted survivor-centred and trauma-informed approaches to respond to CRSV and prosecute perpetrators.

The meeting closed with Baroness Hodgson thanking the High Commission of Canada for partnering on the event and thanking their participants for their attendance and contributions.

For further information, please do not hesitate to contact: appg-wps@gaps-uk.org

The event was chaired by Baroness Hodgson of Abinger, co-chair of the APPG-WPS, and led by Sudanese civil society leaders, Ibtisam El Doma and Aisha Hamad, based in Sudan and Ethiopia respectively; Dr Eva Khair, Founder and Director of the Women4Sudan Campaign; and Peter Oborne, award-winning journalist and broadcaster.

A full report from the roundtable can be found here.

Baroness Fiona Hodgson CBE chaired the event and opened with remarks about the rise in conflicts around the world and the importance of the WPS agenda in addressing this. The event highlighted how a gender and intersectional analysis is critical to understanding and preventing atrocity crimes. This lens allows us to see how and why perpetrators commit certain crimes against certain peoples and groups, which can enable policymakers to prevent these crimes from happening in the first place.

Christine Chinkin, Founder of the LSE’s Centre for WPS, spoke about the findings of her New Lines Institute report A Gendered Analysis of Aggression and International Law. While not all atrocities take place during conflict, many atrocities that are perpetrated during conflict stems from the initial crime of aggression. She explained how the conduct, circumstances, and consequences of aggression are gendered; that aggression is the manifestation of gendered, militarized nationalism and militarism heightens the risk of violence. She argued that a gender analysis illuminates why and how mass atrocities take place. For example, how men and boys are initially targeting for mass killing because of their gendered identities as potential future threats in a conflict. She reflected that preventing mass atrocities is not as complex as states would have us believe. In fact, it is conflict itself which is much more complex to respond to. Dismantling gender norms and belief systems is necessary to prevent aggression.

‍Emily Prey, Director of the Gender Policy portfolio and the Mass Atrocities & International Law portfolio, discussed her policy brief How Understanding Gender Can Improve Atrocity Prevention and Response. She demonstrated how a gender and intersectional analysis is a necessary tool to predict, prevent, and respond to atrocity crimes. Understanding how peoples’ different identities interact, and seeing which groups of people may be more at risk for persecution or discrimination based on their overlapping identities is crucial to predicting, preventing, and responding to atrocity crimes. She shared research from Valerie Hudson, Bonnie Ballif-Spanvill, Mary Caprioli, and Chad Emmett that shows that women’s security is connected to state security and explained how the continuum of violence leads to greater instability for states. She used the Kurds in northeast Syria as a positive example of preventing atrocities and pushing back against authoritarianism. The governance of Rojava is based on jineology: the philosophy that a country cannot be free until the women are free. She closed by reminding the audience that as long as women and gender minorities are sidelined and considered secondary to national security, states will continue to struggle with how to swiftly and effectively prevention atrocity crimes.

‍Paul Kirby, Reader in International Politics at Queen Mary University of London, discussed the Prevention pillar of the WPS agenda. He noted that the WPS agenda is the most comprehensive framework for gender equality in the world. He explained how the Prevention pillar has two phases. The first phase is preventing violence in conflict and that conflict-related sexual violence is most often referred to in this context. The second phase is the prevention of war itself. It is not about making war safe for women, but about making the world safe from war. He emphasised that when WPS Prevention is looked at through a CRSV lens, military and security actors dominate these conversations. By contrast, when it is looked at through a conflict prevention lens, civil society and peacebuilders are much more involved. He delved into what Prevention as a part of the WPS agenda looks like in the UK, with a much diminished capacity due to aid cuts and the Foreign Office reshuffle. He highlighted that conflict prevention made up only 1% of the UK’s foreign aid before the cuts in 2025. The UK is the second country, after the US, with the deepest and most sustained foreign aid cuts, which negatively impacts its atrocity prevention capabilities. He spoke about how WPS has been deprioritized in both the UK National Security Strategy and in the Strategic Defence Review. He concluded that the shift in UK foreign policy towards funding the military and emphasising ‘hard’ security is not a positive move with respect to atrocity prevention.

‍Homira May Rezai, a Hazara rights activist, offered the experience of the Hazara community in Afghanistan as a failed example of atrocity prevention. All aspects of Hazara identity are under attack in the Taliban’s Afghanistan. This kind of identity-based targeting signals future atrocities may take place. She cited the New Lines Institute legal analysis which concluded that Afghanistan bears state responsibility for breaches of the Genocide Convention against the Hazaras. She paid particular attention to the intersectional persecution that Hazara women face as they are targeted on the basis of their three intersecting identities as women, Shia Muslims, and as ethnic Hazaras. She shared testimony from a Hazara girl who was kidnapped, imprisoned, tortured, and raped for 28 days: Every single day, I was beaten with cables and whips across my back, my legs, my whole body — until my skin split open and bled, until dark bruises formed so deep that even breathing became painful. The blows kept coming, day after day, until my body began to shut down. They filmed me screaming. They filmed me on the floor. They even filmed the rapes, the gang rapes — moments so painful that speaking of them now hurts. With cold indifference, they recorded the sexual violence and humiliation. I was raped over and over again, to the point of passing out. I was threatened again and again, subjected to the most nauseating, degrading acts imaginable. Homira explained how Hazara women are not only suffering under the Taliban’s system of gender apartheid but are also suffering from genocidal targeting by various actors including the Taliban and IS-KP. She concluded that is we do not integrate gender and minority persecution into our atrocity prevention frameworks, we will always intervene too late. Gender persecution is a precursor for mass atrocities so states must track things like girls being removed from schools, communities being ethnically cleansed from their lands, and violence against women all as forms of atrocity prevention.

The event highlighted the ongoing challenges to effectively predicting and preventing atrocities, but the speakers provided recommendations for policymakers and states to engage in gendered approaches to prevention.

The meeting opened with an overview from Dr Katia Alkhateb, Director of Syria in Transition, who highlighted the persistence of systematic violations against civilians in Syria amid an ongoing militarised armed conflict. Following the collapse of the former regime in December 2024, Syria entered a transition phase marked by major political and social restructuring. However, this period has been accompanied by heightened risks for minority communities, particularly the Alawite population.

Dr Alkhateb outlined indicators suggesting elevated atrocity and potential genocide risks affecting Alawites, including collective punishment, identity-based violence, forced displacement, and social exclusion. She noted that in transitional contexts, minorities perceived as linked to former regimes often lack legal protections, creating conditions for renewed cycles of violence. The framing of political responsibility for past state crimes has, in practice, translated into narratives of community-level guilt. Warning signs consistent with mass atrocity risk markers were identified, including hate speech, dehumanisation, and normalisation of violence against targeted groups. These narratives have been amplified through social media and, in some cases, reinforced by public statements from state officials and religious authorities.

Concern was raised about the use of religious mobilisation rhetoric, including calls for “nekfir,” which blurred distinctions between civilians and combatants. In March 2025, following unrest involving a small number of individuals on the Syrian coast, authorities reportedly issued a broad call for mobilisation. This resulted in large-scale movement of armed actors and civilians to the coastal region and was followed by a documented massacre involving over 2,300 victims. Questions were raised regarding state duty of care, command responsibility, and potential war crimes implications, particularly where officials have publicly asserted no distinction between civilians and military actors. Concerns were also raised about similar patterns of violence targeting other minority groups, including Druze and Kurdish communities, and the lack of meaningful security sector reform addressing extremist ideologies.

The meeting also heard evidence from Dima Ouda, former senior journalist at BBC World Service, regarding gender-based violations. Over 100 cases of abduction of Alawite girls and women have been documented, including underage victims, with 55 cases verified directly with families. These cases reportedly involve trafficking, forced marriage, and other forms of gender-based violence, often occurring in public spaces such as routes to school or family homes. Evidence suggests systemic barriers to reporting, including lack of safe and independent reporting channels, refusal by authorities to register cases, and alleged links between perpetrators and security actors or affiliated groups. Parallel documentation has been reported in Sweida relating to Druze women. Participants emphasised the need for independent monitoring, international accountability mechanisms, and immediate protection and evacuation pathways for women and girls at risk, alongside psychosocial and survivor support programming.

Participants also discussed governance and political transition dynamics. Concerns were raised about the composition of parliament, perceived performative participation of women in politics, and the ongoing influence of armed actors within the war economy. Abductions were assessed by some participants as serving broader objectives of social and political exclusion, as well as control over women’s autonomy. There were also discussions on the role of social media in reinforcing harmful narratives, and the impact of international “Syria fatigue,” refugee pressures, and geopolitical considerations on external engagement and accountability.

Questions were raised regarding the adequacy of current state-led investigative processes and the extent to which they have the technical capacity and independence required to ensure credible accountability. Participants also discussed broader international engagement, including transition monitoring and the role of international accountability pathways, including independent tribunals and documentation bodies. Participants noted the importance of early warning monitoring, particularly given projections that risks of mass atrocity crimes against minorities could escalate over the next 4–5 years without intervention.

It gave an opportunity to hear from other countries how UN Security Council Resolution 1325 has helped to improve women’s rights and there was also a discussion on how women’s rights are rolling back around the world.

This event was very well attended by women Ambassadors in London.

Special thanks were given to HE Sanja Stiglic, the Ambassador of Slovenia, who helped with this event and also to to HE Ximena Fuentes, Ambassador of Chile & President of the Women in Diplomacy Network.

Baroness Hodgson of Abinger, CBE, co-Chair of the APPG on WPS, welcomed everyone to the meeting and especially the UN Assistant Secretary General Elizabeth Spehar.  After thanking the CPA for allowing the event to be held in their room she welcomed parliamentary colleagues. She then talked about the many people, some present, who had helped to make the Resolution happen and who had worked to implement the event. In particular Sir Jeremy and Lady Greenstock (who was the UK’s Ambassador to the UN at the time on the Resolution), Joan Link from the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO), Charlotte Onslow, the first Director of GAPS, Lesley Abdela who founded the 300 Club, Dame Audrey Glover an FCDO human rights lawyer, Margaret Owen of Widows for Peace through Democracy, Annette Lawson and others. She also mentioned people working on WPS today – in particular, Colonel Nick Aucott of Outreach Group, Paul Shrubsole from the FCDO, the many NGOs working on the agenda and Eva Tabbasam and Alice Copland from GAPS.  She gave a special welcome to the Afghan women present – Wida Yalaqi, Nasifa Ahmadi and Quhramaana Kakar – and talked about how Afghan women need to have their rights restored. She thanked Miranda Herst of Mercy Corps and Lizzie Nelson of Search for Common Ground who run the Secretariat of the APPG on Conflict who had done all the organising and Lord McConnell for his support and generosity in providing refreshments through the McConnell International Foundation. She ended by talking about the 116 conflicts raging around the world and hoping that we all stood in solidarity and commitment to ensuring that the WPS agenda remains.

The first speaker was Sanam Anderlini, Founder and CEO of the International Civil Society Action Network (ICAN).  Sanam talked about how civil society actors had put pressure to ensure that the UN took notice of the women’s voice and that had added to ensuring that UN Security Resolution 1325 was passed. She also told us what she heard from her work on the ground in many countries and whilst celebrating the work that was being done, the concern about not enough progress having been made and women’s rights rolling backwards.

Her Excellency Genevieve Kennedy, Ambassador of Liberia, followed by talking about what UN SCR1325 had meant in Liberia which had been so affected by conflict. She talked about the strength of the Liberian women and how it had helped them come together, form groups and insist on having their voices heard.

Senator Ireti Heebah Kingibe, part of a delegation of Nigerian parliamentarians visiting the CPA then spoke and talked about her work in the Nigerian Parliament.

Elizabeth Spehar, UN Assistant Secretary-General for Peacebuilding Support, United Nations Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs then gave a speech.  She talked about the work of the UN in this context and her particular role as Assistant Secretary General.   She mentioned her concern about the many conflicts that are taking place at the present time but also highlighted the important role that the UN plays internationally and how much worse things might be if the UN was not there.  She also underlined the importance of nations recognising the positive role that they could play both inside their countries and on the global stage in helping bring peace.

Lord McConnell closed the formal stage of the meeting by thanking all the speakers and everyone for their contribution.

There was time then to enjoy the refreshments. It was wonderful to see the warmth in the room as people who had worked on this agenda for a long time greeted friends, posed for photos together and enjoyed each other’s company.

The Exhibition considers the contexts in which sexual violence occurs in all conflicts, exploring how propaganda shapes perceptions of gender and power. It is hoped that by increasing public awareness and understanding, Unsilenced will empower survivors, inform visitors and contribute towards meaningful changes in the fight against sexual violence in conflict. The Exhibition features case studies from the First World War to today, examining how and why sexual violence is perpetrated, its impact on victims and survivors and the pursuit of justice and reconciliation. It includes testimonies and interviews with experts including journalist and author of Our Bodies, Their Battlefield: What War Does to Women, Christina Lamb; and journalist and former Chair of the G7 Gender Equality Advisory Council, Sarah Sands.

The exhibition also highlights the ongoing work of four NGOs – Women for Women International, All Survivors Project, Free Yezidi Foundation and Waging Peace – all working in the field of sexual violence. It also explores the legal challenges of children born from sexual violence - and how it took until 2022 for Bosnia and Herzegovina to acknowledge children born as a result of sexual violence during the Bosnian War 1992–1995 as civilian victims of war.  

In her role as Regional Director for the MENA region, Naglaa oversees the SFCG work in Yemen, Iraq, Tunis, Syria, Lebanon, Israel and Palestine and is based in Amman. Naglaa highlighted some of the key barriers in the region – political instability, shrinking civic space, and competing global priorities (migration, defence, security). She observed that ongoing destabilisation is marked by human rights violations, widespread gender-based and sexual violence, and severe restrictions on women’s freedom of movement. The concept of “security” remains contested across the region, taking on different and sometimes divisive meanings.

After 7 October, security concerns have intensified, often overshadowing women’s needs and perspectives. Discussing why the Women, Peace and Security agenda is so difficult to implement now, Naglaa emphasised that many donor countries are now focused on migration or have different priorities often centred around defence and security. In this context, the space for women and girls is shrinking.

The speakers raised awareness of historical and present-day patterns of civilian harm against Hazaras and underlined the need for the UK to continue its efforts to pursue justice and accountability for Hazara victims of genocide.The Hazaras have endured persecution for more than a century – massacres, forced displacement, land dispossession, and targeted attacks. Today, they continue to face existential threats at the hands of the Taliban and the Islamic State-Khorasan Province (IS-KP/Daesh), who deliberately target Hazara schools, mosques, maternity wards and public spaces. Only last month, in Rashak village in Bamiyan, we witnessed yet another wave of forced evictions. Twenty-five Hazara families — around 200 people, including women, children, and the elderly — were expelled from their homes by Taliban authorities working alongside armed Kuchi tribesmen. Families were left in tents, mosques, or hiding in the mountains, under fear of arrest and coercion. Rashak is not an isolated case but part of a broader campaign of land dispossession and repression that bears the hallmarks of genocide.On 3 September 2022, the UK Parliamentary Hazara Inquiry - a joint effort of cross-party Parliamentarians from both Houses and experts working together to reveal atrocities and promote justice for the Hazara in Afghanistan and Pakistan - published their report on the situation of the Hazara in Afghanistan. ​The 2022 report focused on the situation of the Hazara in Afghanistan since 2021 and found that Hazara in Afghanistan, as a religious and ethnic minority, were at serious risk of genocide at the hands of the Taliban and IS-KP.

The New Lines Institute report picks up where the Inquiry left off, and finds that the situation of the Hazara in Afghanistan has reached the level of genocide. This finding engages the responsibility of all states to protect the Hazara and prevent further acts of genocide, under the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide and customary international law.Lord Alton spoke about UK efforts for accountability, including the Parliamentary Inquiry and the upcoming work of the Standing Group on Atrocity Crimes. Dr. Homira May Rezai spoke about the current situation with a focus on the forced displacement of Hazaras in Afghanistan. Emily Prey spoke about the New Lines report, findings of genocide, and genocide as a crime under international law. And Zahra Joya spoke about Hazara voices and the battle for free expression under Taliban rule.

These talks, brokered between the Taliban and the United States, intended to end America’s military presence in Afghanistan, but included only four women delegates. The film captures their courage and determination as they risk their lives navigating the hard road to peace with a group of men historically committed to denying their most basic rights.

The well-attended event featured two of the key negotiators on the Afghan Doha talks, Fatima Gailani, former President of the Afghan Red Cross Society, and Fawzia Koofi, former Afghan Member of Parliament, along with Christina Lamb, Chief Foreign Correspondent of the Sunday Times, and Zohra Joya, Editor in Chief of Rukhshana Media. Film producer Leslie Thomas introduced the excerpt.

The panelists explored the significance of women’s involvement in peace processes and the high stakes of their exclusion. They also shared personal insights into the Doha negotiations and the continued erosion of women’s rights under Taliban rule. Recommendations from the ensuing discussion included creating additional opportunities for Afghan women and allies to gather and formulate strategies along with the need for identification of key goals that a wide variety of rights advocates could focus on during advocacy opportunities.      

The discussion focused on the increasing complexity and frequency of conflict and climate-related crises, and how women-led peacebuilding organisations remain at the frontline of response despite being severely underfunded. The panel highlighted the need for more inclusive, decentralised, and sustainable funding models that direct resources to trusted, locally rooted women’s rights organisations (WROs), who are often the first to respond to emergencies yet the last to receive support.

Sanam Anderlini recalled the origins of ICAN’s work, referencing the 2010 report and the establishment of the Innovative Peace Fund (IPF) in 2015 as a direct challenge to traditional aid mechanisms. With current trends showing an increase in defence and deterrence budgets alongside cuts to humanitarian aid, speakers warned of the urgent need to redirect funding to grassroots actors. Muna Luqman shared a powerful account from Yemen, detailing how communities face weaponised water shortages and systematic deprivation. She described a "slow stripping away of hope", exacerbated by social media harassment and a lack of accountability since 2014. Despite early warnings by WROs, action came too late, though initiatives like Water4Peace are now working to address the gap. Speakers argued for a shift away from top-down aid delivery towards approaches grounded in mutual aid and hyper-local response. The Vitol Foundation shared its work on localising humanitarian support and reimagining systems that scaffold around survivor-led groups. The panel explored how locally led solutions often desecalate tensions, helping to manage security risks more effectively than large-scale interventions.

However, concerns were raised about how bureaucratic and rigid funding structures can hinder these efforts. The phrase "funding corrupts" was invoked to challenge assumptions that funding must flow through traditional institutions. Examples from Sudan showed how emergency response rooms and local-national intermediaries offered more effective, immediate support to communities than many international agencies.The discussion closed with a call to invest directly in women peacebuilders and local civil society organisations, whose resilience and access offer not only faster and more culturally appropriate responses but also long-term pathways to peace. Participants agreed that future funding models must be flexible, responsive and led by those with lived experience of crisis. 

Engagement with parliamentarians, including through the NATO Parliamentary Assembly and international partners such as Japan, was seen as critical. The Foreign Minister’s work in Brussels and the development of international parliamentary networks were cited as effective for advancing the WPS agenda. There was a shared view that WPS must be embedded across national and international policy, with accountability as a core principle. The roundtable discussed NATO’s strategic shift following the war in Ukraine, from crisis management to deterrence and defence. This evolution demands a new regional defence outlook and the integration of gender perspectives at both political and military levels.

While the Washington Summit’s endorsement of NATO’s WPS approach was welcomed, the NATO SG SR on WPS stressed the need for practical implementation guidance and leadership from defence institutions. There were concerns about the militarisation of the WPS agenda. A broader approach that includes civil society and refocuses NATO on prevention and protection was encouraged. There was agreement that WPS must go beyond increasing women’s representation and consider the needs of the civilian population. Ukraine was used as a case study, demonstrating that operational success depends on civilian inclusion. The importance of aligning WPS language with NATO priorities was raised to avoid marginalisation. Recruitment shortages and underused resources were noted, along with the relevance of emerging technologies and public-private partnerships. Attention was drawn to practical challenges, such as proper combat uniforms for women. Institutionalising WPS across defence structures remains a challenge. Training should be standardised and extend beyond gender advisors. Leadership was seen as essential, with calls for gender-responsive leadership to be prioritised. Pilot programmes and cooperation with the OSCE and EU are underway to promote this.Cultural barriers within armed forces were discussed, particularly around sexual violence.

The UK’s PSVI and zero-tolerance approaches were recognised as important initiatives. Public campaigns in Ukraine promoting women in uniform were seen as insufficient without structural change. Proposals included linking arms sales to CRSV accountability.Concerns were raised in the Q&A about the securitisation of WPS and the diminishing space for peace in NATO’s agenda. The ITPP and training partnerships with countries like Morocco, Tunisia and Colombia were cited as promising, though questions remain over NATO’s leverage in bilateral agreements. Revisions to the Protection of Civilians (POC) framework were recommended, particularly in light of lessons from Afghanistan.Finally, reference was made to current Royal Navy investigations and negotiations with the United States, with further updates expected in the autumn. 

The event welcomed four panelist experts who spoke on the harrowing impact of gender and sexual-based violence across families, communities and borders in Sudan. The conversation covered the need for survivor-led and trauma-focused psychosocial support for those impacted by sexual and gender-based violence and the use of rape as a weapon of war. The speakers also importantly outlined how the violence in Sudan does not occur within the country’s borders in isolation, the UK is experiencing intersecting insecurities domestically, including the intimidation of Sudanese WHRDs and rise of domestic violence. For more than two decades, the impact of insecurity and violence have directly impacted Sudanese women and girls.

Recommendations from the panelists included: urging the UK Government to listen to survivors, as a UN penholder on Sudan; ensuring consistency in its approach to protecting civilians and humanitarian workers; UN-led initiatives to investigate SGBV and missing girl crimes; and for the Met Police and Home Office to treat assaults as gender-based hate crimes.

A third of the Maoist rebel fighters were women but only 314 sexual war crimes were registered with the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) in Nepal, and none of those cases have been processed. Devi’s own horrific experience of rape taught her how to speak to fellow survivors. As the film unfolds we see women start to trust her with their stories and she builds a group to take to parliament and demand recognition and the same level of compensation received for other wartime injustices.  

The event—chaired by Baroness (Fiona) Hodgson, co-chair of the APPG-WPS - focused on the power of women to resolve the failings of a patriarchal peace process, what the international community and the UK could now do to support Khadka’s movement and the impact of the withdrawal of foreign aid by the U.S. and other governments in recent months. “Devi, gives us the impetus to continue the fight,” for the rights of women facing sexual violence in conflict, Baroness Hodgson said.  

Subina Shrestha is the director of the award-winning film, Devi. The filmmaking process catalysed Devi’s campaign for justice. Shrestha and the film’s producer, Rosie Garthwaite, have helped to raise funds and find in kind support for the organisation the women have built to support their campaign called The Undefeated or Aparajit in Nepali. In the panel that followed the screening of the film Subina Shrestha explained that on March 19th 2025 some 794 testimonies were officially accepted by TRC, gathered by Aparjit. She explained that in the end, realising the scale of the problem, Devi was “willing to take any risks” to see their testimonies properly recorded. Shrestha explained that while in August 2024 an amendment to the Transitional Justice law was passed enabling a pathway to justice for these women, that law is yet to be implemented. The commissioners of the TRC have not yet been appointed.  

Christina Lamb, OBE, is the chief foreign correspondent for The Sunday Times. Her book, Our bodies, Their Battlefield is a devastating account of warfare on women’s bodies during wars across the world. Lamb said that Devi was “a beautiful and chilling film”. She said that sexual violence like this was happening in conflicts around the world, victims rarely getting justice, “in fact, most of the time victims feel like they have done something wrong.” It has been 25 years since the UN Security Council adopted resolution (S/RES/1325) on women and peace and security on 31 October 2000. It was supposed to reduce rape being used as a weapon of war and increase the participation of women in peace processes. But Lamb says that data reveals the situation is in fact worse now for women in conflict. Despite that Lamb says she has always struggled to get editors to engage with stories of sexual violence in war. “It took Ukraine - a country in Europe - to get people reporting it more widely," Lamb explains. But the lack of action by governments, even where there is attention, is “extremely disappointing,” Lamb says. Even ISIS fighters, whose abuses, of Yazidi women in particular, have been so widely reported.

“Not a single one of them was tried for sexual violence.” Prosecutors, Lamb said, did not consider those crimes as serious as the others with which they were charged. Thomas Bell, a journalist and author, gave credit to the women who had managed to push through the amendment to the law in 2024 and also to the campaigners and politicians who, at the last minute, made it possible. Bell explained, “the reality is that the TRC needs a lot of support.” The sort of support Bell identified was international political pressure and sustained donor funding. “The hope is, it will be through a UN backed mechanism which will be a way to provide some guardrails to uphold to international standards and prevent political interference,” he explained.   

Ian Martin brought a special insight to the panel as he was the Personal Representative of the Secretary-General in Nepal, supporting the peace process 2006–2007. He was also Head of United Nations Mission in Nepal (UNMIN) 2006-2009. When the UNMIN left, Martin explained, there was a full report of war crimes, which included sexual violence. He paid respect to the women in the documentary and campaigners for keeping pressure up to see justice for nearly two decades. “But,” Martin said, he thought “criminal accountability is unlikely in Nepal”. In his experience “the TRC was seen as a way of avoiding criminal accountability rather than a route to it by the Maoists.” And further, ‘the Nepali army (accused of many of  these attacks) is essentially untouchable.” The UK has a strong relationship with the Nepal Army. Martin asked, “in what ways can the UK contribute to the current context.” 

Anneliese Dodds, MP, served as Minister for Development at the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office and Minister for Women and Equalities at the Department for Education from July last year until a month ago. Baroness Hodgson took time to recognise the excellent job Dodds had done whilst a Minister. Dodds called the Devi documentary an “extraordinarily powerful film,” that “shows the horror and ambiguity that victims of sexual violence face.”....”Devi Khadka explores movingly in the film the difficulties of facing so many blocks to her progress by powerful men, some of them her own “comrades”.” Dodds says she found particularly poignant the comment Khadka made about how as long as there was impunity for war time criminals no daughter could be safe. Dodds echoed the words of Gisele Pelicot: “Shame has got to change sides.”  

The first question from the audience asked if there should be more focus on prevention since justice looked like such a remote possibility. There was a lot of push back on this idea from the panellists, Dodds said “Nothing will change if there is no chance that the people in charge can get in trouble.” 

Subina Shrestha was asked to describe the impact of the documentary in Nepal and talked about how the team had been screening the film to survivors around Nepal and that at each screening women came forward with new testimonies, many speaking to people for the first time about their experiences. For that reason there is a heavy cost of these screenings, as a trauma therapist and other support is needed for the women.  She also emphasised on the need for continued support for Devi and the survivors organisation.   

Miss Gillian A Dare, OBE and Lady Anne Greenstock both commented that their many years of experience campaigning for the rights of women has taught them that involving men in the work is crucial for success.  

Devi is touring festivals around the world, with simultaneously impact screenings being planned. The film is still seeking distribution in the UK.  

Saron Belay, the Co-Chair of the Tigray Youth Network, laid out the background of the war in Ethiopia. She discusses the Ethiopian government’s delay of national elections in September – October 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, which eventually led to the Tigray Peoples Liberation Front (TPLF) holding constitutionally mandated regional elections. The government declared these elections null and avoid. Belay cited the national federalist Constitution’s rules on elections and temporal limits on the House of People’s Representatives, explaining how the election postponement became more than a political issue; it evolved into a constitutional crisis that underscored the tensions within Ethiopia's federal structure and the challenges of maintaining constitutionalism and impartiality amidst political conflicts.

On November 4th, 2020, Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed declared war on Tigray alongside foreign Eritrean troops and neighbouring Amhara militia; in response, the TPLF organised the Tigray Defence forces (TDF) for defence of the region. Over the course of two years, Abiy Ahmed used drones, bombs, and chemical weapons purchased from countries like Iran, the UAE, China, and Turkey against Tigray. In spite of the 2022 Cessation of Hostilities Agreement between the Ethiopian government and the TPLF, Eritrean troops continue to occupy parts of Tigray until present day and sexual violence continues to be used as a method of war. Belay notes that despite the violence, displacement, and humanitarian catastrophe in their homeland, the resilience and courage of the Tigrayan people remains undeniable.

Kate Vigneswaran, international criminal justice expert and co-author of the New Lines Institute report “Conflict-Related Sexual and Reproductive Violence in Tigray” which was launched at the APPG event, presented the legal findings of the report. Vigneswaran outlined how the report was based on open-source intelligence including government and non-governmental reports as well as findings by the UN International Commission of Human Rights Experts on Ethiopia.

The report sets out how sexual and reproductive violence, including rape, sexual torture, sexual and reproductive mutilation, forced pregnancy, forced nudity, and sexual slavery, inflicted by all parties to the conflict on men, women, girls, boys and LGBTQI+ persons from Tigray, Amhara, Afar and other ethnic groups was brutal, leaving survivors with life-long physical scars and mental trauma. Such acts targeted, or resulted in damage to, the reproductive capacity of the Tigrayan survivors in particular, with the apparent objective of altering the ethnic composition of the community.

Vigneswaran highlighted how the violence, committed in the context of mass killings, enforced disappearances, arbitrary detention, forced removals, destruction of food and water infrastructure and restrictions on humanitarian aid, among other violations, was widespread throughout the conflict, and continued well after the Cessation of Hostilities Agreement was signed in November 2022 in Pretoria. Vigneswaran emphasised that the report concludes there is a reasonable basis to believe sexual and reproductive violence, as well as other gender-based crimes, constitute crimes against humanity, war crimes and possibly genocide.

The information shows that there are reasonable grounds to believe that victims were persecuted on gender, ethnic, and political grounds. Insufficient information is available regarding those responsible in the higher echelons of the Ethiopian and Eritrean governments and further investigation is required. Vigneswaran recommended States engage with the Ethiopian authorities with a view to instituting proceedings at the International Court of Justice; exercise extraterritorial, including universal, criminal and civil jurisdiction to provide victims with access to justice; explore creative means to provide full access to remedies and reparations, including truth-telling, compensation and community-building initiatives; and support civil society organisations working with survivor communities by adequately funding them and supporting their advocacy at the international level.

Kallie Mitchell, Head of the Gender Policy Portfolio at the New Lines Institute and co-author of the Tigray report, explained how the international community can strengthen global responses to CRSV through two key frameworks: the Women, Peace and Security Agenda (WPS) and the UK’s Preventing Sexual Violence in Conflict Initiative (PSVI). Mitchell emphasised how military actors used sexual and reproductive violence against Tigrayans not only to impact the individual who was directly violated, but to terrorize and, based on many survivor testimonies and investigations cited in the report, destroy, in whole or in part, the Tigrayan ethnic group.

Mitchell explained that by situating the sexual and reproductive violence that occurred during the Tigray conflict within the broader context of gendered vulnerabilities that exist in the region and in Ethiopia as a country, including historical and cultural gender norms and institutional militarized masculinity, we can better understand the severe and long-lasting impact that these violations have on individuals, families, and communities across Ethiopia.

Any meaningful approaches to preventing and responding to this violence require more than legal accountability - it demands a fundamental shift in the gendered power structures that perpetuate it around the world. She urged more understanding of how deeply entrenched gender norms in peacetime serve as a driver of wartime sexual and reproductive violence; and that these norms exist beyond private spheres to shape institutions, especially those involved in conflict. These norms include boundaries of acceptable violence both in peacetime and in war; since men make up the majority of actors who start, fight in, and end wars, they are the actors deciding on these boundaries.

Mitchell went on to show how the four pillars of the WPS agenda can be used to challenge the gendered power structures that enable discrimination, conflict, and gender-based violence. As a leader on WPS and the penholder of the agenda at the UN, the UK has played a key role in advancing commitments towards gender equality in peace and security frameworks. The UK has further built on its WPS commitments through its Preventing Sexual Violence in Conflict Initiative (PSVI), which seeks to address CRSV through policy advocacy, survivor support, and accountability efforts.

Mitchell concluded that sexual violence in Tigray was not an isolated atrocity; it is a symptom of deeper gendered power structures that persist in conflicts worldwide. And yet, the international community already has the tools to prevent and combat these crimes through the WPS agenda and PSVI.

The Q&A session covered meaningful justice for survivors of CRSV beyond domestic accountability, which remains unlikely; what reparations could look like; how advocacy groups can continue to support survivors and the work of policymakers around the world; how to change pervasive and entrenched gender norms in Tigray to support the reintegration of survivors of CRSV into their communities and families without the stigma and shame of sexual violence; and considerations of children born of wartime sexual violence.

This important and timely event highlighted the ongoing challenges in addressing CRSV and advocated for comprehensive, survivor-centered approaches on an international scale.

The event welcomed:

• Professor Christine Chinkin, Professor in International Law from the LSE

• Joanna Crouch, Policy Lead on Human Security for the Ministry of Defence

• Tess Phippen, Head of WPS at the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office

• Eva Tabbasam, Director for Gender Action for Peace and Security.

The discussion was facilitated by Baroness Fiona Hodgson, co-chair of the APPG on WPS. Baroness Hodgson welcomed the panellists and participants to this briefing, noting the importance of this discussion in light of the 25th anniversary of UNSCR 1325 and the 30th Anniversary of the Beijing Platform. 

She observed that at this time sadly women’s rights are rolling back, as seen in Afghanistan with women being banned from education. Iraq is now passing a law to permit girls as young as 9 years old to be married. She also commented that Holding this event with experts on WPS provides an opportunity for collective  consideration in light of these global challenges.

Professor Christine Chinkin provided a comprehensive overview of the WPS agenda. Since its establishment by passing of UNSCR 1325, a further nine resolutions have been adopted by the UN Security Council. In light of the gendered impacts of conflict, this agenda seeks to ensure women’s experiences are included in policy and law-making throughout the conflict continuum.. The agenda was meant to ‘build on, and work in tandem with existing law obligations’ as provided under International Humanitarian Law, International Human Rights Law and International Criminal Law.

Professor Chinkin noted the importance of the prevention pillar as a wider remit that encompasses all elements of crisis, not just conflict. The proceeding resolutions have emphasised survivor-centred, women’s empowerment and the importance of building the capacity and financial sustainability of women’s rights organisations and women-led organisations, challenging the ‘top-down, security council led approach’. Professor Chinkin challenged the linear logic to the WPS resolution which assumes a pre, during and post-conflict stages; for example, post-conflict planning must begin at the ‘pre’ and participation must be implemented from the outset of conflict.

Professor Chinkin identified the main problem with advancing the WPS agenda as non-implementation- reports show that there fails to be ‘actionable commitments through structural shifts by powerful actors, such as the security council, the UN and member states’. WPS could be, should, be a comprehensive and overriding agenda for women and those who do not conform to the gender binary; ‘We need champions to counter the very real backlash we are seeing’, Professor Chinkin concludes.

Tess Phippen from the FCDO then followed with an overview of the UK’s commitments to Women, Peace and Security, particularly through the establishment of the National Action Plan since 2006.  In 2023-2027, the UK introduced its first NAP with domestic and international implementation, in partnership between the FCDO and the MOD. The NAP is centred around 5 strategic objectives.

1. Decision-making: delivered through policy and programmatic support to women’s peacebuilders and NGOs.

2. Gender-based violence: domestic and international action. Halving VAWG and knife crime and responding to CRSV- Lord Collins.

3. Crisis response: women and girls disproportionately impacted by violence yet their specific needs are overlooked in conflict.

4. Security and Justice: committed to increase accountability

5. Transnational threats: ensuring response to the needs of women and girls. Introduced new measures to tackle online violence against women and girls.

Ms Phippen informed MPs that the UK is working with its global partners in the UN, UNSC and NATO to support countries to develop and implement NAPS, such as Colombia. The UK is also focused on building HMG capability on WPS through initiatives such as the ISF-funded WPS Helpdesk. Tess concluded by looking ahead to this year’s 25th anniversary on WPS and urged parliamentarians to engage with the agenda as we navigate a challenging global picture ahead of us.

Joanne Crouch provided a comprehensive overview of the Ministry of Defence’s (MOD) role as a co-owner of the NAP, one of the few countries with specific defence commitments. Joanne identified that defence is not a sideline actor- it owns the levers on the use of force and a role in the conduct of both war and peace operations. ‘There is a ‘moral, legal and strategic imperative’ to ensure a values-based agenda, Ms Crouch explained. The MOD has a 12-year change programme to deliver its commitments, to ensure that women have access to the right tools and policies to operate on equal terms as men within defence. This strategy also includes conducting work to enhance responsiveness to gender-based violence in the conflict arena.

Eva Tabbasam provided a background to GAPS’s work and thinking about the crucial role of NGOs/CSOs as part of the agenda. GAPS is a network of 19 NGOs with civil society organizations working in-country, acting as the critical friend of the government and supporting the implementation of the National Action Plan. Ms Tabbasam outlined how GAPS supported the development of the recent iteration through language support, hosting roundtables.

The agenda is a civil society agenda- its roots are grounded in CSO activism and a pacifist approach. GAPS tries to ensure that CSO perspectives are included at the national, regional and grassroots levels. In recognition of the 25th anniversary, GAPS is facilitating conversations about what WPS currently looks like and considering security for whom? CSOs and NGOs working at the frontline of communities hold expertise on their own contexts, Ms Tabbasam underlined. Parliamentary support is critical, acting as an accountability mechanism; Ms Tabbasam urged parliamentarians to ask critical questions about implementation, where ODA goes, and how much the UK is truly supporting women and girls.

Baroness Fiona Hodgson concluded the discussion by providing an overview of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on WPS. As a co-chair with Alicia Kearns and GAPS as secretariat, the APPG-WPS organises events to keep engaged on the issues of WPS.. Baroness Hodgson asked participants to continue putting down questions in parliament to ensure WPS is centred in discussions. Providing an update on the WPS Bill, this has now cleared the Lords and will be brought by Sarah Champion MP to the House of Commons.

After an open discussion with participants on topics of gender champions and the current landscape of backlash against women’s rights, Baroness Hodgson thanked the speakers and participants for a fruitful event.