Introduction
On March 1st, 2021, the Iraqi Parliament enacted Law No 8 of 2021, the Yazidi Female Survivors Law (YSL). The law was the product of years of advocacy by Yazidi survivors, civil society organisations, and international human rights bodies following the genocide perpetrated by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) against minorities, namely the Yazidis, Turkmen, Shabak, and Christian communities beginning in August 2014. ISIL executed thousands of men and older women, enslaved women and girls, subjecting them to systematic sexual violence, and indoctrinated boys into use as child soldiers. These acts were formally characterised as genocide and crimes against humanity by the United Nations Investigative Team to Promote Accountability for Crimes Committed by Da’esh/ISIL (UNITAD) and recognised as genocide by the Iraqi legislature in Article 7 of the YSL.
The YSL constitutes one of the few examples in the world of a state creating a dedicated administrative reparations programme specifically for survivors of conflict-related sexual violence (CRSV). The law provides for monthly financial compensation, access to education, free land or housing, employment quotas in the public sector, psychosocial and rehabilitation services, and a formal recognition of the genocide by the state.
However, four years into implementation, a significant gap has emerged between the law’s formal provisions and its practical delivery. Thus, this article examines three specific failures: the criminal complaint requirement, the absence of provisions for children born out of sexual violence, and the non-construction of the rehabilitation centre. It argues that each constitutes a breach of a specific international legal obligation. The article further outlines Iraq’s treaty obligations, analyses the YSL’s design, and assesses implementation failures against those obligations.
Iraq’s International Legal Obligations
Iraq acceded to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) in 1971 and to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) in 1986. It further ratified the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) in 1994. These instruments impose binding obligations that directly apply to the YSL.
Under Article 2(3) of the ICCPR, Iraq must ensure that any person whose rights under the Covenant are violated has an effective remedy, and that such remedies are enforced by competent authorities. In its concluding observations on Iraq’s sixth periodic report, the regular compliance review wherein states submit reports to United Nations (UN) treaty bodies as adopted in August 2022 (CCPR/C/IRQ/CO/6), the Human Rights Committee recommended that Iraq
“investigate and prosecute in a timely manner all reported cases of human rights violations, including in cases involving sexual offences committed by Da’esh members during the armed conflict against Yazidi women and girls […] ensure that perpetrators are punished […] and that the victims or members of their families receive full reparation”.
The Committee also expressed concern about Article 26 of Iraq’s Unified National Identity Card Law No 3 of 2016, which permanently classifies any child born to at least one Muslim parent as Muslim, and recommended that Iraq
“amend the Law on national identity cards in order to take into account the situation of children born to non-Muslim mothers where the father is unknown or uninvolved in the life of the child, in particular children born of rape to Yazidi women previously held captive by Da’esh”.
Article 2 of the CEDAW requires Iraq to modify or abolish existing laws that discriminate against women. Iraq submitted reservations to Articles 2(f) and (g), 9, 16, and 29(1) at the time of accession, thereby limiting the scope of certain obligations relating to equality under domestic law and family relations. The CEDAW Committee has consistently maintained that reservations to Article 2 are contrary to the Convention’s object and purpose. The Committee’s General Recommendation No 30 on women in conflict prevention, conflict, and post-conflict situations (CEDAW/C/GC/30, 2013) states that reparations must be “adequate, effective and prompt” and that rather than restoring the pre-violation situation they must “seek to transform the structural inequalities which led to the violations of women’s rights”. Paragraphs 81(e) and 81(g) further require states to involve women in the design of reparations programmes and to address sexual enslavement and forced marriage, among other harms.
In February 2026, the CEDAW Committee reviewed Iraq’s eighth periodic report (CEDAW/C/IRQ/CO/8). In its concluding observations, the Committee expressed concern that the YSL “may at times impose burdensome and stigmatizing procedures on survivors, such as the filing of judicial complaints to gain access to reparations”, and that it “has been implemented without transparent data on the reparations granted”. The Committee recommended that Iraq amend the YSL to align its implementation with the Basic Principles and adopt the Global Code of Conduct for Gathering and Using Information about Systematic and CRSV, known as the Murad Code, a framework designed to ensure that evidence collection from survivors of CRSV does not cause further harm. It separately expressed concern about the absence of a legal framework to protect children born of rape by Da’esh members and recommended that Iraq establish a dedicated legal framework for their protection.
Additionally, during its review of Iraq’s fifth and sixth periodic reports in May 2025, the Committee on the Rights of the Child expressed serious concern about discrimination against children born of rape or CRSV and recommended that Iraq develop targeted policies addressing their access to documentation and essential services. It further recommended that Iraq cease recording religion on birth certificates and develop protocols for registering children born in areas formerly controlled by Da’esh.
The overall normative framework for reparations is provided by UN General Assembly Resolution 60/147 of 16 December 2005, the Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law (the Basic Principles). While not legally binding, these principles are widely regarded as reflecting authoritative standards, and in part, customary international law. Principle 18 identifies five forms of reparation: restitution, compensation, rehabilitation, satisfaction, and guarantees of non-repetition; all of which are implicated by the YSL.
Principle 12 requires that victims be treated with compassion and respect for their dignity and that administrative programmes not impose undue procedural or evidentiary burdens. This is particularly relevant to the YSL’s complaint requirement. The UN Secretary-General’s Guidance Note on Reparations for CRSV (June 2014) elaborates on Principle 12 in terms directly applicable to the YSL. Principle 2 of the Guidance Note states that administrative reparations programmes imply “recognition of the harm suffered, without subordinating it to the judicial establishment of the responsibility of the perpetrator”.
The YSL on Paper
- The YSL was designed as an administrative reparations programme with a deliberately flexible evidentiary framework. Article 5 allows survivors’ applications to be verified through a range of sources, such as government records, civil society documentation, and media reporting, and explicitly does not require survivors to appear before a court. The law contains confidentiality provisions prohibiting the General Directorate for Survivors’ Affairs (GDSA) and other government agencies from sharing survivors’ information without authorisation. Article 8(3) mandates the establishment of a dedicated rehabilitation centre in Sinjar. The law covers Yazidi, Turkmen, Christian, and Shabak survivors, including boys abducted as minors and men and women who survived mass executions. At the level of design, the YSL incorporates key elements associated with the international reparations framework. It includes elements of all five forms of reparation, and its administrative character with flexible evidentiary thresholds aligns with the Guidance Note’s requirement that administrative programmes allow access to reparations independent of criminal proceedings.
- Three Specific Failures, Three Specific Violations
- The Criminal Complaint Requirement
Approximately two months after the GDSA opened its application process in July 2022, the judge then serving as Chair of the Committee established under Article 10 of the YSL introduced the requirement that every applicant must file a criminal complaint against ISIL and supply the resulting investigative documentation before their application could be processed. This requirement appears nowhere in the YSL or its associated by-laws, and therefore lacks an explicit basis in the governing legal framework.
The Coalition for Just Reparations (C4JR), a civil society monitoring body tracking the YSL’s implementation, confirmed in its fourth annual monitoring report (March 2025) that the requirement remained in force and had, by May 2024, been further expanded: survivors must produce corroborating testimony from two current YSL beneficiaries who witnessed the specific crime at issue. The C4JR characterised this heightened standard as risking “re-traumatization of both applicants and eyewitnesses”. In the years before, the C4JR has recorded cases of investigators screaming at survivors, calling them liars, and threatening them with imprisonment. Female Shabak survivors were likewise subjected to derogatory language by court employees during their testimony. Crucially, the GDSA does not publish data on the number of applicants who abandoned the process as a result of procedural practice, which raises concerns under the Basic Principles’ requirement of access to relevant information concerning reparation mechanisms.
In April 2023, 13 organisations, including Human Rights Watch (HRW), the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), and the C4JR, issued a joint statement calling on Iraq to revoke the requirement and align the process with international standards. Two joint communications were sent by eight Special Rapporteurs to the Iraqi government. The first (AL IRQ 3/2022) addressed the general inadequacy of the reparations framework, and the second (AL IRQ 3/2023) addressed the criminal complaint requirement directly. Iraq did not respond to either communication.
A limited step forward was made in November 2024, when the GDSA announced that survivors in France and Germany could provide criminal testimony remotely at Iraqi diplomatic missions in Berlin, Frankfurt, and Paris. By May 2025, approximately 120 remote interviews had taken place. While this constitutes a procedural facilitation measure, it does not address the fundamental legal problem of the criminal complaint requirement itself remaining in place. The requirement is difficult to reconcile with Article 5 of the YSL, and appears inconsistent with Principle 2 of the UN Secretary-General’s Guidance Note by subordinating recognition of harm to the judicial establishment of the perpetrator’s responsibility. Under CEDAW General Recommendation No 30, it is in tension with Iraq’s obligation to ensure that reparations are adequate, effective, and designed to respond to women’s specific needs and circumstances.
Omission in Regard to Children Born of Rape
The YSL contains no provision addressing the legal status, welfare, or rights of children born as a result of ISIL’s systematic use of rape, resulting in a significant normative gap within the framework. The Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) stated at the time of the law’s enactment in 2021, that she had “deep concern over the situation of the children born out of rape by ISIL fighters”, as their situation was not addressed by this law. The UN Special Representative of the Secretary-General on Sexual Violence in Conflict similarly highlighted this omission in September 2021.
The omission is worsened by Article 26(2) of Iraq’s Unified National Identity Card Law No 3 of 2016, which permanently designates any child born to at least one Muslim parent as Muslim. Because ISIL fighters are classified as Muslim, children born of rape during captivity are permanently classified as Muslim, a designation that is effectively irreversible under Iraqi law. Since Yazidism requires both parents to be Yazidi, these children cannot be accepted into the Yazidi community, forcing mothers to face the impossible choice of returning home without their children or remaining in exile with them. Michelle Xiao Liu described this dynamic as “an enduring genocide”, arguing that Iraqi law perpetuates what ISIL accomplished by force, by structurally entrenching the separation of mothers from their children and disrupting the intergenerational continuity of the Yazidi community.
The Human Rights Committee recommended that Iraq amend the National Card Law to address the situation of children born of rape to Yazidi women held captive by ISIL. However, this recommendation has not been implemented. The combined effect of the YSL’s silence and the continued application of Article 26(2) violates the freedom of religion and belief, Article 18 of the ICCPR, and the best interests of the child, Article 3(1) of the CRC, which prohibits identity designations that serve no interest of the child and actively harm their welfare and family life.
Rehabilitation
- Article 8(3) of the YSL explicitly mandates the construction of a dedicated rehabilitation centre in Sinjar. Four years after the law’s enactment, no such centre has been built. The C4JR identified this as one of the most significant outstanding gaps, noting that mental health and psychosocial support services remain fragmented and inaccessible for survivors who have returned or wish to return to Sinjar.
Crucially, the GDSA operates under a hiring freeze imposed by Iraq’s General Budget Law No 13 of 2023, which has prevented the recruitment of specialist staff necessary to design and operationalise rehabilitation services. However, a state cannot indefinitely invoke domestic budgetary constraints to justify non-delivery of a statutory mandate that corresponds to a binding international obligation. Rehabilitation is one of the five forms of reparation required by the Basic Principles, and is particularly central in cases involving severe and lasting psychological trauma inflicted by sexual slavery and genocidal violence. In this context, a prolonged failure to establish the mandated rehabilitation centre raises questions as to whether Iraq has exercised due diligence in implementing the YSL. Four years of non-compliance is not a temporary delay, but a structural failure in engaging Iraq’s obligations under CEDAW General Recommendation No 30, paragraph 81(g), and the Basic Principles, Principle 18(c).
Lessons from Colombia
- Colombia’s Law 1448 of 2011 is the most directly instructive comparator for the YSL as a case that highlights its design choices and implementation failures underlining what Iraq’s programme currently lacks.
Colombia’s Registro Único de Víctimas (RUV), the Unique Registry of Victims, processes applications through an entirely administrative process grounded in the principle of good faith (principio de buena fe) established in Article 5 of Law 1448: “The State shall presume the good faith of the victims”. The victim’s oral declaration before any regional public ministry office counts as primary evidence, and there is no requirement to file a criminal complaint before registering. The RUV cross-references the survivor’s account against government databases after registration, meaning that the criminal justice process is secondary to the access to reparations, not a condition precedent to it. This design reflects both ethical principle and practical necessity.
However, despite the law’s ambition, only approximately 13 percent of registered victims had received financial compensation by 2023, with land restitution covering only 9 percent. Of the 522 recognised subjects of collective reparation, only 28 communities had completed Collective Reparation Plans in the law’s first ten years. It becomes clear that transformative legislative ambitions without the institutional capacity, staffing, or sustained funding to deliver on them, fail. The GDSA’s continued hiring freeze under Iraq’s Budget Law No 13 of 2023 carries the same risk, appearing at an earlier stage, which is why Colombia’s experience is also instructive.
Conclusion
- The YSL was enacted because survivors demanded it. Yazidi women spent years testifying before parliaments, treaty bodies, and international tribunals to urge a state to acknowledge what had been done to them, and the law that resulted was a hard-won victory. Four years on, however, it risks becoming only a formal structure that absorbs international attention while delivering almost nothing to the people it was built for.
What makes this particularly concerning is that none of the failures examined in this article stem from legal ambiguity or genuine institutional complexity. The criminal complaint requirement contradicts the very text of the law it claims to operate under. The exclusion of children born of rape was flagged by UN mandate holders during enactment and was yet left unaddressed for four years. The rehabilitation centre was never built, despite an express statutory mandate. These are not oversights but choices, and they have been documented, transmitted to the Iraqi government, and ignored. The path forward, moreover, does not require new institutions or a new law. The criminal complaint requirement can be withdrawn by a single directive. The YSL and the National Card Law can be amended to bring children born of CRSV within the scope of legal protection. The rehabilitation centre requires prioritisation of its funding, and the publishing of detailed data by the GDSA would allow survivors and monitors alike to understand whether the programme is actually working effectively.
None of this is novel and therein lies the deeper problem. The international community has named these failures repeatedly, and Iraq has learned that naming them carries no consequence. The reforms required are neither legally complex nor politically unprecedented. What remains to be seen is whether the gap between what the YSL promises and what it delivers will finally be treated as the legal obligation it is.
Bibliography
Primary Sources – Treaties and International Instruments
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (adopted 18 December 1979, entered into force 3 September 1981) 1249 UNTS 13.
Convention on the Rights of the Child (adopted 20 November 1989, entered into force 2 September 1990) 1577 UNTS 3.
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (adopted 16 December 1966, entered into force 23 March 1976) 999 UNTS 171.
UNGA Res 60/147 (16 December 2005) UN Doc A/RES/60/147 (Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law).
Primary Sources – Domestic Legislation
Colombia, Victims and Land Restitution Law (Law 1448 of 2011).
Iraq, General Budget Law No 13 of 2023.
Iraq, Unified National Identity Card Law No 3 of 2016.
Iraq, Yazidi Female Survivors Law No 8 of 2021.
Primary Sources – UN Treaty Body Documents
CEDAW Committee, ‘General Recommendation No 28 on the Core Obligations of States Parties under Article 2 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women’ (16 December 2010) UN Doc CEDAW/C/2010/47/GC.2.
CEDAW Committee, ‘General Recommendation No 30 on Women in Conflict Prevention, Conflict and Post-Conflict Situations’ (1 November 2013) UN Doc CEDAW/C/GC/30.
CEDAW Committee, ‘Concluding Observations on the Eighth Periodic Report of Iraq’ (25 February 2026) UN Doc CEDAW/C/IRQ/CO/8.
CRC Committee, ‘Concluding Observations on the Combined Fifth and Sixth Periodic Reports of Iraq’ (18 July 2025) UN Doc CRC/C/IRQ/CO/5-6.
Human Rights Committee, ‘Concluding Observations on the Sixth Periodic Report of Iraq’ (16 August 2022) UN Doc CCPR/C/IRQ/CO/6.
Primary Sources – UN Special Procedures
OHCHR, ‘Mandates of the Special Rapporteur on the Promotion of Truth, Justice, Reparation and Guarantees of Non-Recurrence [and others]’ (15 September 2022) AL IRQ 3/2022 https://spcommreports.ohchr.org/TMResultsBase/DownLoadPublicCommunicationFile?gId=27513.
Primary Sources – UN Reports and Guidance
Office of the United Nations Secretary-General, ‘Guidance Note of the Secretary-General: Reparations for Conflict-Related Sexual Violence’ (June 2014) https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Press/GuidanceNoteReparationsJune-2014.pdf.
UN Office of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on Sexual Violence in Conflict, ‘Remarks of SRSG Patten at the Event “The Yazidi Women Survivors Law and Ensuring an Effective Reparations Programme in Iraq”‘ (30 September 2021) https://www.un.org/sexualviolenceinconflict/statement/remarks-of-srsg-patten-at-the-event-the-yazidi-women-survivors-law-and-ensuring-an-effective-reparations-programme-in-iraq-30-september-2021/.
UNITAD, ‘Eighth Report of the Investigative Team to Promote Accountability for Crimes Committed by Da’esh/ISIL’ (8 May 2021) UN Doc S/2021/419.
Secondary Sources – Books and Journal Articles
Michelle Xiao Liu, ‘The Enduring Genocide Against the Yazidis: How Iraq’s Law on Religious Identity Violates the Human Rights of Yazidi Survivors of ISIS Captivity and Their Children Born of Sexual Violence’ (2025) 23(2) Northwestern Journal of Human Rights 75.
Secondary Sources – Civil Society and NGO
Reports C4JR, ‘C4JR Urges Committee Established Under Yazidi Survivors Law to Drop Requirement of Filing Criminal Complaint to Receive Reparations’ (6 April 2023). Retrieved 8 April 2026 https://c4jr.org/0604202327288.
C4JR, ‘UN Special Rapporteurs Raise YSL Criminal Complaint Concerns with Iraq’ (25 August 2023) https://c4jr.org/2508202327740.
C4JR and Jiyan Foundation for Human Rights, ‘More Than “Ink on Paper”: Taking Stock Four Years After the Adoption of the Yazidi [Female] Survivors Law’ (March 2025). Retrieved 8 April 2026 https://c4jr.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/C4JR-Report-2025-Four-Years-After-YSL.pdf.
Human Rights Watch, ‘Iraq: Flawed Implementation of Yazidi Compensation Law’ (14 April 2023). Retrieved 7 April 2026 https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/04/14/iraq-flawed-implementation-yazidi-compensation-law.
Human Rights Watch and others, ‘Joint Statement on the Implementation of the Yazidi Survivors Law’ (14 April 2023). Retrieved 10 April 2026 https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/04/14/joint-statement-implementation-yazidi-survivors-law.
International Center for Transitional Justice, ‘From Principles to Practice: Challenges of Implementing Reparations for Massive Violations in Colombia’ (ICTJ, 2015). Retrieved 5 April 2026 https://www.ictj.org/resource-library/principles-practice-challenges-implementing-reparations-massive-violations accessed 10 April 2026.
ReliefWeb, ‘Iraq: UN Expert Welcomes Law to Aid ISIL Atrocity Survivors, but More Needs to Be Done for Children Born from Rape’ (April 2021). Retrieved 5 April 2026 https://reliefweb.int/report/iraq/iraq-un-expert-welcomes-law-aid-isil-atrocity-survivors-more-needs-be-done-children-born.
Yazda, ‘Implementing the Yazidi Survivors Law: A Review by and for Yazidi Survivors’ (2 August 2025). Retrieved 8 April 2026 https://www.yazda.org/implementing-the-yazidi-survivors-law-a-review-by-and-for-yazidi-survivors-yazda-launches-report-on-the-progress-gaps-and-the-path-to-survivor-led-transitional-justice-in-iraq.
Yazda, ‘Important Announcement for Survivors of ISIL Crimes Living in France and Germany and Wanting to Apply to the Yazidi Survivors’ Law’ (December 2024). Retrieved 8 April 2026 https://www.yazda.org/important-announcement-for-survivors-of-isil-crimes-living-in-france-and-germany-and-wanting-to-apply-to-the-yazidi-survivors-law.
Secondary Sources – Online Summaries and Media
JusticeInfo, ‘Syria: Learning from Iraq’s Reparations Experience’ (2 April 2026). Retrieved 9 April 2026 https://www.justiceinfo.net/en/157239-syria-learning-from-iraq-reparations-experience.html.
LSE Women, Peace and Security Blog, ‘Legal Representation Is Vital for Delivering Reparations to Those Kidnapped by ISIS’ (4 August 2025). Retrieved 8 April 2026 https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/wps/2025/08/04/legal-representation-is-vital-for-delivering-reparations-to-those-kidnapped-by-isis/.
OHCHR, ‘Preliminary Observations of the Special Rapporteur on the Promotion of Truth, Justice, Reparation and Guarantees of Non-Recurrence on his Official Visit to Colombia’ (29 September 2023). Retrieved 8 April 2026 https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/truth/statements/20230929-eom-stm-colombia-sr-truth.pdf accessed 10 April 2026.
Pathfinders for Peaceful, Just and Inclusive Societies, ‘Colombia’s Measures for Armed Conflict Victim Reparations and Land Restitution’ (2024) https://www.sdg16.plus/policies/colombias-measures-for-armed-conflict-victim-reparations-and-land-restitution/ accessed 10 April 2026.
UN Office at Geneva, ‘Experts of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women Commend Iraq on National Strategy for Iraqi Women, Raise Questions on Survivors of Sexual Violence Committed by ISIS and Impunity for “Honour” Crimes’ (4 February 2026). Retrieved 10 April 2026 https://www.ungeneva.org/en/news-media/meeting-summary/2026/02/examen-de-liraq-au-cedaw-les-experts-saluent-les-mesures-prises.
UN Office at Geneva, ‘Experts of the Committee on the Rights of the Child Praise Iraq’s Child Rights Strategy, Raise Issues Concerning Child Marriage and Corporal Punishment’ (16 May 2025). Retrieved 6 April 2026 https://www.ungeneva.org/en/news-media/meeting-summary/2025/05/examen-de-liraq-au-comite-des-droits-de-lenfant-les-experts.
