| dc.description.abstract | This thesis critically examines the applicability and feasibility of Transformative Gender Justice (TGJ) for children born as a result of conflict-related sexual violence (CRSV) perpetrated by Da’esh (ISIS) during the 2014 Yezidi genocide. These children face stigmatization, statelessness and socio-economic deprivation. The Yezidi Survivors’ Law (YSL) excludes these children, exacerbating their marginalization. TGJ aims to transform structural violence, emphasizes the gendered nature thereof and doing so via local participation. Central to this thesis is the application of Dustin N. Sharp’s ‘integrated critique’, which bridges critical theory and pragmatic policy implementation. This thesis applies ‘integrated critique’ in a two-step process. First, it evaluates the applicability of TGJ - implemented in other contexts – to the Yezidi-case, by comparing how assumptions about stigmatization, deprivation and justice align, or fail to align, with the lived experiences of Yezidi mothers and their children born of CRSV. This thesis then moves to ‘integrated critique’ step two, evaluating the feasibility of TGJ-mechanisms given Iraq’s political-, judicial-, and socio-economic context. This thesis argues that while TGJ-mechanisms are theoretically applicable to Yezidi children born of CRSV, their feasibility is constrained by a lack of socio-political capacity and limited willingness to engage with the transformation of gendered structural-violence that TGJ requires. This does not render TGJ inapplicable, however. TGJ can be effective when it balances short-term pragmatism with long-term structural transformation, levering informal initiatives while gradually addressing systemic inequalities. This thesis contributes to academic debate on post-conflict justice for children born of CRSV, highlighting the underexplored Yezidi-case and advocating for the inclusion of pragmatism in assessing TGJ’s transformative potential. | |
