A report released today raises alarm about significant gaps in the protection of survivors of sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) within the European asylum system. The report, titled “SGBV in the Asylum Procedure – Identification, Protection, Recognition,” is the first systematic overview of the international and EU legal framework on this issue and is intended to serve as a basis for further advocacy and legal action on behalf of survivors.

Women and girls on the move are exposed to a heightened risk of sexual and gender-based violence throughout their entire journey – in their country of origin, along migration routes, and in reception facilities in Europe. Estimates suggest that up to 90 percent of women and girls who have travelled the Mediterranean route have survived sexual violence, including rape. At the same time, only around one-third of asylum applications registered in the EU in 2024 fell under the category ‘female,’ even though women make up roughly half of all forcibly displaced people worldwide. Increasingly dangerous routes, pushbacks and violence by border guards hinder especially women and girls from seeking protection in Europe. The report systematically examines the legal obligations states hold towards these survivors.

Key findings of the report:

· Asylum systems historically designed from a male perspective: Forms of gender-based persecution such as domestic violence, forced marriage, or female genital mutilation were long not recognised as persecution within the meaning of the refugee definition. Women's claims were often treated only as derivative of a male family member's, rather than as grounds for protection in their own right.

· Binding obligations under international law: The Geneva Refugee Convention, The UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, the European Convention on Human Rights, and the Istanbul Convention oblige states to ensure early identification of survivors, gender-sensitive reception conditions, and a non-discriminatory procedure.

· EU law requires trauma-informed practice: The reformed Common European Asylum System requires Member States to apply all stages of the procedure in a gender-sensitive and trauma-informed manner, including mandatory training for all personnel involved.

· Landmark case law from the CJEU: The Court of Justice of the European Union has clarified that being female constitutes an innate characteristic sufficient to establish membership of a particular social group eligible for asylum – and that systematic discrimination against women within a state can, taken as a whole, constitute persecution, even without proof of individually targeted violence against the applicant.

· Right to stay outside the asylum system: Under certain conditions, survivors may obtain an independent right to remain – for instance under Article 59 of the Istanbul Convention or via the principle of non-refoulement – yet in practice, access to these rights remains out of reach for many survivors.

The report systematically examines sources of international and EU law, including binding treaties, soft-law instruments, and the case law of the European Court of Human Rights and the CJEU. It covers all stages of the asylum procedure – from the identification of survivors, through reception conditions and the asylum procedure itself, to status determination and rights outside the formal asylum system. It shows that despite a multi-layered legal framework of protection, the actual enforcement of SGBV survivors' rights frequently falls short of the legal standards in place. It calls for a coherent, gender-sensitive, and trauma-informed application of existing instruments, as well as the consistent invocation of the EU principle of effectiveness to challenge national rules that render these rights practically inaccessible for survivors.

“A legal framework conceived from a male perspective does not automatically protect women simply because they are later added to it . As long as the patriarchal structures that have shaped asylum systems from the ground up remain in place, the protection we promise on paper is only worth as much as its actual application – and that is precisely where it currently fails.”

– Anne Pertsch, author of the report

Read the full report here.

***

Contact: info@equal-rights.org