Share

Why This Matters Now

Modernizing the Definition of Apartheid in the Draft Crimes Against Humanity Treaty

Negotiations at the United Nations (UN) on a new Crimes Against Humanity (CAH) Treaty present an opportunity to modernize how the crime of apartheid is defined — ensuring that the law protects all victims of discriminatory regimes of oppression and domination. They also are a moment for civil society to reflect and organize for victim recognition and reparations as no one has been held accountable for the crime of apartheid to date. Current definitions under international criminal law were shaped to address apartheid in places like South Africa andNamibia and are rooted in mid-20th-century understandings of racism and discrimination. They risk excluding people suffering under intersectional discrimination and other forms of systematic discrimination today.

Without reform, the treaty’s apartheid provision could entrench outdated concepts of identity and oppression, leaving millions without recognition or recourse in international criminal law.

The Problem with Outdated Definitions

Under existing law — including the 1973 Apartheid Convention and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court — the crime of apartheid is defined as inhumane acts to further oppression and domination by one racial group over another racial group or groups.

But contemporary understandings of race and gender, reflected in international human rights law, emphasize that these are socially constructed categories shaped by systems of power —not fixed biological traits.

This disconnect between these understandings under international criminal and human rights law poses risks:

  • Exclusion of victims: Victims such as Palestinians, Afghan women and girls, and LGBTQIA+ persons could be excluded from narrow interpretations of “racial groups” — and could be overlooked under a narrowly defined apartheid provision.
  • Blind spots on gender-based systems of domination: The systematic oppression of women, girls, and LGBTQI+ persons — for example under the Taliban’s rule in Afghanistan — shares some structural features of apartheid but is not currently recognized as such. And as Black South African and Namibian feminists have long pointed out, South Africa’s apartheid system especially subjected Black women to intersecting racist and gendered discriminatory oppression.
  • Fragmented accountability: If gender-based oppression is treated as a separate crime, rather than as part of a unified system of domination, legal responses may fail to capture how racist and gendered hierarchies intersect in practice.

Read this article and this Q&A on defining apartheid in the draft CAH Treaty for details.

Toward an Inclusive, Contemporary Definition

Legal experts and advocates are proposing changes that would anchor the apartheid definition in how states and perpetrators operate systems of discrimination, rather than in outdated assumptions about identity.

A forward-looking definition would:

  • Extend recognition to all victims of institutionalized regimes of oppression and domination targeted on the basis of racism, gender or intersecting grounds.
  • Align with human rights law’s understanding of race and gender as socially constructed categories, not fixed biological traits.
  • Capture intersectional discrimination in regimes where racist, gendered, and other forms of oppression and domination reinforce one another in institutionalized systems.

This approach maintains the spirit of existing apartheid law while ensuring that the treaty can respond to the full range of systemic domination seen around the world today. To read more about three of the proposed definitions and which one ensures inclusivity read here. For a comprehensive overview of the definition of apartheid see the law review article by Lisa Davis and Kirby Anwar or watch our webinar.

What We’re Doing — and How You Can Stay Engaged

We are organizing with civil society across continents to ensure that the definition of apartheid in the Crimes Against Humanity Treaty reflects lived realities, international human rights law, and the voices of those most affected by discriminatory systems of domination and oppression.

Building Global Momentum

  • Engaging states and civil society: We are working directly with states, UN missions, and other civil society organizations to advance an inclusive, modern definition of apartheid—one that captures intersecting systems of racist and gendered oppression and aligns with contemporary human rights standards.
  • Regional and international briefings: We have held expert briefings and consultations across three continents, bringing together diplomats, UN experts, academics, and civil society leaders in affected communities. Additional briefings and convenings are planned in the coming months to broaden geographic reach and deepen state engagement. We have also provided expert testimony to key policy makers.
  • Advocacy at the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights: In Banjul, we joined African human rights advocates, legal experts, and civil society at the 85th Ordinary Session of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, to center African perspectives on apartheid, accountability, international lawmaking and solidarity. These conversations reinforced the importance of definitions that reflect historical experience and contemporary forms of systematic oppression and domination, ensuring that international law does not reproduce exclusion or hierarchy.
  • Expert convenings and survivor-centered dialogue: Those most impacted by apartheid—Palestinians, Afghans, Namibians, South Africans, and others—must be at the center of conversations on international criminal law. We have repeatedly convened civil society from these groups alongside UN Special Rapporteurs, ICC advisers, and international legal experts to build international solidarity and ensure victims’ experiences underlie the structures of accountability.

Stay Connected

This campaign is ongoing, and the treaty negotiations are moving quickly. If you would like to:

  • receive updates on briefings and events
  • stay informed about key developments in the negotiations
  • or learn how to support or engage with this work

You can sign up to stay apprised of the campaign and upcoming events here.

The opportunity to modernize international law does not come often. We are committed to ensuring it delivers justice that is inclusive, intersectional, and real.

A Proven Track Record: We’ve Won Before —  and We Can Win Again

History shows that determined, coordinated advocacy can shape international law.

Earlier drafts of the CAH Treaty contained a definition lifted from the Rome Statute — one that described gender as the “two sexes, male and female, within the context of society,” leaving critical protections unclear and vulnerable to narrow interpretation.

But through strategic global mobilization, civil society organizations, academic partners, and allied states pushed back. Advocates organized global campaigns to raise awareness of the limitations and risks of the outdated definition. Workshops, briefings, and legal submissions were coordinated across regions and languages to build broad support.

The results were outstanding:

  • Nearly 600 organizations and academics from over 100 countries signed our open letter urging the International Law Commission to remove or revise the Rome Statute’s definition.
  • Over 30 UN Special Rapporteurs and other UN Experts signed a submission calling on the Commission to remove the outdated definition of gender from the draft treaty. A second submission called on the Commission to expand the grounds for persecution in the draft treaty to include disability. Indigenous status, age, social origin, language, and migrant and refugee status.
  • Dozens of governments, UN Special Rapporteurs, and other experts echoed these calls, affirming that the treaty must reflect modern human rights law.

The result? The International Law Commission’s final recommended draft formally removed the outdated gender definition, aligning the treaty with contemporary understandings of gender and paving the way for truly inclusive protections.

This victory demonstrates that collective action works —we can shape language that truly protects people. History shows that when advocates organize, evidence wins, and law evolves.

Yanar Mohammed sits and talks with a group of young Iraqi children at a local shelter.

On the Assassination of Feminist Leader Yanar Mohammed

Yanar Mohammed – one of the most formidable feminist leaders of her generation – was assassinated in her home in Baghdad in what appears to have been a targeted militia attack.

Read our full statement.
Skip to site