The conceptualization of sexual violence as a ‘weapon of war’ has placed war-time rape on the international se¬curity agenda. From being seen as a tragic by-product of armed conflicts in international humanitarian and criminal law, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda recognised that acts of sexual violence can constitute torture, enslavement and, in certain circumstances, genocide. The use of rape has been documented in the armed conflict that erupted in 2003 in Darfur as a weapon of war used by the Omar Hassan al-Bashir’s regime against African tribes. In 2008, the International Criminal Court indicted the sitting president of Sudan for crimes against humanity and war crimes in Darfur, including individual responsibility for the widespread and systematic rape of women and children. Based on new empirical data from interviews with Darfuri activists and critical actors in 2011, 2012 and 2013, the article critically analyzes the localized effects of the indictment and subsequent arrest warrant in Darfur looking specifically at local frames and modes of activism to protect women against violence and impunity for such crimes. The article argues that the hyper attention in international law and policy framing sexual violence as a weapon of war, has unintended consequences for the work and perspectives of local activists in championing the end of violence against women.
