When laws fail survivors: How rape definitions and penalties in the Arab States undermine justice

Across the Arab States, outdated definitions of rape and inadequate penalties often leave survivors without justice, and in some cases, without legal recognition that a crime has occurred.

Our recent research, In Search of Justice: Rape Laws in the Arab States, finds that narrow legal definitions, marital exemptions, harmful evidentiary practices, and lenient penalties are not isolated oversights but systemic failures in 22 countries including Algeria, Bahrain, Comoros, Djibouti, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates (UAE), and Yemen.

These gaps devastate the lives of women, girls, and other vulnerable groups, and they risk emboldening perpetrators.

Narrow definitions leave survivors unprotected.

In the majority of the 22 LAS countries, rape is defined only as “a man having sexual relations with a woman without her consent.” This language excludes male survivors, same-sex assaults, and non-vaginal penetration, meaning that many acts of sexual violence cannot be prosecuted as rape. Where the law fails to define an act as rape, it is often charged under lesser offences with lighter penalties, diminishing the seriousness of the crime.

Marital rape: The invisible crime in law

None of the 22 member states of the League of Arab States explicitly criminalise marital rape in their penal codes. In some countries, such as Morocco and Tunisia, there are provisions in domestic violence laws that could, in theory, be applied to non-consensual sex within marriage. However, these are not framed as “rape” under the law, and prosecutions are rare to non-existent.

 In most jurisdictions, including Lebanon, Syria, and Kuwait, the law either directly exempts spouses from rape provisions or remains entirely silent on the matter. In Jordan, Palestine, and Syria, the law explicitly excludes marital rape. Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen go even further by codifying a husband’s “right” to sex regardless of the wife’s will. 

This legal silence has real consequences. It reinforces the outdated notion that marriage grants unconditional sexual access, denies survivors in marriage the protection of the law, and leaves them with almost no viable route to justice. International human rights standards are clear that consent is required in all sexual activity, regardless of marital status.

Honour over consent

Many League of Arab States legal codes treat rape as a crime against “public decency” or the “honor” of a family or tribe, rather than a violation of an individual’s autonomy and dignity. In Yemen, for example, sexual violence is categorised as a crime against “honour” rather than against personal autonomy and bodily integrity. This legal framing prioritises family reputation over survivor rights, fuels victim-blaming, and discourages reporting. Survivors risk being judged not on whether they consented, but on whether their behaviour met societal expectations of morality.

Penalties that do not match the harm

The punishment for rape varies drastically across the region. In Tunisia, aggravated cases can carry a life sentence. Still, in other states, the minimum penalty can be as low as three years, and even reduced further for so-called mitigating circumstances.

Until recently, Jordan’s Penal Code contained Article 308, which allowed a perpetrator of rape or sexual assault to avoid prosecution altogether by marrying his victim. The provision was justified under the guise of “protecting family honour,” but in reality, it coerced survivors into marriages with their rapists and denied them justice. Following years of advocacy by women’s rights groups, Article 308 was repealed in 2017, a landmark victory, but also a stark reminder of how legal systems in the region have historically prioritised reputation and social norms over survivor rights.

Even today, light sentences and escape clauses across other states continue to signal to perpetrators that sexual violence is not treated as a serious crime. Such provisions not only embolden offenders but also reinforce a culture of impunity that silences survivors and discourages reporting.

Survivors of rape continue to face barriers in the courtroom

In Sudan and Iraq, courts have historically required survivors to prove physical resistance to establish rape. This standard ignores the reality that many victims cannot fight back due to fear, coercion, or incapacitation. Virginity testing, still used in some investigations in Egypt and Iraq, has no scientific validity and is condemned by the World Health Organisation. These practices not only retraumatise survivors but also undermine their credibility in court.

Power imbalances ignored

Across the region, most penal codes fail to recognise that abuse of authority by teachers, employers, or religious leaders can nullify consent. Survivors in unequal power relationships are left without tailored protections, even though these situations carry a heightened risk of coercion. In Tunisia, reforms have broadened the definition of violence against women. However, survivors still report cases where abusers in positions of authority evade proper accountability unless a violent assault can be proven.

Saudi Arabia’s law ignores sexual abuse perpetrated by those in positions of social, religious, or economic power. Victims who come forward can face reversal of blame or prosecution for related “morality” crimes, especially in employer-employee or religious leader-follower scenarios. 

Consent must be the standard

Perhaps the most striking finding of the report is that, across the 22 member states of the League of Arab States, only Tunisia has taken steps toward basing its rape law on the international definition of rape. In most of the other LAS countries, penal codes hinge on proof of physical force or threat and define rape solely as vaginal penetration. This narrow framing excludes other forms of rape that can be committed against both women and men. By conditioning the definition on the use of force, survivors who are intoxicated, unconscious, asleep, or otherwise unable to resist are often denied justice, as the law fails to recognize that the absence of consent, not evidence of resistance, is the defining element of rape.

In countries like Lebanon, Djibouti, Libya, Palestine, Somalia, Sudan, and Syria, rape is legally defined solely by the use of force, survivors are expected to prove they were physically overpowered or that they fought back, a standard that fails to reflect the realities of sexual violence and places the burden of responsibility unfairly on those who have been harmed.”. These gaps perpetuate harmful rape myths that can further silence survivors, especially those who do not meet these narrow evidentiary requirements.

Even where consent appears in the law, it is poorly defined or inconsistently applied. For instance, in Egypt, the law does not demand proof of force or resistance; however, survivors still face a relentless struggle to access justice. Due to the absence of a survivor-centred approach, the burden of proof falls heavily on them, forcing them to endure cumbersome and often inhumane procedures, during which they are ridiculed, dismissed, questioned about their behaviour, or subjected to invasive, unnecessary forensic testing.

Saudi Arabia criminalises rape under Sharia, without a codified penal code or clear statutory provisions. This leaves broad discretionary power in the hands of judges, who traditionally interpret sharia rules in ways that often require physical violence or overt coercion for prosecution, reflecting entrenched notions that sexual acts without physical resistance may not qualify as rape under the law. This fosters impunity in cases where victims are silenced by circumstances beyond their control, such as familial pressure or economic dependence.

It is also worth noting that the cumbersome procedures for accessing justice, combined with the heavy burden of proof placed on victims/survivors, can expose them to further harm. When they are unable to meet the strict evidentiary requirements, shaped by restrictive definitions of rape and onerous legal processes, they risk being accused of engaging in sexual relations outside of marriage, an act criminalized in all LAS countries.

The missing piece across much of the region is a consent-based definition of rape that recognises sexual acts as unlawful unless there is free and voluntary willingness to participate, in line with the  Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW).

CEDAW explicitly prohibits rape and other acts of sexual violence as forms of gender-based violence and discrimination against women, and its General Recommendations emphasise the need for laws that protect women’s rights and dignity, including a definition of sexual violence that centres on the absence of free and informed consent. 

Why this matters now

The legal systems across the LAS members remain deeply inadequate in addressing rape as a grave human rights violation. While legal reform is underway in some countries, progress remains slow and uneven. Most legal systems still rely on outdated, force-based definitions of rape that ignore the principle of consent and entrenched patriarchal values.

The consequences are devastating. Survivors of rape are routinely denied justice, face stigma and disbelief, and are pressured into withdrawing complaints or accepting out-of-court settlements. Judicial practices, from virginity testing to demands for proof of physical resistance, further re-traumatise those who seek justice. For women, girls, and marginalised groups such as persons with disabilities, the personal, social, and economic cost of reporting rape remains unbearably high.

Equality Now’s call to action

Equality Now works globally and regionally to address sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) as a global human rights crisis. Ending sexual violence requires good laws, effective implementation, and an intersectional approach that recognises how overlapping forms of discrimination increase vulnerability and barriers to justice.

In the MENA region, we partner with women’s rights organisations to draft survivor-centred legislative reforms, train justice officials, and challenge harmful myths. Globally, we advocate for consent-based rape laws, the removal of marital exemptions and impunity clauses, and justice systems that put survivors’ dignity and rights at the centre.

Transformative change is urgently needed. Laws must be rewritten to ground the definition of rape in consent, explicitly criminalise marital rape, and treat the full range of non-consensual sexual acts with equal seriousness. Reform must be backed by real investment in judicial training, survivor services, access to legal aid, and public education.

States must engage with civil society and uphold their obligations under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) and other international human rights treaties.

The road to ending impunity begins with a clear recognition: rape is not a private matter, a moral lapse, or a cultural question. It is a human rights violation that demands a human rights response. Governments, policymakers, legal professionals, and advocates must act with urgency and courage to ensure that the law no longer protects perpetrators or punishes survivors but becomes a tool for justice, accountability, and equality.