A/HRC/41/33 and remain in a cycle of oppression. That may be particularly true for women identified as “criminals” in the first place, such as those who use drugs, are involved in minor aspects of drug trafficking or prostitution/sex work, or are irregular migrants. 69. Violence may also be used as a tool to coerce women to engage in criminal activity for which they are then imprisoned (see A/68/340). For example, in the drug trade, violence is frequently used to coerce women to become involved in drug trafficking networks, where they are used as mules and treated as dispensable by the ringleaders. The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights has documented cases in many countries in the region it covers, where girls exposed to violence, gangs, trafficking and sexual exploitation are also at high risk of interacting with the criminal justice system, leading to their incarceration. 70. Women may also be subject to criminalization and deprivation of liberty when they respond to the violence that they experience by taking forceful measures of self-defence. When they are accused of crimes following violent altercations, their ability to argue selfdefence may be impacted by gender stereotypes that paint men as those who have the right to stand and fight, while women are expected to retreat.37 A review of nine diverse legal systems around the world found that most included no legislative provisions allowing women’s exposure to violence to be considered as a ground of self-defence or a mitigating factor in their convictions or sentencing when they were accused of killing their abusers. 38 Furthermore, the assessment of proportionality and immediacy in self-defence does not take into account the difference in physical strength between women and men, and the altered perception of immediate harm in the context of long-term domestic violence. Several stakeholders reported to the Working Group that in some States domestic violence against women might be met with impunity, while women who fought back were treated harshly by the justice system. The instrumentalization of women’s deprivation of liberty in times of conflict 2. 71. Just as interpersonal and private violence have differential and discriminatory effects on women’s lives and liberty, so do broader societal violence and armed conflict. Recent armed conflicts have seen both State and non-State actors using women’s deprivation of liberty as a tool to further their ends.39 In situations of conflict, women’s liberty and bodies are instrumentalized in multiple ways leading to deprivation of liberty. 72. Non-State armed groups have engaged in high-profile abductions or detention of women, who have then been subjected to forced marriage or sexual slavery and forced recruitment for combatant or support roles in conflicts (see A/HRC/32/32/Add.2). Such kidnappings and detention are often in part motivated by attempts to impose a social order based on strict gender roles and the subjugation of women. 73. State authorities responding to conflict may detain and confine women in the service of their own cause. Women who are able to escape from non-State armed groups or who are simply suspected of having been involved with them have been held by the military and other State actors in camps, prisons and other detention sites, rather than receiving the services they need. Measures to combat terrorism and corresponding national security measures sometimes profile and target women, in particular those from certain groups, and sometimes even women human rights defenders. Women and girls may also be targeted and detained based on their religion, ethnicity, tribal identity or place of origin. For example, thousands of Yazidi women and girls from northern Iraq were abducted and detained by the 37 38 39 16 See Mary Anne Franks, “Real men advance, real women retreat: stand your ground, battered women’s syndrome, and violence as male privilege”, University of Miami Law Review, vol. 68, No. 4 (2014). See Penal Reform International and Linklaters LLP, “Women who kill in response to domestic violence: how do criminal justice systems respond?” (2016). For example, between 2015 and 2017 a number of women and girls were detained by armed groups or government forces in Iraq, Libya, Myanmar, Nigeria, South Sudan and the Syrian Arab Republic for reasons ranging from charges on grounds of national security, counter-terrorism and association of family members with insurgent groups to investigation/intelligence and sexual exploitation.