‌Context & Objective: Forced marriage has recently gained prominence in international criminal law as a significant form of gender based violence within armed conflicts and repressive regimes. This research evaluates the performance of international criminal tribunals in recognizing and addressing the gendered dimensions of this phenomenon. The study outlines the evolution of forced marriage from a neglected harm to a prosecuted crime across various jurisdictions including the Special Court for Sierra Leone the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia and the International Criminal Court. The primary research purpose is to analyze the efficacy of the international criminal justice system in reflecting gendered realities within judicial processes while filling gaps in existing legal literature. The central research question asks whether existing mechanisms and legal interpretations are capable of capturing the multifaceted gendered nature of forced marriage or if structural biases continue to impede comprehensive justice for victims.
 ‌Method & Approach: This study employs a doctrinal research methodology primarily through library and documentary analysis. The investigation involves a comprehensive review of international treaties conventions and the constitutive statutes of international tribunals. The approach includes a detailed examination of landmark judicial decisions and case law from the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda the Special Court for Sierra Leone the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia and the International Criminal Court. Additionally, the research synthesizes insights from prominent international law scholars and legal practitioners to evaluate the intersection of criminal justice and gender theory.
 ‌Findings: The research finds that forced marriage is an inherently gendered crime rooted in patriarchal structures that target women based on socially constructed roles of domesticity and reproduction. While international jurisprudence has progressed by increasingly identifying forced marriage as an independent crime under the category of other inhumane acts rather than subsuming it strictly under sexual slavery significant challenges remain. The analysis reveals a lack of a unified approach across tribunals with varying characterizations including conjugal slavery and sexual slavery which often leads to legal ambiguity. Although the International Criminal Court decision in the Ongwen case marked a milestone by focusing on the imposition of marital status and the violation of relational autonomy findings indicate that structural gender biases still hinder a full understanding of systemic violence. Specifically judicial interpretations frequently rely on physical or objective criteria for coercion while neglecting the psychological and social pressures uniquely affecting female victims.
 ‌Conclusion: The research concludes that formal recognition of forced marriage is insufficient to achieve substantive gender justice. Achieving a truly gender sensitive framework requires the explicit criminalization of forced marriage as a standalone offense within the Rome Statute. Legal definitions must be expanded to encompass physical structural and psychological coercion and the diverse gendered motivations behind such crimes including the control of reproduction and the enforcement of female subordination. Furthermore, the study recommends gender sensitive training for international judges and the development of specialized reparation mechanisms. Ultimately realizing justice for victims necessitates a paradigm shift in international criminal law discourse that moves beyond traditional masculine legal norms to fully integrate the lived experiences and socio-cultural realities of women.