Crossroads of Reform: Why Rape Redefinition Advanced While the Istanbul Convention Stalled

This paper explores the contrasting trajectories of two pivotal gender-based violence (GBV) reform efforts in the Czech Republic in 2024: the successful redefinition of rape in national law and the stalled ratification of the Istanbul Convention. Both processes unfolded against a backdrop of intensifying anti-gender narratives, with conservative and populist actors portraying the Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence Against Women and Domestic Violence as a threat to traditional values. While the feminist civil society campaign for rape redefinition succeeded in galvanizing public and political will, leading to a historic legal shift, the broader protections offered by the Istanbul Convention were met with fierce opposition. This opposition not only hindered progress but reinforced moral panic around gender-related issues. By framing GBV narrowly, as a legal rather than a structural issue tied to broader gender inequalities, political actors could advance isolated reforms while resisting more comprehensive approaches. The paper argues that selective moral panic, reluctance to address the intersection of GBV and gender inequality, and strategic framing allowed one reform to succeed while the other stalled.