Conflict-related sexual violence (CRSV) is a severe human rights violation, leaving the survivors and societies with long-lasting impacts. Truth commissions are part of transitional justice mechanisms, established to uncover the truth, promote accountability, and foster reconciliation. This study will provide a comparative analysis of truth commissions in Sierra Leone and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) to examine their effectiveness in addressing CRSV. By using a qualitative methodology and applying a comparative case study approach, this research will critically examine how structural, operational, and political challenges have impacted the outcomes of the truth commissions. With the use of Critical Legal Theory (CLT) as an analytical framework, it will explore how power dynamics, societal inequalities, and institutional limitations have influenced these transitional justice efforts. The findings indicate that Sierra Leone’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) had relatively strong institutional support, international engagement, and a clearer mandate, however, societal stigma and survivor participation remained challenges. In contrast, the DRC’s TRC was severely hindered by political interference, a lack of gender-sensitive approaches, and weak institutional capacity, failing to provide meaningful justice. The study emphasizes the importance of survivor-centered approaches, gender-sensitive policies, and sustained institutional reforms to enhance the role of truth commissions in addressing CRSV.