In 2016, the case of Sepur Zarco in Guatemala marked the first time that a national jurisdiction recognized sexual violence in the context of armed conflict as a crime against humanity. This occurred in a case concerning indigenous women, within a country profoundly marked by gender-based violence and indigenous peoples’ marginalization. In order to account for the lack of reconciliation that has led to the present prevalence of sexist and racial discrimination, this study analyzes it as a transitional justice case. Through an impact evaluation, it interrogates the effectiveness of the legal path for victim-survivors, for rewriting historical narratives, and for promoting reconciliation. The qualitative indicators used include secondary data and interviews conducted with those who worked on the case. Findings suggest that although transitional justice legal cases are often met with backlash, they also empower social movements that promote democracy. The benefits tied to the legal tool, however, are conditional to the use of adequate strategies, which include active victims’ participation and the use of international standards. Moreover, successful cases require a legitimate national legal system that considers its population’s needs.