Introduction

In recent years, the number and variety of refugee claims based on the ‘membership of a particular social group’ ground set out in the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees have increased dramatically. The social group cases have been pushing the boundaries of refugee law, raising issues such as domestic abuse, homosexuality, coercive family planning policies, female genital mutilation (FGM), and discrimination against the disabled.

Invocation of the particular social group ground is not surprising. Its potential breadth makes it a plausible vehicle for refugee claims that do not easily fall under the other grounds set out in Article 1A(2) of the 1951 Convention. This reads:

Furthermore, since the usual materials consulted in the interpretation of international agreements provide little assistance on the question of membership of a particular social group, adjudicators have adopted a range of (often conflicting) constructions of the Convention language. Courts and administrative agencies have at times announced a standard that adequately resolves the case before them only later to conclude that the rule must be modified because of subsequent claims.