Canadian refugee law recognises that persons fleeing gender-based violence and persecution may qualify for refugee protection. Claims based on domestic violence, sexual violence, female genital mutilation or cutting (FGM/C), forced marriage, persecution related to sexual orientation or gender identity, and other forms of gender-based harm are assessed under the refugee definition in IRPA read together with the IRB's Chairperson's Guideline 4 (Gender Considerations in Proceedings before the Immigration and Refugee Board, revised 2022). The Guideline provides binding guidance on how IRB members must approach gender-based claims, including the application of an intersectional and trauma-informed approach, special hearing procedures for claimants, and how state protection and internal flight alternative are assessed in gender cases. This page explains how gender-based persecution is framed within the five Refugee Convention grounds, the types of harm covered, and the procedural protections available to claimants. For the current Guideline text, refer to the IRB Chairperson's Guideline 4 page.

• Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, s 96 — Convention refugee definition; requires persecution based on race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group
• IRPA, s 97 — person in need of protection definition; includes risk of torture or cruel treatment not necessarily linked to a Convention ground
• IRB Chairperson's Guideline 4: Gender Considerations in Proceedings before the Immigration and Refugee Board (revised 2022) — the primary policy instrument governing gender-based refugee claims; binding on IRB members — irb-cisr.gc.ca/guideline-4
• Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, s 165 — authority of the IRB Chairperson to issue guidelines on factors to be considered in proceedings
• 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, Article 1A(2) — the underlying definition of "refugee" which includes membership in a particular social group

The Convention ground — particular social group

Gender-based persecution claims must be connected to one of the five Refugee Convention grounds: race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group (PSG). The vast majority of gender-based claims use the PSG ground. In Canadian refugee law, the following have been recognised as PSGs:

• Women who fear gender-related persecution — this is one of the most commonly used PSG framings for claims involving domestic violence, sexual violence, FGM/C, forced marriage, and other harms specifically directed at women
• More specific PSG formulations: "women in [country] who resist traditional gender roles"; "women in [country] who refuse FGM/C"; "married women in [country] who are subject to domestic violence" — the PSG must be defined with adequate specificity and must be established as a PSG within the claimant's country of origin
• Persons with diverse sexual orientations, gender identities, and expressions (SOGIE) — LGBTQ2I+ persons are recognised as members of a PSG; SOGIE claims have their own Chairperson's Guideline (Guideline 9)

The PSG definition must satisfy two requirements in Canadian law: the group must be defined by an innate characteristic or one the person should not have to change (immutability), and the group must be socially distinct in the country of origin (social perception). The courts and IRB have consistently found that women in many countries constitute a PSG for gender-related persecution purposes.

Types of gender-based harm covered

Guideline 4 applies to claims involving:

• Domestic and intimate partner violence (IPV): violence inflicted by a spouse, partner, or family member — including physical, sexual, and psychological abuse; the analysis addresses state protection, the adequacy of police response, and cultural or legal norms that enable impunity
• Female genital mutilation or cutting (FGM/C): a practice that violates the bodily integrity and health of the person subject to it; claims may be made by women already subjected to FGM/C who fear further harm, or by women at risk of FGM/C in the country of origin
• Forced marriage: coercion into marriage by family or community; the analysis considers whether the marriage is genuinely forced and whether state or social protection is available
• Sexual violence: including rape, sexual assault, trafficking for sexual exploitation, and other forms of gender-based sexual harm
• Persecution for non-conforming gender roles: punishment or persecution for refusing to comply with dress codes, social restrictions, or behavioural norms that apply to women in the country of origin
• LGBTQ2I+ persecution: persecution based on sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression — covered more specifically by Guideline 9 (SOGIE) but also addressed in Guideline 4's broader gender framework

The intersectional and trauma-informed approach

Guideline 4 (revised 2022) requires IRB members to apply two overarching frameworks:

• Intersectional approach: the assessment must consider how multiple aspects of the claimant's identity — gender, race, ethnicity, religion, age, immigration status, sexual orientation, disability, socio-economic status — interact and compound the risk of harm. A woman fleeing domestic violence in a country where she also faces racial discrimination may face compounded barriers to state protection that would not be visible if gender alone were analysed
• Trauma-informed approach: members must recognise that traumatic experiences can affect how a person discloses information, the consistency of their account, and their demeanour during a hearing. Inconsistencies that arise from trauma (such as delayed disclosure of sexual violence, difficulty recalling exact dates or sequences) are not automatically grounds for adverse credibility findings — the member must consider trauma as an explanation for those inconsistencies

Special hearing procedures

Claimants with gender-based claims can request the following procedural accommodations before the hearing:

• A gender-concordant interpreter — an interpreter of a specific gender, where the claimant is not comfortable with a male interpreter for reasons related to the nature of the claim (sexual violence, domestic abuse)
• A gender-concordant hearing officer — an IRB member of a specific gender may be requested in appropriate circumstances
• A private hearing — the hearing is closed to the public gallery; only parties and their representatives are present
• Adapted questioning procedures — members are directed not to require the claimant to repeat traumatic details unnecessarily; once established, traumatic facts should not be repeatedly canvassed

These accommodations are available upon request; claimants should make requests through their representatives before the hearing date.

State protection in gender-based claims

State protection is a central issue in gender-based claims. The standard for state protection requires more than formal legal protection on paper — it requires protection that is adequate in practice. In gender cases, the state protection analysis must consider:

• Whether police and authorities actually enforce laws protecting women from domestic violence and sexual assault
• Cultural or religious norms that lead law enforcement to disregard or minimise gender-based harm
• The track record of protection in the specific country and region — country condition evidence is critical
• Whether the claimant has already sought protection and been denied or failed by the state

A claimant is not required to exhaust all possible avenues of protection before claiming — she must show that protection would not reasonably be forthcoming. For details, see the state protection page.

Internal flight alternative (IFA) in gender cases

An IFA is only viable if the claimant can relocate internally and be safe from the feared harm and it is not unreasonable to expect her to relocate there. In gender-based claims, the IFA analysis includes:

• Whether the persecutor (a former husband, family, or community) would follow the claimant to the proposed IFA location — if the family network or tribal/clan connections extend nationally, the IFA may not be safe
• Whether the social conditions in the IFA city or region would expose the claimant to the same persecutory treatment from a different actor — for example, a woman fleeing FGM/C in a rural area may not be safe in a city where the same practice is enforced by the community
• Whether relocation is reasonable given the claimant's personal circumstances — a woman with no social network in the proposed IFA city, no income, and no safe accommodation may face conditions that make relocation unreasonable even if not technically dangerous

Guideline 4 was first issued in 1993 — making Canada one of the first countries in the world to specifically address gender-based persecution in its refugee determination process. The 2022 revision broadened the Guideline from a focus on women to a broader gender-inclusive scope while retaining specific protections for women, girls, and LGBTQ2I+ persons who face disproportionate gender-based harm. The revision emphasised the trauma-informed approach after research showed that adverse credibility findings based on delayed disclosure and inconsistency were disproportionately affecting gender-based claims. A practical challenge in gender cases is country condition evidence — members rely heavily on documentary evidence about how the country of origin treats gender-based violence, and the quality and currency of that evidence varies significantly by country. Claimants' representatives should submit current, country-specific country condition documentation focused on the specific type of harm alleged. For LGBTQ2I+ claims specifically, Guideline 9 (SOGIE) provides additional direction. For the current Guideline 4 text and IRB procedural guidance for gender-based claims, refer to the IRB Chairperson's Guideline 4 page.