• Arrest and deportation of women reported by abusive partner – Abusers sometimes report their partner to the CBSA as a way of punishing them. The CBSA’s mandate is to enforce immigration laws, but arresting and deporting women at the request of their abuser makes the CBSA complicit in the abuse.
• Deportation of women before custody issues are resolved – Women are sometimes deported from Canada with no coordination around custody issues, and in disregard for the principles of the Best Interests of the Child.
• Investigations of misrepresentation – In the wake of the welcome repeal of Conditional Permanent Residence, IRCC investigations for misrepresentation in immigration proceedings have been increasing, and seem to be triggered by complaints from sponsoring partners. By launching these investigations without adequate attention to potential issues of spousal abuse, IRCC is complicit in abuse by the sponsor.

Settlement issues

• Gender sensitivity in settlement organizations – There are best practices on awareness of gender issues in settlement agencies, but these tools need to be improved on and generalized throughout the sector. This relates not only to gender sensitivity, but also to an understanding of how gendered power dynamics impact women’s integration.
• Woman-centred settlement programming – there is a lack of programming focused on the needs of refugee women.
• Transphobia – settlement agencies need to look at transphobia within their organizations and structures, and develop strategies (including training) to counter this.
• Trauma-informed approach in settlement work – There is a lack of training, support and resources for settlement workers to recognize trauma and provide the necessary support. People who are experiencing trauma or abuse, including women survivors of gender-based violence, often slip through the cracks and do not receive the services they need as a result.

In the three years since its introduction, Conditional Permanent Residence has increased the vulnerability of many sponsored newcomers, particularly victims of domestic and sexual violence and abuse, who are often women. Victims of abuse are doubly victimized and retraumatized by the condition: they suffer abuse from their partner and threat of deportation from the State. The measure has placed more power in the hands of abusive sponsors, and put sponsored partners at increased risk of abuse, increasing gender inequalities in cases where the sponsored person is a woman. Front-line workers and lawyers have reported that there are women in situations of abuse who – after consulting them about the condition and the exception – decide to stay in the abusive relationship for fear of having their application for the exception rejected.  Others remain in violent relationships because they lack knowledge of their rights and are manipulated by sponsors. Even in cases where there is no abuse, the measure creates significant stress for those affected because of the threat of deportation in the case of a breakdown in the relationship.

Background

In October 2012, the federal government introduced a two-year period of conditional permanent residence for sponsored spouses who have been in a relationship with their sponsor for less than two years, and who have no children together at the time the sponsorship application is made.

Under this rule, the sponsored person’s permanent residence is conditional on their remaining in a conjugal relationship and cohabitating with their sponsor for two years after they become a permanent resident. If they don’t fulfill these conditions, their permanent residence could be revoked, and they could be deported. After outcry from advocates for women and newcomers, an exception to the measure was added for victims of abuse and neglect. Eligible applicants must prove abuse in order to access the exception.

The Canadian Council for Refugees, along with many other organizations, expressed grave concerns about the measure from the outset, on the grounds that it would increase the risk of spousal abuse and that it unfairly associates newcomers with fraudulent behaviour.

Experiences with Conditional Permanent Residence

In order to assess the impact of Conditional Permanent Residence, the Canadian Council for Refugees reached out in 2015 to over 140 settlement organizations, legal clinics, and women’s shelters across the country. The following is a summary of feedback received.

Lack of information about the condition is a significant challenge, especially outside of major urban centres. Many front-line workers do not fully understand the implications of the condition for sponsored spouses, and many are unaware of or have wrong information about the exception for victims of abuse or neglect. In outreach calls done with 142 organizations across the country, only 62% were aware of the condition, and only 40% were aware of the exception for victims of abuse or neglect.

An important barrier flagged by front-line workers is the need for an advocate. A person who has experienced abuse has a much better chance of applying successfully for the exception and thus escaping an abusive relationship if they have an advocate to inform them about, and help them with the process. Many newcomer women are isolated and face language barriers, making it difficult for them to access help.  In some cases well-intentioned advocates prove ineffective or misleading, due to lack of information on the measure, or faulty information on how to access the exception.

It is impossible to know how many women have been trapped in relationships because of lack of access to information about the exception, and lack of support.

Three years after the implementation of Conditional Permanent Residence for sponsored spouses, front-line workers at women- and newcomer-focused organizations report that the exception is not working as intended. The House of Commons Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration heard  concerns that the exception is inadequate to protect women from abuse,^[1] and our consultations with organizations show that this rule has indeed put victims at increased risk of abuse.

Organizations that attempted to access the exception for victims of abuse reported the following:

• CIC recommends its call centre as the first point of contact for those seeking an exception, but users report that this has not been effective.  It is difficult and time-consuming to reach a representative; not all CIC representatives understand the rules of the condition, and misleading information is often provided.
• There is a lack of clarity and consistency from CIC on the investigation process for breach of condition.
• There appears to be insufficient training on gender violence for CIC Call Centre representatives as well as for officers conducting interviews to decide whether the exception will be granted: CCR has received reports that several have made comments showing a significant lack of understanding of gender violence.
• Compiling evidence and applying for the exception is onerous and time consuming, and proving emotional or psychological abuse is difficult.
• There are problems around disclosure: where an ex-partner has complained to CIC and instigated an investigation, the partner affected by the condition is not given access to information on the allegations against them.
• CIC does not always respond promptly to requests for an exception, causing significant stress and trauma. In some cases it appears that CBSA has launched an investigation against a sponsored spouse for not complying with the condition, after that spouse had already requested an exception from the condition due to abuse.

In addition to unacceptably trapping people in abusive relationships, Conditional Permanent Residence leads to a significant waste of resources. Organizations and lawyers supporting victims of violence or neglect spend significant time helping sponsored spouses to apply for the exception, including collecting evidence of abuse and preparing detailed submissions. Government officials also spend time informing sponsored spouses about the provision, monitoring compliance and evaluating complex requests for exceptions.  Given that there is no evidence that Conditional Permanent Residence is addressing a real problem, this is a shameful waste of resources.

CCR’s position

The CCR maintains that:

• Making permanent residence conditional on staying in a relationship for two years traps people into staying in abusive relationships for fear of losing their status.
• Punishing the sponsored partner for relationship breakdown is unfair, and puts all the power into the hands of sponsors, who may be abusive.
• The exception is not effective: abused partners are often unable to take advantage of it because of barriers to information on the exemption (e.g. language, isolation), and the burden of proving their own abuse.

• The measure is unnecessary, since there are already legal provisions to address misrepresentations in immigration proceedings (e.g. marriages of convenience).

The CCR is pleased to note that repealing Conditional Permanent Residence is part of the Liberal Plan for Immigration.

CCR calls on the government to follow through on its commitment and repeal Conditional Permanent Residence immediately, to remove this unnecessary measure that is harmful to the many who are affected by it, disproportionately women.

---

Jane’s story:

Jane came to Canada sponsored by her spouse James, a Canadian citizen she had met and married in her native Norway.  To her surprise, she found she was to live with her in-laws as well as James and was expected to work (unpaid) in the family’s cleaning business. James became verbally and sexually abusive as well as controlling: she was not allowed to leave the house without him. James would tell her that if she left him she would be deported from Canada. After he started shoving her, she left the home and went to a shelter. 

A shelter worker who had recently attended a presentation on Conditional Permanent Residence helped Jane call the CIC Call Centre to request an exception from the two-year condition. They asked for an interpreter but were told they had to call back with their own. When they did that, CIC took basic information and informed them they would hear from the CIC local office. Several months passed before CIC sent a letter explaining that she needed to submit proof of her relationship and the abuse within 60 days. Since James was so controlling, she had little documented evidence of their relationship (such as a joint bank account, joint lease agreement, etc.) and was worried the lack of evidence would result in her losing her status. She submitted what she had and explained why she didn’t have much evidence. After several months, Jane received a second letter asking for the same documents she had previously explained she could not provide. Some time after responding to that letter, she was asked to attend an interview with a CIC officer. Jane was sobbing through the interview trying to explain to the officer why her circumstances met the definition of abuse and neglect, and weren’t simply “marital problems”, as the officer suggested. While her exemption was eventually granted by way of a letter, the eight month long process was emotionally draining and humiliating for Jane.

Jemma’s story

Jemma is a citizen of Burma who was sponsored from within Canada. She was seven months pregnant with her sponsor’s child when she received her permanent residence. The landing interview was the first time Jemma or her husband Jared learned of the conditional permanent resident requirement. While the relationship had been a little bit rocky before, Jared’s disposition at that point began to shift drastically. He would tell Jemma that he felt trapped by being a father and that he was now stuck with her for two years. He controlled all the finances in the household, constantly telling Jemma she was “useless” because she was unable to contribute financially. One day her husband beat her so badly with a kitchen utensil that she had to be taken to the emergency room. Jemma’s neighbour called the police and her husband was later criminally charged. He then called Citizenship and Immigration Canada and informed them that it was actually Jemma who was abusive and she only married him to stay in Canada. CIC wrote Jemma a letter stating that she may be found inadmissible to Canada, and provided a summary of the allegation, without naming the person making the allegation. Jemma was assisted by a lawyer to respond to the letter and also request an exemption from the condition. She is still awaiting a decision several months later and feels in limbo – unable to move forward with her life in Canada and scared of losing her status.

There have been many recent changes in immigration and refugee policies in Canada. How might these changes affect women and girls?

Reformed refugee determination system

Significant changes have been made recently to Canada’s refugee determination system, mostly taking effect on 15 December 2012. Key features are:

• Very short timelines for filing forms and for the refugee hearing – many women will find they don’t have enough time to prepare for the refugee hearing. It takes time and trust to be ready to speak about traumatic experiences, especially sexual violence. Documentation of human rights abuses against women is not always readily available. It is also more difficult to meet short timelines if you are juggling childcare.
• Barriers to legal representation – more claimants will be left unrepresented in the new system. Negotiating the refugee process without a lawyer is particularly difficult for women who have had limited access to education or relevant professional experience.
• Designated countries of origin – some countries have been designated “safe” and claimants from these countries have even shorter timelines, no right of appeal and virtually no access to health care. Women and girls fleeing gender-based persecution will be among the worst affected by these discriminatory rules, since women’s rights are routinely violated in many countries that may appear generally “safe”.
• Implementation of the appeal – more than ten years after Parliament passed a law giving refused refugee claimants a full appeal on the merits, this provision has finally been implemented! Unfortunately, many categories of claimants are denied this right. This means that, in some cases, a woman fleeing gender-based violence or persecution based on her sexual orientation will have her fate determined by a single decision-maker, with no opportunity for a second look to ensure a mistake was not made.
• One-year bar on Pre-Removal Risk Assessment (PRRA) after a refugee claim has been refused – sometimes women’s grounds for fearing persecution are not properly heard when they make a claim together with their husband (who is often considered the “principal applicant”). The same applies to girls arriving with their families. The PRRA used to be an opportunity for women and girls to bring forward new evidence of risks they face, but now they can be deported without access to the PRRA.
• Bar on refugee claimants making an application on humanitarian grounds (H&C) –in the past many women, including many who had suffered gender violence, were accepted under H&C after being refused in the refugee claim process. The new rules mean that most women will be deported before an H&C application can be reviewed.
• Mandatory detention for designated “irregular arrivals” – some mothers detained long-term under these new provisions will face the painful choice of keeping their children incarcerated with them in detention or handing them over to a child welfare agency.

Cuts to refugee health care

Cuts made in June 2012 by the federal government to its Interim Federal Health (IFH) Program have left many refugees, refugee claimants and certain other non-citizens without coverage for essential health care services. Some people are without any coverage at all.

• The cuts leave some pregnant women facing huge bills for prenatal and postnatal care, as well as deep anxiety about giving birth without access to medical care.

Resettlement and refugee family reunification – long delays

In many regions, particularly in Africa, processing is extremely slow for resettlement to Canada or for reunification with family members who are refugees in Canada.

• Women and girls are forced to wait in precarious situations, where they are vulnerable to sexual assault, due to very long processing times.
• Mothers in Canada separated from their children overseas experience extreme anguish during the long wait for reunification. Requests for DNA testing prolong the delays and impose a huge financial burden on recently arrived refugee women.

Conditional Permanent Residence

In October 2012, the federal government introduced “conditional” permanent residence for some sponsored spouses and partners for a period of two years. If they don’t remain with their sponsor throughout this period, their permanent residence could be revoked, and they could be deported.

• Conditional permanent residence exposes women to increased power imbalance in the relationship and heightened risk of domestic violence.
• There is an exception for sponsored partners in situations of abuse or neglect, but there are multiple barriers to accessing this exception.

Migrant workers in Canada

Canada has in recent years shifted dramatically towards temporary migration. At the end of 2012, there were over 300,000 Temporary Foreign Workers in Canada, an increase of 70% over the past five years.

• Workers in “low-skilled” streams of the Temporary Foreign Worker Program, who include many women, are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation, including trafficking.
• While the Canadian Experience Class offers a pathway to permanent status for some workers, statistics show that the class is less accessible to women.
• By requiring workers to live with their employers, the Live-in Caregiver Program leaves women isolated and vulnerable to physical, psychological and sexual abuse.

Trafficking

Women and girls are particularly vulnerable to trafficking in persons, and new barriers to access to status in Canada only increase risks.

• Despite the many recent changes in legislation, there have been no amendments to assure protection for trafficked women and girls. The existing mechanism of Temporary Residence Permits is not fully effective.

March 2013

IMMIGRATION LEGISLATIVE REVIEW & REFUGEE WOMEN Comments, 4 February 1998

 

General

The report overall pays very little attention to gender. Hidden away in chapter 9 (on reviews) is an acknowledgement of this deficiency. "In the time available, we were unfortunately unable systematically to check the effect of our recommendations on equality between the sexes. Citizenship and Immigration Canada should undertake such an analysis before formulating its policy, revising the Act and Regulations and establishing its programs." (page 126).

In 1995 the Federal Government adopted a policy requiring gender-based analysis of future policies and legislation. It will be important to follow closely (and participate in) the process of developing this analysis.
 

Overseas versus inland
* The report proposes giving greater priority to overseas selection compared to the inland refugee determination system. It notes that the majority of refugees in refugee camps are women and children, while in-Canada claimants are in majority male.

* This fact is presented as an example of the proposition that those reaching Canada are not the "most needy". The implication is that women are by definition more needy - a questionable statement (particularly given that "needy" is undefined) and unwelcome if it is based on the stereotype of women as weak.

* Although the majority of claimants in Canada are male, a significant proportion are nevertheless women. Therefore, although it is to the advantage of women to improve the overseas process, women will suffer if it is at the expense of the inland process.

* The success of the overseas resettlement program depends very heavily on the availability of resources, an issue that the report does not address. Unless resources are guaranteed to the resettlement program, there is a danger that most (or all) resources will be eaten up in the inland process (which, as conceived, will require considerable resources).
 

Overseas process
* The recommendation that the successful establishment requirement be removed is very positive for women, who are currently discriminated against by the criterion. Factors such as official language skills, professional experience and education are all taken into account, to the disadvantage of refugee women who have less opportunity than men to acquire these skills and experiences. In addition, single women with children are often found to be unlikely to successfully establish.

* Having trained Protection Officers doing refugee interviews may allow for a greater degree of gender sensitivity than is sometimes the case at present. Similarly the use of NGO identification could be a way to ensure that refugee women, who often can travel to visa posts less easily than men, can be referred for resettlement.
 

Definition
* The broadening of the definition of persons to be protected provides an opportunity for incorporating instruments relating to women's rights in the definition. However, this would need to be pursued as it is not spelt out in the report. Furthermore there is no mention of the Gender Guidelines: it will be important to ensure that this advance is not lost.
 

In-Canada refugee determination
* The recommendation relating to Safe Third Country does not mention the need to take account of gender aspects. Women claimants should not be sent back to a country that does not recognize gender-related persecution, even if it could be shown that male claimants were offered protection.

* The timelines within which a person must make a claim (3 days to present oneself to the Protection Agency; 10 days to the make the claim) will hurt people making non-traditional claims, for example on the basis of domestic violence, female genital mutilation or other forms of gender-related persecution. As the courts have recognized, it is understandable that such persons may not immediately know that they can seek protection.

* The narrow timelines will also hurt women who have been raped or survived other forms of torture that they will be reluctant to talk about.

* The report proposes that claimants only be referred to counsel and NGOs after they have made their claim, implying that the only counselling available to claimants in the initial stage will be the Protection Agency. Women may be particularly affected by this, since they are generally less used to dealing with authority than men.

* The short timeline between making the claim and the interview (6 weeks) will be disadvantageous to women making gender-based claims, where information supporting the claim is often not readily available and requires extra research.
 

Right of Landing Fee
* The ROLF or Head Tax is to continue to be imposed on refugees. This fee is a particularly heavy burden on the poor, who are disproportionately women. Single women with children have significant difficulties beginning life in Canada with a heavy debt burden, which can easily amount to thousands of dollars if they are resettled from overseas and must also repay their travel loans.
 

Identity documents
* The report proposes that refugees without "satisfactory" identity documents wait 3 rather than 5 years before being landed. Women are disproportionately affected by this measure because they tend to have fewer identity documents than men. While 3 years is better than 5 years, it is still an unbearable wait (particularly for mothers separated from young children).
 

Family reunification
* In many cases husbands are accepted as refugees in Canada and subsequently apply to be reunited with their wives and children, who must wait through the often lengthy processing, perhaps at risk of persecution in the home country or in some precarious place of refuge. Although the report proposes that sponsored spouses and children be allowed to come to Canada immediately for processing here, perversely the same is not proposed for refugees. This will mean that women and children will continue to wait months if not years overseas before being able to reunite with their husband/father in Canada.
 

Citizenship
* The requirement that applicants meet 2 out 4 participation categories (work, study, community participation and family care) could easily lead to many women being refused citizenship. Family care-givers (usually women) are often fully occupied in the home and do not have the opportunity to qualify for one of the other 3 categories.
 

Family Class
* The bar on family sponsorship for anyone on welfare during the last 12 months will have a very negative impact on single mothers. For example, a woman separated from her husband during a war who comes to Canada with their young children may have no choice but to rely on welfare, but having found her husband again she will be unable to sponsor him (even though with him in Canada the family would be able to be self-sufficient).

* Proposed fees for children over 6 who do not speak an official language could lead to long separation of mothers from their children where they are unable to raise the money (in addition to processing fees).

* Reducing sponsorship periods for immediate family from 10 years to 3 is an extremely positive recommendation. Such a reduction would significantly reduce the potential for violence within families, which is aggravated by the relationship of dependency implied by sponsorship.

* The recognition of the need for provisions to address domestic violence within sponsorship is welcome. However, the recommendation proposes a heavy burden of proof which many women in abusive relationships will likely not be able to meet. Furthermore, the report does not address the situation of women where there is violence before they are landed (a situation which would be even more common in the proposed model where sponsored spouses are regularly processed in Canada). Since the report does away with humanitarian and compassionate consideration, women in abusive relationships and not yet landed would be faced with a choice of remaining in the relationship or being removed from Canada. The latter choice may be extremely difficult or even dangerous if they come from a culture where women who leave their husbands are not accepted.
 

NETWORK ON WOMEN FLEEING GENDER-RELATED PERSECUTION NEWSLETTER: ISSUE 1 29 May 2000

In This Issue:

I. About This Newsletter

II. Gender-based Persecution as Reported in ...
1. Denmark
2. Finland
3. Ireland
4. Norway
5. South Africa
6. Sweden

III. Resources IV. About the CCR V. Contributors VI. Appendices A. Network/Conference proposal B. Questionnaire

I. About This Newsletter

Background

Over the past three months the Canadian Council for Refugees has been organizing a network of people interested in gender-related persecution, with the view to promoting better protection for women internationally. We are working towards an international conference on the subject to be held in Montreal, Spring 2001.

Our objectives in developing the network are (a) promoting greater awareness of gender-specific elements of persecution and the refugee experience, particularly in countries where there is currently limited sensitivity to these issues; (b) facilitating information-sharing and expertise-sharing among those in different countries working for the recognition of gender-based claims; and (c) developing strategies for action, at local, regional and international levels, to promote recognition of gender-based claims. The network is expected to guide us to inviting potential participants and presenters in the conference, as well as helping us in conference planning, themes, and structure.

The contents of this newsletter have been drawn primarily from the input we have received from the network participants. Through this newsletter we share the information collected, hoping it would trigger more thoughts and input form the readers.

The CCR's initiative for developing the network and holding the conference on gender-based persecution has received lots of support from refugee rights, human rights and women rights INGOs and NGOs. It has also been supported by many scholars and activists interested in this field. We are working hard to invite yet broader participation from all regions of the world and all interested bodies.

As we work towards further developing the network, we look forward to reflecting news and inputs from a broader range of regions in the next issues of this newsletter.

Joining in
You can contribute to this newsletter by:

a) sending us information on the status of gender-related persecution in your region and country. We would be glad to hear from you about whether women in your country can find protection from gender-related persecution and about any current initiative of relevance. You could add to the above list of country reports, by sending us further information about developments in any country.

b) letting us know what you think of the proposed conference - what aspects of it are you interested in and what aspects would you recommend we add to our agenda

c) sharing information and news on relevant publications, conferences, and initiatives

To join the network, and be a part of this collective effort to raise awareness and develop action-strategies on gender-based refugee claims, simply fill in the questionnaire (appendix) and send it to us via email at ahojabri@total.net or ccr@web.net, or via mail to:

Canadian Council for Refugees/Conseil canadien pour les réfugiés
6839 Drolet # 302, Montréal, QC, H2S 2T1, Canada

II. Gender-related persecution, as reported in …

This section consists of the reports we have received from network participants on the status of gender-based persecution on six countries, along with the initiatives undertaken by relevant organizations in each of these countries. The objective is to share the inputs and news, rather than providing an extensive overview of the country cases. You are encouraged to contribute to this section by sending updates on gender-related initiatives in your country or adding your perspectives on the following reports.

1. DENMARK

Legislation
Women facing gender related persecution will normally get protection in Denmark - although the status will often be a de facto and not a Convention refugee status.

Initiatives
The Danish Refugee Council has focused on the issue of gender related persecution in the last 4-5 years. It hosted a conference in 1997 on the theme. One of the key note speakers was Nurjehan Mawani telling about the Canadian experience. The DRC has cooperated closely with the Danish Women's Council - one of the member organizations of DRC and on several occasions, it has suggested that guidelines should be issued, but the response of the Minister of the Interior has so far been negative.
by Louise Holck , The Danish Refugee Council, Head of the Asylum Department

2. FINLAND

Legislation
The Refugee Advice Centre has had only a few cases where the grounds for the asylum claim have been based mostly on sex. Finnish legal praxis has little case-law on the issue at the moment.

Initiative
Refugee Advice Centre arranged a one-day seminar last year on refugee women and its main speaker was Dr. Heaven Crawley from UK.
by Sari Sirva - Refugee Advice Centre

3. IRELAND

Legislation
In Ireland women can get protection from gender-related persecution. The definition of a refugee incorporated into Irish Law through the Irish Refugee Act 1996 states that membership of a social group includes, inter alia, 'membership of a group of persons whose defining characteristic is their belonging to the female or the male sex'. Under section 5 of the said Act, a person's freedom shall be regarded as threatened ' if he/she is likely to be subject to serious assault including that of a sexual nature'.
by Peter O'Mahony, Chief Executive, Irish Refugee Council.

Initiatives
The Irish Council of Civil Liberties is an independent voluntary membership organization that works to defend and promote human rights and civil liberties. The Women's Committee works on human rights issues affecting women. For example, in 1999, the Committee produced a Shadow Report to the Government's Report under the UN Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women and it made a detailed submission to the Committee on the Constitution on Abortion.

The Women's Committee is currently drafting guidelines (working title: Women and the Refugee Experience: Towards a Statement of Best Practice), in the hope that they will be used by those dealing with female asylum seekers and refugees, such as immigration officials, government officials, legal representatives and medical personnel.

To draft the gender-guidelines, the Irish Council for Civil Liberties, Women's Committee has consulted widely with asylum seeking and refugee women, NGOs working in this area, legal practitioners, academics and other interested parties. It has also considered the Canadian, Australian and US Guidelines and those drafted in the UK by the Refugee Women's Legal Group. The committee intends to launch their guidelines early May 2000 and thereafter to provide training sessions for government officials etc.

The National Women's Council is putting together an alternative to the Government's Report on the Beijing Platform for Action to which the ICCL Women's Committee will be making a submission. One of the issues the Committee will focus on is refugee and asylum seeking women. Although, the Irish legislation is quite progressive, the Committee is concerned that very few women are recognized as refugees, particularly at first instance.
by Catherine Kenny Governor of the Irish Council for Civil Liberties' Women's Committee

4. NORWAY

Legislation
In Norwegian practice, gender-related persecution is recognized as a valid basis for seeking asylum. Guidelines effective from January 15, 1998 specifically mention gender-related persecution, exemplified as situations where women through their actions, omissions and statements violate written and unwritten social rules that affect women particularly, regarding dressing, the right to employment, etc. If violations of these rules are punished with sanctions that can be seen as persecution in accordance with the 1951Convention, asylum should be granted.
by Rune Steen for the Norwegian Organisation for Asylum Seekers

5. SOUTH AFRICA

Legislation
In South Africa, refugee rights started to be recognized only at the end of 1993 and the UN and OAU Conventions were signed in 1996. With respect to refugee processes, the Refugee Act was promulgated in 1998. It has yet however to come into effect. It is progressive in many respects and specifically enumerates gender as a social group deserving protection under the 1951 Convention.

As far as progress with respect to recognizing gender related persecution, South Africa has in the past 5 years begun reforming the legislation that governed former immigration processes under the previous apartheid regime.

Initiatives
In the past 2 years a forum of NGOs along with government have formed the 'National Consortium on Refugee Affairs'. It is intended to inform and assist government in the formulation of its policy. As part of this initiative Nahla Valji and Lee Ann de la Hunt created a background document on gender-related persecution, as well as a set of basic guidelines to be utilized by determination officers with respect to any claims by women. (see "Resources" for a summary of these gender guidelines) . Last year the National Consortium published these gender guidelines. However the regulations recently promulgated by the Department of Home Affairs do not reflect a notion of gender-related asylum claims.

Although the Department of Home Affairs is a member of the Forum, it has yet to formally accept or take on board the recommendations and guidelines. There has so far been no case of a woman claiming asylum on the basis of gender-related persecution. This is largely due to the lack of awareness around such a category as a basis for asylum, as well as of South Africa's willingness to recognize such persecution.

With specific reference to practices such as female genital mutilation, which is the most widely practiced in Africa, South Africa should be in an important position as a near port of call for women seeking protection from the practice. It is therefore important that the country develop its own internal mechanisms with regards to the issue of gender-related persecution, as well as make its position known in a wider context.

The reality of the situation however is that prior to 1994 there was in fact no asylum process in this country, and as such attitudes and mechanisms still need to be created and transformed. The likelihood of true gender sensitivity being a concern of the Department of Home Affairs is as yet farfetched.
by Nahla Valji Gender Unit, Centre for Human Rights, University of Pretoria
and Lee Anne de la Hunt, for National Consortium on Refugee Affairs

6. SWEDEN

Legislation
Sweden has chosen not to identify women as a social group. Instead, a new paragraph was introduced into the law in 1997 which was supposed to offer protection to women facing gender-related persecution It has hardly been used.
by Maria Bexelius for Swedish Refugee Advice Center

Initiatives
The issues of protection from gender-based persecution are among the main focuses of Forum for Asylum seekers and Refugees' (FARR) current work (and this is also true of a number of Swedish NGOs). The recent issue of FARR's publication, ARTIKEL 14, covered how gender issues are treated in the asylum procedure in Sweden. It points out that more progress needs to be made. The Swedish Immigration Board is now looking more closely at how gender claims are dealt with.

FARR also has a medical doctor on its board who has worked closely with traumatized women who have been the victims of rape or sexual abuse. Swedish practice has been commented on by researchers Noll & Folkelius in one of the more recent issues of the International Journal of Refugee Law. Gregor Noll is a member of FARR and is just completing his doctoral thesis on the European Union and asylum issues.

In 2001 Sweden will be holding the Presidency of the European Union and will focus on the needs of women asylum seekers as well as children. The Swedish NGOs are currently coordinating their efforts to try and influence the agenda.
by Michael Williams, Forum for Asylum seekers and Refugees (FARR)

Initiatives (cont.)
Since last year, the Swedish Foundation for Human Rights, has been engaged in opinion-moulding activities concerning gender-related issues, especially women asylum-seekers. A seminar was organized on "Gender as a ground for persecution", and a follow-up seminar is planned for this fall.

The SFHR is working on the subject in collaboration with other NGOs such as the Swedish section of Amnesty International, Swedish Refugee Council, Swedish Church and the Swedish Red Cross. During the preparation period for the seminar, the SFHR , together with its partners, are also trying to put the subject on the political agenda through lobbying in the corridors of the Swedish Parliament and in the chambers of the Government. It is noteworthy that recently four oppositional parties raised a question to the government on the issue - Can gender be a ground for persecution? This shows that this is indeed a current topic in Sweden.

The upcoming seminar is probably going to be a workshop within the frames of a two-day conference on human rights. The purpose of the conference is to bring researchers and practitioners together and to discuss and focus on different obstacles and opportunities in the field of human rights. A cross-disciplinary approach is desirable. There are a few issues concerning women's human rights in general and particularly gender persecution that the organizers wish to focus on:

- the possibility of interpreting or include gender persecution in the Geneva convention and thus giving asylum to women seeking protection from violence.

- harmonizing European practice and/or legislation on the subject, especially within the framework of the Dublin Convention when it transforms into an EU directive.

If neither a harmonization is possible, nor an alteration of the Geneva Convention, what possible solutions can be found within national legislation and/or practices that will be as effective?

- to look upon non-state persecution the same way as on state persecution. Fleeing violence is a ground for asylum even if the violence cannot be derived to the behaviour of a state´s representatives.

- to compare national practice and/or guidelines concerning gender as a ground for persecution and thus as a possible prerequisite for asylum.
by Anna Wigenmark and Anita Klum, for The Swedish NGO Foundation for Human Rights
 

III. RESOURCES

This section highlights a selected number of policy documents and articles which we were able to summarize for the purpose of sharing information in this newsletter (Summaries are provided by CCR volunteer, Soleil Surette). We are working towards putting together a bibliography of relevant manuscripts and internet resources on the CCR website soon (http://www.web.net/~ccr).

Most of the guidelines can be accessed from: http://www.uchastings.edu/cgrs/documents/guidelines.html

National Policy Documents

- Guidelines on Gender Issues for Decision Makers: Refugee and Humanitarian Visa Applicants, Department of Immigration and Multiculturalism Affairs, Australia, July 1996.

In July 1996 the Australian Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (DIMA) issued the Guidelines on Women Refugee Claimants Fearing Gender-related Persecution. The Guidelines apply to the officers employed by the Department who assess refugee claims. The Guidelines recognize that certain forms of persecution may be inflicted exclusively or more commonly on women. Like the Canadian Guidelines and the America Considerations, The Australian Guidelines do not constitute binding law and are administrative directives, aimed at encouraging decision-makers to apply them. The Australian Guidelines are unique in that they apply to both the inland and overseas selection processes (Audrey Macklin, Cross-boarder shopping for ideas: A critical review of United States, Canadian, and Australian approaches to gender-related asylum claims, 1998)

Summary: The guidelines are divided into four sections: Introduction, background, procedures, and assessment of claims. The background begins by listing various international instruments that are relevant to human rights, refugees, and women. It then provides a background on the development and recognition of gender persecution. It examines the various forms refugee protection has taken, including the development of the recognition of the specific experiences of women. Finally, it outlines some of the basic problems encountered by, and when dealing with, women refugee claimants. The third part examines procedural concerns such as the lack of information on women in their country of origin, difficulties that might be encountered during the interview process, things to consider about interpreters, and the need for strict confidentiality especially vis-à-vis an applicant's family,. The final section concerns the assessment of claims and is divided into three subparts. The first part deals with persecution and gender-related persecution. It looks at things like sexual violence, forced abortion, and genital mutilation as persecution by torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment or treatment. It also examines persecution as the result of societal oppression, where there is a denial of economic, political and social choice and where a refusal to obey social mores results in punishments that seem to be excessive. This section also brings attention to the women at risk sub-category available under the offshore humanitarian program. The second part concerns definitions of well-founded fear and also the issue of internal relocation and the problems for women regarding this option. The final subsection deals with the Convention grounds for asylum as they pertain to women. A general comment is made on the importance of imputed grounds, as often it is not the actions of women that precipitate persecution but those that are attributed to them. There is recognition by the Australian Refugee Tribunal of women as a particular social group even though it would be a very broad one.

- Immigration and Naturalization Service Gender Guidelines Considerations for Asylum Officers Adjudicating Asylum Claims from Women, Memorandum of 26 May 1995 from Phyllis Coven, Office of International Affairs, to all INS Asylum Officers and Headquarters Coordinators.

Summary: The document begins by sketching a quick outline of what the memorandum grew out of the American case law that drew attention to the need for recognition of gender persecution, the various international instruments and recommendations by the UN, and the Canadian Gender Persecution Guidelines. It includes an analysis of when harm amounts to persecution, and enumerates some of the types of harm that are unique to or generally befall women. The paper also outlines procedural issues such as using interpreters, privacy issues for women, cultural differences and body language during the interview process, and the general aim of gender guidelines. It examines how women experience the Convention reasons for persecution. It examines the category of gender as meaning 'membership in a particular social group' and how this has not been clear. The 2^nd Circuit court has ruled that it is too broad, while the 3^rd Circuit court has not, though no ruling has declared that persecution occurs solely based on gender. However, gender in conjunction with other characteristics can define membership in a particular social group. Another point of interest in the memorandum that is raised is that acts of violence committed by an agent of the state for private reasons do not qualify the victim for refugee status unless they can demonstrate that the harm they face is on account of a Convention characteristic and that the state cannot or will not interfere. The last section of the manual outlines the need for basic training and monitoring in order to attempt to establish consistency in judgments.

- Women Refugee Claimants Fearing Gender-Related Persecution: UPDATE, Immigration and Refugee Board, Ottawa, Canada, 25 Nov. 1996. On International Women's Day 1993, the Immigration and Refugee Board released Guidelines on Women Refugee Claimants Fearing Gender-Related Persecution. The "Canadian Guidelines" can be said to have emerged from a complex process of interaction with domestic Canadian groups, an international institution (UNHCR), international law and transnational issue networks. (Kuttner, Stephanie, Crossing New Boundaries and Gender-Related Persecution , M.Phil thesis, 1997).

Summary: The guidelines seek to address four issues that are brought forward by gender-related refugee claims: (1) how well do the five Convention refugee definitions apply to women making gender persecution claims? (2) What does it take to have gender violence constitute persecution in a jurisprudential manner? (3) What evidentiary issues need to be examined in gender-related claims? (4) What are the problems that women face at their refugee determination hearing? Women refugee claimants can be classed into four broad categories: They fear persecution on the same grounds as men; they fear persecution because of the actions and/or views of family members; the persecution is the result of severe discrimination on grounds of gender or acts of violence by the authorities or private citizens whom the state cannot or will not protect against; or they fail to conform to or transgress the social norms acceptable for women in their country of origin. The guidelines also set out the definition of 'membership in a social group' based on the Ward case: (1) groups defined by an innate or unchangeable characteristic (2) groups whose members voluntarily associate for reasons so fundamental to their human dignity that they should not be forced to forsake the association (3) groups associated by the former voluntary status, unalterable due to its historical permanence. The universality of violence against women is irrelevant when determining whether gender-specific crimes constitute forms of persecution. What is important is whether the violence, feared or experienced, is a violation of a human right on Convention grounds, and whether that violence is a result of the failure of state protection. Claims cannot be rejected because the woman comes from a country where oppression and violence are generalized and the fear of persecution is not particularized. This guideline also provides a framework of analysis for evaluating gender persecution claims.

Non-Governmental Policy Documents:
- Refugee Women's Legal Group (RWLG) Gender Guidelines for the Determination of Asylum Claims in the UK, The Immigration Law Practitioners' Association (ILPA), United Kingdom, July 1998. The Refugee Women's Legal Group is a British NGO. The purpose of the guidelines as cited on the inside cover is to "enable interviewers and decision makers to apply the refugee convention in a way which embraces the totality of human experiences and to assert and affirm the rights of women to effective international protection under UK law." The guidelines are not formally embraced by the UK government.

Summary: The guidelines are divided into five sections. The first section constructs a framework for understanding the need for gender guidelines in the refugee determination process. It addresses such concerns as how women's experiences differ from men's especially in a political context and how this leads to the marginalization of women since much of the case law is based on men's experience. It also examines the distinction made between the words sex and gender, and between women being persecuted as women and being persecuted because they are women. Women being persecuted as women refers to forms of persecution that are gender specific such as forced abortions or female genital mutilations. The second, women being persecuted because they are women, examines the causal relationship between gender and persecution. Finally, this section lists the pertinent international instruments for dealing with this subject. The second section examines the meaning of 'serious harm' and lists what should qualify. The third section deals with the failure of state protection, both directly as the persecutor and indirectly by being unwilling or unable to protect women who seek help. It touches upon such things as whether it is always reasonable for women to attempt to seek state protection and the role that gender can play in an internal flight alternative. The fourth illustrates how the Convention grounds can be applied to women and why imputed or attributed grounds are important. The guidelines make the point that while persecution cannot create a particular social group it can be evidence of the perception of one. The final section provides a look at possible procedural and evidential issues and some suggestions for dealing with them.

- Valji, Nahla and De La Hunt, Lee Anne, Gender Guidelines for Asylum Determination, South Africa: National Consortium of Refugee Affairs, 1999.

Summary: The guidelines begin with a substantial outline of gender asylum issues and a chronological list of foreign and international gender policy instruments. The next part deals with definitions of related terms, including gender and persecution. The experience of female refugees is defined as falling into four categories patterned on the Canadian guidelines. The next segment suggests an outline for interview sessions: including alternative means of providing testimony, and the need for gender and cultural sensitivity. The assessment of claims is the next issue and it outlines the need for a greater understanding of political persecution, and such things as what qualifies as 'well-founded' fear of persecution, and fear of serious harm in cases of non-Convention persecution. A very important part of these guidelines is the section that addresses the arguments against the inclusion of gender as a social group. The first is that of cultural relativism: the argument here is that "the right to safety, dignity of life, and freedom from cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment are not culturally derived, but stem from the common humanity of the individual" (p.18). The second argument concerning 'floodgates' points out that even if gender was recognized everywhere as a social group, it afford women the opportunity to apply for refugee status, but it would not oblige any state to receive them. Likewise, most potential refugee claimants face many substantial social and economic barriers in their countries of origin that prevent them from leaving. Also unique to these guidelines are recommendations on refugee reception centres that are often as bad for women as the situations they are fleeing from. The conclusion advanced by the authors of the guidelines is that South Africa is in a position to take a leading role in the area of refugee policy. Finally, they offer gender guidelines for officials interviewing asylum seekers.

Books & Articles:
Understanding Domestic Violence as Torture, in Human Rights of Women: National and International Perspectives. Rebecca Cook (ed.). , University of Pennsylvania Press, 1994.

This article is an argument for recognition of gender-based violence as an independent human rights violation. The author addresses several key issues surrounding the definition of torture and demonstrates the parallels to domestic abuse (such as the interaction between the victim of domestic abuse and the victimizer often being similar to the Stockholm syndrome that victims of torture experience). She argues that the purpose of gender-based violence is to maintain the subordinate position of the victim and of women as a group, just as torture is meant to intimidate both the individual and the section of society that he/she represents. She also looks at the physical and psychological similarities between torture and domestic abuse, and at how the nature of domestic violence fits into international definitions of torture. She argues that both are alternative systems of social control that are outside of the jurisdiction of the state but are often condoned by it. The author questions whether the idea of domestic violence being a "private" matter and not a "public" one is a valid distinction to make.

- Foster, Pamela, The Gender Guidelines: From the Margins to the Centre, Canadian Woman Studies, Fall 1999, pp.45-50.

Pamela Foster offers a thoughtful critique of the Canadian Gender Guidelines in this paper. She touches on some of the broad themes currently informing refugee discourse such as the unequal power relations between the claimant and the asylum state, and the stereotyping of especially women 'refugees' as not only vulnerable (true) but also as helpless (false). Her contention is that the Gender Guidelines do not address these issues and in some cases reinforce the stereotypes and might inhibit women in general from being granted asylum and also distort their chances of successful integration. Women under these conditions are less likely to be seen as likely successful integrators then male refugees.

- Mason, Elisa, The protection concerns of refugee women: A bibliography, Texas Journal of Women and the Law, fall 1999, vol. 9. pp. 96-118.

The collection covers a wide range of references, in English and French, to different aspects of legal and physical protection of refugee women. The References are organized under major themes, Protection Issues and Responses; Women as Asylum Seekers; and Bibliographies. The last section lists relevant Internet Sources.

IV ABOUT THE CANADIAN COUNCIL FOR REFUGEES

The Canadian Council for Refugees is a non-profit umbrella organization committed to the rights and protection of refugees in Canada and around the world and to the settlement of refugees and immigrants in Canada. The membership is made up of organizations involved in refugee sponsorship and protection and newcomer settlement. The Council serves the networking, information-exchange and advocacy needs of its membership.

As part of its ongoing activities, the CCR organizes regular conferences and meetings and facilitates information-exchange and networking. As directed by the membership, the CCR promotes the rights of refugees and the successful integration of newcomers in Canada, through public education, dialogue with governments and media work. The CCR has about 150 members. Among the CCR's information-exchange initiatives is a very successful listserv, with over 400 subscribers, a significant number of whom are from outside Canada.

The CCR has a strong history of promoting respect for the rights of women refugees and recognition of the differences between men and women refugees. This work is coordinated through our Gender Issues Core Group. In 1992-1994 the CCR played a key role, through advocacy and the organization of consultations, in the events leading to the adoption by the Immigration and Refugee Board of its gender guidelines, the Declaration on Refugee Protection for Women by Citizenship and Immigration Canada, and the Consultations on gender issues and refugees. Since then the CCR has continued to monitor the treatment by Canada of women claiming refugee status on the basis of gender and to promote recognition of gender-based claims in the refugee selection system overseas. The CCR has also prepared gender analyses of the immigration legislative review in 1998 and of the immigration white paper in 1999. The CCR recently played a lead role in the seminar in El Salvador, held in February 2000 in the context of the Regional Conference on Migration (the "Puebla Process", bringing together North and Central America).

V. Contributors

More than 70 organizations and individuals have supported the CCR's initiative and expressed their interest in being a part of the network. We are grateful to all of you who have helped with making contacts with various groups and individuals and/or provided us with information about issues of protection from gender-based in various parts of the world. We look forward to further input.

HONORARY PATRONS
James Hathaway, The University of Michigan Law School
Nurjehan Mawani, former chairperson of the Immigration and Refugee Board
Arthur Helton, Senior Fellow for Refugee Studies and Preventive Action at the Council on Foreign Relations (for identification purposes)
Radhika Coomaraswamy, Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women
Asma Jahangir, former Chairperson of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan
Sima Wali, President, RefWID.
 

ADVISORY COMMITTEE
- Ariane Brunet, for International Centre for Human Rights and Democratic Development (Canada)
- Leanne Macmillan, from Amnesty International (London)
- Audrey Macklin, from Dalhousie University (Canada)
- Wendy Young, for Women's Commission for Refugee Women and Children (USA)
- Deborah Anker and Nancy Kelly, for Refugee Law Center (USA)
- Karen Musalo, University of California (USA)
- Sharryn Aiken, Centre for Refugee Studies, York University (Canada)
- Greta Hofmann Nemiroff, for Sisterhood Is Global Institute
- Malathi de Alwis, International Center for Ethnic Studies/Women's Coalition for Peace (Sri Lanka).
- Nastaran Mosavi, for Ockenden International (Iran)
- Lee Ann de la Hunt, for The National Consortium on Refugee Affairs (Pretoria, South Africa)
- Kohki Abe, Kanagawa University, Faculty of Law (Japan)
- Elizabeth Ferris, World Council of Churches (Geneva)
- Widney Brown, for Women's Rights Division, Human Rights Watch (USA)
- Marguerite Garling, UNIFEM/AFWIC, UNIFEM Regional Office for the Horn, Eastern and Central Africa
 

APPENDIX A

PROPOSAL FOR AN INTERNATIONAL NETWORK AND CONFERENCE
ON REFUGEE WOMEN FLEEING GENDER-BASED PERSECUTION (May 2000)

 

CONTEXT
According to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, a refugee is a person who is outside his or her country, who has a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion and whom the state is unwilling or unable to protect. The definition does not mention gender and has traditionally tended to be interpreted in a way that does not take account of women's experiences of persecution.

It is increasingly being recognized that the forms of persecution experienced by women are often different from those experienced by men, and that women are persecuted because of their gender. The evidence that women may be able to bring forward to support their refugee claim may also be different - and more difficult to provide - than that available to men. These differences need to be fully taken into account if women's human rights are to be respected.

In 1993 Canada became the first country to issue guidelines on refugee women claimants fleeing gender-related persecution. Since then, the recognition of gender-based violence has become relatively well established in Canada's refugee determination system and other countries (notably U.S. and Australia) have adopted their own guidelines, or have changed legislation to recognize gender-based persecution (e.g. Sweden) or have advanced the issue through jurisprudence (e.g. British House of Lords decision). There have also been setbacks such as the recent US Board of Immigration Appeals R-A- which overturned a positive decision in the case of a Guatemalan woman fleeing domestic violence.

The Fourth World Conference on Women (the Beijing Conference) in 1995 recognized the problem of violence against women and called for action against this violence. Under Strategic Objective E.5, the Platform for Action calls for consideration to be given to recognizing as refugees women whose claim to refugee status is based on a well-founded fear of persecution "including persecution through sexual violence or other gender-related persecution" (147 (h)).

Seeking refugee status is one important way in which women fleeing gender-related violence can protect themselves. Making refugee determination systems gender-sensitive contributes to the international efforts to combat gender-based violence. NGOs play a crucial role in advocating for changes in this area and have made significant contributions in many countries. However, their efforts are relatively unconnected and in some countries little attention has been paid to the subject. Likewise, others inside and outside government who are interested in ensuring that women are protected have relatively few opportunities to exchange information, review together the effectiveness of measures adopted and strategize about next steps. Given Canada's leadership role in this area, Canadian NGOs are well-placed to coordinate an initiative to put a spotlight on gender-related claims and connect NGOs and others interested in advancing international recognition of claims based on gender-related violence.
 

THE PROPOSAL

The Canadian Council for Refugees proposes to develop an international network of organizations committed to ensuring protection for women fleeing gender-related persecution and to host an international conference in Canada (proposed for spring 2001).
 

OBJECTIVES

1. To create an international network of NGOs advocating for the recognition of gender-based refugee claims.
 

2. To increase awareness among NGOs (those fighting gender-based violence, as well as refugee advocates) in as wide a number of countries as possible of the need to recognize gender-based refugee claims.
 

3. To offer a forum for others (decision-makers, academics, policy-makers, representatives of inter-governmental organizations, etc) to gather information and network around the issue of protecting women fleeing gender-based persecution.
 
 
 

ACTION PLAN
 

- An international network of people and organizations active in the field will be formed (via internet) as a way of gathering information on the gender-persecution issues and initiatives in as many countries as possible. The network will also be a tool for assessing needs, exchanging ideas and reflecting various viewpoints on the subject.
 

- Potential contributors and/or participants in the conference, as well as possible themes and formats of the conference will be decided collectively based on the information gathered through the network. (While not everyone on the network will necessarily be able to participate in the conference, we expect our participants to number in the hundreds)
 

>- A number of distinguished individuals will be invited to lend their names in support of this initiative, as honorary patrons.

- An international advisory committee, consisting of known scholars and activists, with representation from as many regions as possible, will be formed and asked for their advice, throughout the project, on various aspects of the development of the network and the conference. The honorary patrons and international advisory committee will be identified and recruited through networking.
 

- A steering committee, consisting of a selected number of interested CCR members, will give input throughout the project.
 

- An international conference will be held in Montreal in the spring of 2001.
 
 
 

CONFERENCE PARTICIPANTS
The conference will be primarily directed at representatives of NGOs, from as wide a range of countries as possible, and not simply Western countries. The conference will also include strong participation from women who have fled gender-related persecution.
 

The conference will also be designed to attract refugee decision-makers, academics, policy-makers, representatives of inter-governmental organizations, etc. Non NGOs would be welcome to host complementary sessions aimed at their sector, in conjunction with the conference.
 

FORMAT
The conference will include:

- plenary sessions

- workshops

- an NGO networking session with a focus on follow up action

- other sectors (e.g. academics, decision-makers) could also plan their own special sessions.
 

THEMES
Themes to include:
- worldwide context of gender-related violence and efforts to combat it.
- successes and failures in different countries' approaches to protecting women fleeing gender-related persecution.
- resettlement of women fleeing gender-related persecution (including evaluation of the women at risk program).
- refugee definition issues
- particular issues relating to refugees from domestic violence
- hearing room and other procedural issues
- documentation issues
- impact of gender on decision-making cases involving sexual orientation and children
- issues of racism and North/South relations as they relate to protection on the basis of gender-related persecution

APPENDIX B
 

QUESTIONAIRE

INTERNATIONAL NETWORK AND CONFERENCE N REFUGEES FLEEING GENDER-BASED PERSECUTION (May 2000)

 

- Is your organization (or persons affiliated with your organization) interested in this project? If so, what aspect(s) of the conference are you interested in? And what aspect(s) would you recommend that we include in our agenda?
 
 
 
 
 

- Can women in your country find protection from gender-based persecution? What are the initiatives of relevance?
 
 
 
 
 

- Who else can you recommend we contact, as potential interested parties, from your country or region?
 
 
 

- Do you have any other suggestions for us?
 
 
 
 
 

Your feedback will guide us in our invitations to potential contributors, and help make this important initiative as broad and rich as possible.
 

Name
 

Organization
 

Contact information (including email, if any)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

CANADIAN COUNCIL FOR REFUGEES
6830 Drolet, # 302, Montréal (Québec) H2S 2T1 CANADA

Afsaneh Hojabri
Phone: (514) 369-8943
Fax: (514) 277-1447
E-mail: ahojabri@total.net

Janet Dench
Executive Director Project Coordinator
Phone: (514) 277-7223
Fax: (514) 277-1447
E-mail: ccr@web.net
www.web.net/~ccr
 

How does gender affect newcomers’ experience of migration and settlement? What does gender mean? Are only women affected by gender issues? If you work or volunteer in an organization serving newcomers, you may want to deepen your understanding of gender and how it affects the experience of newcomers, in order to better adapt your services to the different realities of immigrant and refugee women and men.

The Canadian Council for Refugees is launching a new tool, the Pathways to Gender Justice Handbook, that aims at enhancing the capacity of organizations to use a gender-based approach in their work with newcomers. The Handbook is a practical guide that can be used in different areas of an organization, such as governance, management and direct services.

Understanding gender to improve services

Significant attention has been paid to gender in recent decades, but there is still a need within the immigrant and refugee serving sector to better understand gender issues and to effectively apply a gender-based analysis within the service delivery framework. A gender-based approach ensures that policies and services are designed, analyzed, implemented and monitored with an appreciation for gender differences. 

Gender roles often change after a person or a family arrives in Canada and these changes affect relationships between women and men, as well as girls and boys. Changes in gender roles can empower some family members, with various possible repercussions for family relationships. Looking at the process of migration and settlement with a “gender lens” may help improve programs, services and policies. However, in order to succeed, a gender-based approach to settlement work needs to involve everyone, including men.

A flexible tool connected to organizations’ needs

The Handbook was developed by an active Advisory Committee, made up of people from across Canada active in the immigrant and refugee serving sector – most of whom themselves have a refugee or immigrant background. To make it as concrete as possible, the Handbook was piloted by 7 organizations across Canada. The pilot was done with the input and participation of refugee and immigrant women clients of the organizations.

The Handbook is a flexible tool that offers a variety of entry points and encourages organizations to make the process their own. It includes suggestions of self evaluation, action plans, references and examples and can be adapted to different sizes and types of organizations across Canada. The Handbook’s approach is to use open questions that can help organizations find their own pathway to gender justice. For example, the following questions are included regarding case intervention:  

• What are our assumptions about why our intervention is needed?
• Who benefits from our intervention? Why?
• Whose needs are not being addressed? Why? How can those needs be met?
• Who is excluded? Why?  What can be done about it?
• Will our intervention lead to greater/lesser/same levels of equity? In the short term? In the long term?

Intersections

The Handbook was developed with an understanding that different forms of oppression intersect and create different experiences of the migration and settlement process. Power in relationships also plays a special role in shaping newcomer experiences. For example, when a service user enters a settlement agency for the first time, the following factors should be considered by staff, as they affect the settlement process: family dynamics, domestic violence, mental health before/after migration; race; status in Canada; surviving rape, torture and crimes against humanity, among others.

Participants’ comments

“Solitude can be a heavy burden, especially for women who find themselves at home with small children, without the opportunity to learn English, build a new social network. They often do not want to burden family members back home with their emotional struggles in Canada.”

“There needs to be more programs for men and how to look at the cultural differences. Men need help in looking at the changing roles.”

How to obtain the handbook

The Pathways to Gender Justice Handbook is available on the CCR website at www.ccrweb.ca/Genderhandbook.pdf.  

You can also order copies from the CCR using the order form www.ccrweb.ca/documents/publicationsorderform.pdf

The Handbook complements the CCR’s Pathways to Gender Justice Toolkit, also available online at www.ccrweb.ca/Gender.pdf . The Toolkit, launched in 2006, is a reference document that includes background information, theory and exercises about gender analysis.

The project to develop the Handbook received funding from the Women’s Program, Status of Women Canada.