This article examines two perspectives concerning refugee women in the legal literature. One perspective argues that sex should be included in the Convention definition as a persecutory ground and that the concept of 'persecution' itself should be reformulated to incorporate the experience of women. The second perspective argues that a distinction must be drawn between a persecutory form and a persecutory ground, and that issues relating to sex can be better addressed within the legal structures which currently exist. The article first provides a backdrop to the debate which discusses sexual violence and other forms of violence against women which exist in the refugee context; then gives a detailed exposition of both perspectives; discusses the issues in a practical sense with reference to the Canadian experience; and finally provides comparisons and conclusions.

[No Keywords available]

[No Keywords available]