Abstract
In this Article, we argue that the House of Lords' reasoning in Adan was seriously flawed. The House of Lords correctly recognized that evidence that minorities face a heightened risk of being persecuted can be sufficient to show a nexus to a Convention ground. Yet it erred when it went on to hold that only differentially at-risk individuals or groups can benefit from refugee status. If a person's risk of being persecuted is causally linked to his or her race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, the nexus requirement is satisfied irrespective of whether the applicant is a member of a minority group that is particularly vulnerable to harm.
Recommended Citation
Michael Kagan & William P. Johnson,
Persecution in the Fog of War: The House of Lords' Decision in Adan,
23
Mich. J. Int'l L.
247
(2002).
Available at:
https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjil/vol23/iss2/3
Included in
Courts Commons, Human Rights Law Commons, Immigration Law Commons, International Law Commons