Rethinking Gender-Related Persecution, Sexual Violence, and Women's Rights: A New Conceptual Framework for Political Asylum and International Human Rights Law

In the case of Re Kasinga (1996) Fauziya Kasinga claimed the need for asylum to avoid the practice of female genital mutilation and was granted refugee status by the U.S. Board of Immigration Appeals. This article discusses the implications of this case for other gender-related asylum claims based on harmful traditional practices and/or violations of the right to bodily and sexual integrity. New definitions and future directions for political asylum and international human rights law are proposed. While Re Kasinga directly addressed political asylum, this remedy is available only to a small percentage of the women who are faced with sexual violence in their daily lives. This article moves from the focused examination of political asylum to broader conclusions on the international women's rights movement and recommends future directions for the treatment of such violence under international law. [Descriptors: Migration - Refugees and Immigration, International]