founded fear of persecution in that person’s own country (para. 27). A determination on this point would require consideration of the full circumstances under which the victim had been trafficked, including the existence of a threat of harm to the victim in their country of origin. THE REASONS FOR PERSECUTION In order to qualify for refugee status, an individual’s “well-founded fear of persecution” must relate to one or more reasons or grounds specified in the definition contained in the Refugee Convention: “race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion”. It is sufficient for the “ground” to be a relevant factor contributing to the persecution; it does not need to be the sole or even dominant cause (para. 29). In cases where there is a risk of persecution by a non-State actor for reasons related to one of these grounds, the causal link is established irrespective of whether the State’s inability or unwillingness to protect is based on one of the grounds. Even where the persecution is unrelated to any of the accepted grounds, a causal link will still be established if the inability/failure of the State to protect is based on one of the grounds (para. 30). Traffickers are generally motivated solely by considerations of profit. However, the UNHCR has noted the possibility of certain Conventionrelated grounds being used in the targeting and selection of victims of trafficking. For example, members of a particular race or ethnic group may be especially vulnerable to trafficking as a result of conflict or even because of specific market demands. Members of these groups may also be less effectively protected by the authorities in the country of origin (paras. 32 and 34). Victims and potential victims of trafficking could also qualify for refugee status if it can be shown that their well-founded fear of persecution is related to their membership of a particular social group. In order to make such a determination, it is necessary to show that members of this group share innate and unchangeable characteristics (other than being persecuted) and are generally recognized as a group (para. 37).157 Not all members of the social group need to be at risk of persecution: it is sufficient to show that the claimant’s well-founded fear of persecution is based on his or her membership of that group.158 Women, men and children (as well as subsets of these groups, such as unaccompanied children) may constitute a particular social group for the purposes of determining refugee status. The fact of belonging to one of these groups might be one of the factors contributing to an individual’s fear of being subject to persecution, such as sexual exploitation, through trafficking.159 Former victims of trafficking might also be regarded as constituting a social group for whom future persecution could involve reprisals, punishment and ostracism (para. 39). The link between trafficking and membership of “a particular social group” continues to be explored at the national level in the context of specific refugee status determination procedures.160 THE OBLIGATION OF NON-REFOULEMENT The obligation of non-refoulement (non-return) is recognized as a norm of customary international 157 See also UNHCR Social Group Guidelines. 158 UNHCR Social Group Guidelines, para. 17. 159 UNHCR Trafficking Guidelines, para. 38. Several decisions of the Canadian Courts have found a well-founded fear of persecution due to membership of a particularly social group which relates to trafficking or its component acts: V95-02904 (Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, Refugee Determination Division, 26 November 1997) (woman forced into prostitution); T9806186 (Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, Refugee Division, 2 November 1999) (women and/or former sex-trade workers); TA4-16915 (Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, Refugee Protection Division, 16 March 2006) (single women who were trafficked in Ethiopia). The Australian Refugee Review Tribunal has dismissed several cases of women who claimed that, due to their membership of a “particular social group”, 160 (Continued on next page) COMMENTARY 91