This article addresses the concern that decision-making in sexual orientation or gender identity (SOGI) asylum claims in Europe is often unfair, and that one way to remedy this is by improving the guidance provided to decision-makers when interpreting the Refugee Convention in respect of these claims. We begin by interrogating a number of different decision-making guidelines and models to assess whether they contribute to a fairer asylum system. We show that, for claims based on SOGI, success invariably depends on the decision-maker’s assessment as to whether a claimant is, or would be perceived in their home country to be, a member of a SOGI minority, and so belongs to a Particular Social Group. Such focus risks neglecting analysis of the actual risk of persecution. We set out our own recommendation for a fairer approach based on prioritising SOGI-specific Country of Origin Information (COI) and the risk of persecution, rather than focusing on whether applicants are ‘genuinely’ members of a SOGI minority. We argue that this will lead to fairer outcomes that are less likely to be overturned on appeal and more consistent with the Refugee Convention’s spirit and letter.

中文翻译：

---

改善 SOGI 庇护裁决：将迫害置于身份之前

本文解决了欧洲对性取向或性别认同 (SOGI) 庇护申请的决策通常不公平的担忧，解决这一问题的一种方法是在解释《难民公约》时改进为决策者提供的指导这些索赔。我们首先询问了许多不同的决策指南和模型，以评估它们是否有助于建立更公平的庇护制度。我们表明，对于基于 SOGI 的索赔，成功总是取决于决策者对索赔人是否是或将在其本国被视为 SOGI 少数群体成员的评估，因此属于特定的社会团体。这种关注可能会忽视对迫害的实际风险的分析。我们提出了我们自己的建议，即基于优先考虑 SOGI 特定的原产国信息 (COI) 和迫害风险的更公平方法，而不是关注申请人是否“真正”是 SOGI 少数群体的成员。我们认为，这将导致更公平的结果，不太可能在上诉中被推翻，并且更符合《难民公约》的精神和文字。