Abstract

This paper explores the gendered dimensions of forced displacement, highlighting how women and girls face disproportionate burdens due to gender-based violence (GBV), including domestic abuse, female genital mutilation, forced marriage, honour killings, and systemic oppression (e.g., Taliban-era Afghanistan). It traces risks across origin countries, perilous journeys, and host settings, worsened by 2025 humanitarian funding cuts. The study examines the 1951 Refugee Convention and 1967 Protocol, interpreted through UNHCR guidelines to recognise gender-related persecution under "particular social group." It analyses the judiciary's evolving role, focusing on three landmark 2024 CJEU rulings that advanced gender-sensitive asylum claims for domestic violence, equality-based identity, and systemic discrimination against Afghan women. In India, a non-signatory lacking dedicated refugee law, the paper reviews constitutional protections under Articles 14 and 21, key Supreme Court cases on non-refoulement (including Rohingya petitions), and persistent gaps due to executive-driven policies. Drawing on CEDAW GR 32, the Istanbul Convention, and broader human rights frameworks, the paper calls for comprehensive gender-sensitive refugee legislation in India, enhanced judicial training, stronger UNHCR and women-led organisation partnerships, and prioritised access to services, empowerment, and global responsibility-sharing to transform vulnerability into agency and dignity for refugee women and girls.

Keywords