The appellant, a dual citizen of Ireland and the United Kingdom, was a former member of the INLA who was sentenced to death by the organization after he released hostages for reasons of conscience.
He fled to Canada and claimed Convention refugee status.
The Supreme Court of Canada held that state complicity is not a prerequisite for persecution under the refugee definition; a state's inability to protect its citizens is sufficient.
The Court also ruled that while the INLA is not a 'particular social group', the appellant's actions constituted an expression of political opinion for which he feared persecution.
However, because the appellant held dual nationality, the Court remitted the matter to the Board to determine whether he could be afforded protection in Great Britain.
