DISCUSSION: The drafters were intentionally vague. So they probably thought there was an advantage to vagueness.
- Maybe? Or maybe they wanted to give countries a broad enough law that they could work everything out themselves.
- Lines 19-23 say that the IRO document didn’t mention social groups. They probably also didn’t mention women. So by including social groups, the Convention probably broke with tradition by allowing the inclusion of women, indirectly.
- CORRECT. If the drafters thought they could list every category, then they probably wouldn’t have included “social group” as a separate category. They could just have listed each group directly and have been done with it.
- Hard to say. There are other reasons for being vague, apart from not caring. They may have thought that countries would reject the Convention if it explicitly protected women.
- Same as D. There are other reasons for not listing something directly.
Want a free Reading Comp lesson?
Get a free sample of the Reading Comprehension Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for solving RC questions