Person in Need of Protection
Updated September 2026. This guide explains Canada’s person in need of protection framework and the risks assessed under section 97 of IRPA.
Section 97 protection
Section 97 of IRPA protects a person in Canada whose removal would personally expose them to a danger of torture, or to a qualifying risk to life or risk of cruel and unusual treatment or punishment. Unlike section 96, section 97 does not require a connection to one of the five Convention grounds.
Danger of torture
The decision-maker considers whether the person would face a danger of torture within the meaning incorporated by section 97. The assessment is forward-looking and based on the person’s circumstances and reliable evidence.
Risk to life or cruel and unusual treatment or punishment
The statute places conditions on this branch of protection. Among other things, the risk must be personal, generally must exist throughout the country, must not be a risk generally faced by others in or from the country, must not be inherent or incidental to lawful sanctions unless imposed contrary to accepted international standards, and must not arise simply from the country’s inability to provide adequate health or medical care.
Personalized versus generalized risk
A frequent issue is whether the claimant faces a personalized risk rather than generalized danger faced by the population. General violence or insecurity can form part of the evidence, but the claimant must connect the conditions to their own prospective risk within the statutory test.
State protection and geographic reach
Evidence can also raise questions about effective protection and whether the alleged risk exists throughout the country. Relevant factors may include the identity and reach of the feared actor, past attempts to obtain protection, geographic reach and current country conditions.
Evidence
Useful evidence can include threats, communications, police and court records, medical documentation, witness statements, proof of the feared actor’s capacity or reach and reliable country evidence. Evidence should address the specific legal test rather than simply describe difficult country conditions.
Sections 96 and 97 may overlap
The RPD considers whether an eligible claimant meets either section 96 or 97. The same factual history can raise both provisions, but each has distinct requirements. Proof of danger alone does not automatically establish refugee protection.
Official resources
This page provides general legal information, not advice for an individual case. Laws, policies and procedural directions can change. Confirm the requirements and deadlines that apply to your matter.
Refugee law, procedures, country conditions and available remedies can change. Information on this page is general and is not a substitute for advice based on the complete record.