What is IRPA s.97?

IRPA s.97 defines a person in need of protection for Canadian refugee protection. The standard text:

A person in need of protection is a person in Canada whose removal to their country of nationality... would subject them personally (a) to a danger, believed on substantial grounds to exist, of torture within the meaning of Article 1 of the Convention Against Torture; or (b) to a risk to their life or to a risk of cruel and unusual treatment or punishment if (i) the person is unable or, because of that risk, unwilling to avail themself of the protection of that country, (ii) the risk would be faced by the person in every part of that country and is not faced generally by other individuals in or from that country, (iii) the risk is not inherent or incidental to lawful sanctions, and (iv) the risk is not caused by the inability of that country to provide adequate health or medical care.

s.97 vs s.96 — when each applies

• s.96 (Convention refugee): persecution for race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group
• s.97 (Person in need of protection): torture, cruel/unusual treatment, or risk to life — no Convention ground required

Common s.97 fact patterns

• Victims of severe domestic violence where state protection is inadequate
• Honour-based violence threats
• Cartel / organized-crime targeting (often when s.96 grounds don't squarely apply)
• Risk to life from individual perpetrators (extortion, blood feuds)
• Severe medical risk in country of return (limited by the s.97(b)(iv) inadequate-care exception)

The "generalized risk" issue — s.97(b)(ii)

A common refusal ground under s.97: the IRB finds the risk is "generalized" — faced by all members of the country, not personalized to the claimant. This is heavily-litigated in cases from Mexico, Honduras, El Salvador, Haiti, and Nigeria where cartel/gang violence affects large populations.

The fix in successful claims: documenting the claimant's specific risk profile (prior targeting, family connection to threatened persons, particular geographic risk) to elevate "generalized" risk into personalized risk.

How s.96 and s.97 work together

Most refugee claimants argue both. The RPD assesses s.96 first; if that fails, they assess s.97. A claim can succeed under s.97 even if s.96 fails.

Where the claim is heard

Same as s.96 — RPD, with appeal to RAD, then judicial review at Federal Court.