PRRA Applications

A Pre-Removal Risk Assessment (PRRA) is often the final opportunity for a person facing deportation from Canada to present evidence of danger, persecution, or risk they would face if returned to their home country. Unlike a refugee claim at the RPD or an appeal at the RAD, the PRRA is not a full re-hearing. It is a specialized, paper-based assessment focused exclusively on new evidence or significantly changed circumstances that emerged after the last refugee determination. Because PRRA decisions can literally determine whether someone lives or dies, or whether they remain separated from their family, the process demands rigorous evidence, precise legal arguments, and expert preparation.

Let's have a comprehensive, lawyer-level guide to PRRA applications, including eligibility rules, legal tests, evidence standards, bar periods, exemptions, risk categories, best practices, and judicial review options. It also explains how PRRA fits into the broader enforcement and removal system, its relationship with the RPD/RAD, and strategies for last-minute filings when CBSA attempts to remove an individual quickly.

Legal Framework

PRRA applications are governed by:

• IRPA ss.112–114,
• IRPR (Regulations) Part 13,
• Federal Court jurisprudence,
• UNHCR Handbook (persuasive authority).

A PRRA assesses risks faced on removal, not humanitarian factors (except in limited exemptions).

Who Can Apply for PRRA?

Persons facing removal from Canada may be eligible for a PRRA. However, bar periods apply:

• 12-month bar after a negative RPD or RAD decision,
• 36-month bar for claims from certain countries with improved conditions.

Exceptions apply for:

• countries listed for immediate PRRA access,
• individuals with new, exceptional risks (e.g., political upheaval, new persecution),
• serious medical vulnerabilities (in limited cases).

Purpose of the PRRA

A PRRA is designed to determine whether a person would face:

• risk to life,
• risk of cruel and unusual treatment or punishment,
• torture,
• a personalized danger not faced by the general population.

It does NOT reconsider the credibility findings of the RPD unless new evidence undermines those findings.

Differences Between PRRA and Refugee Claim

• PRRA focuses on new evidence, not re-arguing old facts.
• PRRA officers can accept written submissions only; there is no hearing.
• PRRA is completed by IRCC officers, not the IRB.
• Credibility findings from the RPD are presumed valid unless shown otherwise.

Submitting a Strong PRRA

A persuasive PRRA submission requires:

• new country evidence (post-RPD/RAD decision),
• new personal evidence (threats, attacks, warrants),
• expert reports,
• medical documentation,
• legal argument mapping evidence to IRPA risks.

What Counts as “New Evidence”?

Evidence must:

• not have been reasonably available during the RPD/RAD process, and
• be material enough to change the outcome.

Examples:

• recent threats or attacks against the applicant or family,
• new political violence, coups, or civil conflict,
• updated human rights reports showing worsened conditions,
• fresh medical diagnoses relevant to removal risk,
• new arrest warrants or summons from home country.

Examples of evidence NOT considered new:

• documents available before the RPD hearing,
• repeat submissions of old evidence,
• generic news articles not linked to personal risk.

Legal Tests Applied in PRRA

Officers assess whether the applicant faces:

• personalized risk (not faced by the general public),
• reasonable possibility of persecution, torture, or severe harm,
• inadequate state protection,
• no viable internal flight alternative (IFA).

Medical Risks and PRRA

Medical conditions are considered only if:

• return would expose the person to risk equivalent to “cruel and unusual treatment,”
• medical system in home country cannot provide adequate treatment,
• loss of access to essential medications would create extreme suffering.

PRRA officers apply a high threshold for medical claims.

PRRA and Criminality

Individuals with serious criminality may have limited access to risk-based protections. However, officers must still consider:

• risk of torture (non-derogable),
• risk to life,
• country conditions indicating severe harm.

Stay of Removal Applications

Filing a PRRA does not automatically stop removal unless:

• a stay application is filed at the Federal Court, or
• the PRRA is at a stage where a stay applies by law.

Stay motions require:

• serious issue to be determined,
• irreparable harm if removed,
• balance of convenience favouring the applicant.

Reasons PRRA Applications Are Refused

• evidence not considered “new,”
• lack of personalization of risk,
• credibility concerns carried over from RPD,
• insufficient country documentation,
• IFA deemed available,
• state protection presumed adequate,
• submissions lack legal analysis.

Judicial Review of PRRA Refusals

Applicants may challenge refusals at the Federal Court. Common grounds include:

• failure to consider key evidence,
• misapplication of legal tests,
• irrational findings on country conditions,
• procedural unfairness,
• mistaken credibility findings.

High-Risk PRRA Profiles

• claimants from countries with fluctuating security situations,
• LGBTQ claimants (where laws worsen),
• domestic violence survivors in patriarchal or weak-protection states,
• journalists, activists, and whistleblowers,
• individuals targeted by gangs, militias, or political groups,
• people with deteriorating medical conditions.

Role of Skilled Counsel

Lawyers play a critical role in PRRA success:

• identifying strong new evidence,
• drafting persuasive risk submissions,
• organizing country-conditions packages,
• preparing expert affidavits,
• filing urgent stay motions,
• pursuing Federal Court review.

Because a PRRA often represents the last legal barrier between the applicant and removal to danger, expert preparation is essential to securing protection and preserving life, safety, and dignity.