{"id":2590,"date":"2026-11-13T22:32:37","date_gmt":"2026-11-13T22:32:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.lawgicalcorp.com\/blog\/danger-opinion-canada\/"},"modified":"2026-11-13T22:32:37","modified_gmt":"2026-11-13T22:32:37","slug":"danger-opinion-canada","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lawgicalcorp.com\/blog\/danger-opinion-canada\/","title":{"rendered":"Danger opinion in Canada: what a s. 115(2) opinion means"},"content":{"rendered":"

By Prabhpreet Kaur Sangha<\/a>, lawyer at Lawgical Law Corporation \u00b7 Reviewed November 13, 2026<\/em><\/p>\n

Prabhpreet Kaur Sangha is a lawyer at Lawgical Law Corporation, called to the BC bar in 2019, and a member of the Law Society of British Columbia<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n

Updated November 13, 2026: IRPA s. 115 and IRCC’s section A115 instructions checked that day.<\/em><\/p>\n

\n

The rule:<\/strong> a refugee or protected person can’t be sent back to persecution or torture (s. 115(1)), unless the Minister’s delegate gives a “danger opinion” (s. 115(2)).<\/p>\n

Who it applies to:<\/strong> people inadmissible for serious criminality who are found a danger to the public, or for security, human rights violations or organized crime.<\/p>\n

The balance:<\/strong> danger to Canada is weighed against the risk you’d face and humanitarian factors. Why a lawyer<\/a><\/p>\n

Book a consultation<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Our immigration lawyers<\/p>\n

\"SundeepSundeep S. Grewal<\/span>Barrister and Solicitor<\/span><\/a>\"PrabhpreetPrabhpreet Kaur Sangha<\/span>Barrister and Solicitor<\/span><\/a>\"PardeepPardeep S. Grewal<\/span>Barrister and Solicitor<\/span><\/a><\/div>\n
\nAbout our lawyers<\/summary>\n
\n

Sundeep S. Grewal<\/a><\/strong> founded Lawgical Law Corporation and argues immigration cases at the Immigration and Refugee Board and the Federal Court of Canada.<\/p>\n

Prabhpreet Kaur Sangha<\/a><\/strong> focuses on refugee claims, immigration appeals, inadmissibility, detention reviews and Federal Court cases, and has presented at Continuing Legal Education seminars and the National Immigration Conference.<\/p>\n

Pardeep S. Grewal<\/a><\/strong> is an immigration and estates lawyer known for clear communication and practical strategy.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/details>\n<\/div>\n

A danger opinion is the decision that allows Canada to remove a Convention refugee or protected person to a country where they may face persecution or torture. Normally, section 115(1) of IRPA forbids that. A danger opinion under section 115(2) is the exception: CBSA starts the case, and a senior decision-maker at IRCC decides whether the person’s danger to Canada outweighs the risk they would face and any humanitarian considerations.<\/p>\n

Lawgical Law Corporation<\/a>, an immigration law firm in Surrey, Abbotsford and Vancouver, BC, represents refugees and protected persons facing danger opinions, removal and the Federal Court reviews that follow; this guide is by Prabhpreet Kaur Sangha.<\/p>\n

Who can get a danger opinion?<\/h2>\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
The two kinds of danger opinion<\/caption>\n
Section<\/th>\nWho<\/th>\nThe question<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
s. 115(2)(a)<\/td>\nInadmissible for serious criminality<\/td>\nAre you a danger to the public in Canada?<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
s. 115(2)(b)<\/td>\nInadmissible for security, human or international rights violations, or organized criminality<\/td>\nShould you not be allowed to stay because of the nature and severity of your acts or the danger to Canada’s security?<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n

It applies to protected persons in Canada and to people recognized as refugees by another country.<\/p>\n

When it comes up<\/h2>\n

Most often after a protected person who is a permanent resident is convicted, found inadmissible for serious criminality, and loses the right to appeal because the sentence was 6 months or more. They then have a removal order, but s. 115(1) still protects them. See removal after a criminal conviction<\/a>.<\/p>\n

How the decision is made<\/h2>\n
    \n
  1. Notice.<\/strong> CBSA puts you on notice and invites written submissions on three things: whether you are a danger to the public, the risk to your life or freedom if removed, and humanitarian and compassionate factors.<\/li>\n
  2. CBSA’s recommendation.<\/strong> CBSA prepares a “Request for Minister’s Opinion” package, usually recommending a danger finding, with your record and police reports. It is disclosed to you so you can respond.<\/li>\n
  3. Your response.<\/strong> Written submissions and evidence by the deadline CBSA gives. If the file sits for a long time, it is common to update them.<\/li>\n
  4. The decision.<\/strong> A senior decision-maker at IRCC, acting for the Minister, balances the danger against the risk and humanitarian factors. Where there is a substantial risk of torture or death, removal is allowed only in exceptional circumstances.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    From notice to decision can take years, and the record keeps growing in the meantime.<\/p>\n

    Challenging a danger opinion<\/h2>\n

    There is no appeal. You can apply for leave and judicial review in the Federal Court, usually within 15 days, and ask for a stay of removal while the court decides. See a stay after a PRRA or deferral refusal<\/a>.<\/p>\n

    How it fits with PRRA and cessation<\/h2>\n

    A PRRA for someone with serious criminality is restricted. Cessation, by contrast, ends protection altogether: see cessation of refugee protection<\/a>.<\/p>\n

    Why this needs a lawyer<\/h2>\n

    One lawyer, one file, every step:<\/strong><\/p>\n