The new Strengthening Canada's Immigration System and Borders Act (SCISBA; formerly Bill C-12, and still regularly referred to as ‘C-12’) has restricted meaningful access to refugee protection in ways that may violate the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In short: many claims that would previously have been determined by the IRB will now be determined by the Pre-Removal Risk Assessment (PRRA) Office, where the legal community expects that both procedural rights and substantive decision-making will be significantly weaker, leading to worse decision-making, greater unfairness and more inequality. Over the coming months, a team of researchers will analyze a collection of negative PRRA decisions, and a collection of positive IRB decisions, to find real-life examples that litigators can use to illustrate a potential problem with the new approach: examples of situations where a positive decision at the IRB rests, at least in part, on an explanation that the claimant provided at the hearing – an explanation that they would not have had the opportunity to provide to a PRRA officer. The Team Lead will report these examples in an expert affidavit to support an ongoing challenge to the relevant provisions of Bill C12 at the Federal Court.