protected ground as a result the judge ruled that there was no motive however the immigration just aired on this point because there was more than one motive behind every incident and at least one of the motives was based on race and that's evidenced by two things one was  and that includes specifically that petitions were in india and there were no longer wanted in kenya and that they should go back to their own country now the judge had sort of said that these remarks were just unpleasant remarks but they're really more than that because unwilling to control those elements of society would constitute a governmental action in this case pretty much after every incident that occurred to the petitioners they went to the police for help and the police were just unwilling to help them after both robberies they went to the the country reports basics the indians in kenya are reasons are resented there's widespread resentment against indians in kenya by the majority population and also mentions there's a politician in kenya who had called for the mass expulsion of indians out of kenya and even the immigration judge agreed that there was widespread discrimination against indians in kenya and the country reports itself can prove motive a motive in these incidents based on race an issue of whether the n kenya it would strongly suggest that the government is just simply unwilling to protect indians if there is widespread resentment against them and in this case specifically the government was simply you know the police and the government were put on notice after the incidents that were happening to them and they were just simply unwilling to help them the country reports can also show motive in this case because even if you don't have racial remarks and there's a certain case called that indians are victims of crime and you know fiji and as a result of that that was enough the evidence for them to show that the robberies were at least in part based on the fact that the person was indian in this case it's somewhere about actually the other thing that the immigration judge had stated was that the arrest that occurred without with the petitions was legitimate that run after the kidnapping they were taken to jail they went to the police to complain and they were arrested by the police and alone that they would take the side of their own people that you know and it is a comment on the petitioners race it's actually what they're saying is that the petitioners are not their people there are different types of people and because they're different type of people they're not arrested or when it's very interesting claims that narcotics was placed in his backpack and the police arrested and the judge said that this was a legitimate arrest however after he was released from jail the police have told him that they would make things worse for him and his father because they filed complaints against kenyans that goes to an idea of political opinion that the police are saying that they're in there saying files complaints against kenyans because he believes crimes are being committed against them and that's why they were target again if this was a legitimate arrest why would they make those kind of claims against the petitioners and the only reasonable conclusion is they did that because they felt they were targeting him based on a political opinion so in all these cases where we have is a motive based on race which is evidenced by the racial remarks and by the country physician reports and also the government is just simply unwilling to control those elements of society that was committing these crimes were economic difficulties in kenya and the evidence reflects that native kenyans resented indians just petitioners for apparently taking jobs taking job opportunities away from judge noted that there was evidence in the record there was a particularly an article they described a crime property perpetrated against an indian family and the kenyan police were more than willing to come to the a son's encounter with kenyan police following his revealing of a coworker who was stealing from his employer so the immigration judge reasonably found th all of the incidents all of the following incidents were very close after those two employees were fired and then after following the kidnapping the alleged kidnapping  i've stated before the kidnappings there the men the arrest after the kidnappings were not pretext were not legitimate and anyway once again during the kidnapping they were told by their by their kidnappers you know that you guys are indian that you should return they can use your return to your own country that we don't want you here you're taking our jobs he said leave that itself should be enough to show that the kidnapping was more than just a personal retribution because otherwise why would random or nonrandom as the case may be violence against the street and perpetrators call them all a very names they can think of while they're going and this happens in lots of countries they make about the fact that they should go back to their country is consistent with what the country and this report says that there's widespread resentment against indians in kenya and politicians are calling for their expulsion so the idea of mass expulsion of these remarks and what the country commission reports are saying are consistent with each other so i think that makes it more than just a random act of violence furthermore after every incident they go to the police and tell the police i was kidnapped and you know please do something about it and they were just ignored in every single incident that happened to them the police were put on notice about crimes committed against them and nothing was done about it at all so that would be the government sanctioned a government unwilling to protect its citizens would constitute a sign or a thank you council your time has expired the case just argued will be submitted for decision