g did not have the benefit of seeing the widder car in two thousand and nineteen kids with somewhat similar facts in that in that case there was a petitioner who was a mind party supporter and argued he could not safe relocate within india due to the separatist political opinion the indian authorities would put on him if he did so similarly here the petitioner has the same cl found him to be credible in the board did not disturb that finding is credible testimony established that due to landlord tenant verification laws in india he would not be able to freely participate in fluency would avail him of the possibility to safely relocate and that's just not reported in the record additionally edition argues that his brief time living in hiding in the state of  not support i just finding that he could safely relocate in the time he lived in schanberg our he was not politically out he expressed a continued interest to be politically active effort to rebut the presumption of a well founded fear of the i j define the petitioner dabbous past persecution on account of a protected grant the burden shifted to the government and the only evidence the government had were if almost nonexistent in india today do we need to send that back to to provide the obvious there is very little power left in the congress party under the current situation in india as i read the newspapers i follow india fairly carefully because of a variety of reasons we need to send this back now to c because of the off diminished capacity of the congress party to do anything that that is important in the overall determination that could be something would be helpful but i would point to the court the fact that the harm difference given that it was the state that persecuted him as well as it was the congress party that that he sees indications the enemy if the enemy is gone it seems to me that which is the he said one hundred and fifty kilometers from the home she did not participate he was a student but if he were to participate he argues that he would hyun become the days i fully understand your honor i simply state that he agrees that that would be beneficial because he believes there is evidence to show a continuing threat from the congress party but at the same time he argues that the great future harm and in the end it is own testimony and other evidence concerning his relocation of the efforts seven started that not only could he relocate to avoid harm but also that it would be reasonable for him to do so to do relocated within india or approximately twenty six months i did not encounter any difficulties he also testified that he attended five dollars to six dollars political rallies when he was in chanda garceau it is not accurate to say that he was not politically active during that time moreover the ease with which he relocated both internally in india and abroad in singapore demonstrated that he had the resources and skills to relocate and obtain employment because the relocation finding applies  subdue and his experiences because it's based on his own testimony concerning the narrative of everything that happened to him in india and i'm not sure how much more individual i think but to aspects of that you know even thinkers nationwide persecution possibility and that relocation is not reasonable if the government does not bear the burden in showing that would likely happen plus you also have the issue of whether well your honor our position is says it's not necessarily that t h s submitted a bunch of evidence to rebut it it said d h took the evidence you know evidence is evidence and v h s argued quite clearly before the immigration judge  involved if i'm reading this correctly and i believe that then acknowledgement that he was politically active the only reason he said he wasn't more politically active was that there were not elections during the period of time that he was enchanted garden not because he think that's the crux of the chanda kochhar finding really because they had knowledge that an area on i q was in hiding and not politically active but the focus is on the twenty five dollars or twenty six months since shanidar and his political activities there a few rallies but he did not work for the party and that's the strawman all difference between whether he could relocate or not he did not work for the party did not advocate for them he did not the thank you thank you