you judge jones may it please the court jason wilcox on behalf of mccain i think the issue might be a little bit different in that i think united states and mr saulo agree that agreement is required on the future persecution question  i think the issues that are presented here are number one whether the board erred by holding the death threats and mr received in addition to the home invasion and the attempted attack by the bondo carrying sticks and rock animist i don't know exactly the reason i know they are not islamists because an islamic preacher spoke out against female genital mutilation and the record shows that he was burned alive which is one of the reasons why  shia rather than a solid that's fair your honor i guess that's true so i don't know whether the bondo are islamist or and this or exactly what variant of islam they may subscribe to what i do know is that in sierra leone the exercise i'm inclined to cut to the chase in remand but from my own sake i don't know about my colleagues but the so the fellow gets attacked by a herd of women can we really consider that past persecution even if they are threatening to kill one will so i think that even if it was just as you said a herd of women that could count as fast persecution but it was a group of both women and men and you can see that are a way to forty four to  forty nine and when that group came they came carrying sticks and rocks they broke into the house looking for him and when they didn't find him they told his sister in law you're a dead man walking wasn't that the nd time that is the nd time that they quit so the st time they came when they learned he was planning that was five women i agree judge jones the st time it was a group of five women that came to his house and they told him if you continue advocating against we here you going to write this article against female genital mutilation if you go forward and do it and if you do not stop we will kill you you can see that our way to thirty four and to thirty six mr giallo then makes a decision is going to go ahead and write the article anyway and i don't think that he should be punished for that act of bravery in doing that and then he decides to write the article and a month later the bondo show up at his house and they show up with sticks and rocks and they call him a dead man walking when he is not there thankfully so they and forty three and in that case was an individual where him and his family member were repeatedly threatened by far crumbles in colombia there was never any physical violence against him and her or his family and this court held that that presented not just a case of past persecution but a compelling case of past persecution and actually overruled a b i a decision finding that that did not amount to pastors if you so i think that makes the court perfectly in line with the decisions aim willing to carry out the threat armed with sticks and clubs broke into the house and threatened to burn it down i think that takes it beyond just mere words you know as this court said in her nando's verses are when there's threats plus evidence of intent to carry it out that can be enough to establish past persecution and the th circuit i said the same thing in the bench coquet switches for sixty eight f rd at forty six and so it doesn't have to say  me explain for two reasons why i think it is a question of law i think the primary reason is because the definition of refugee which includes persecution in the i a e a was added by congress to bring the united states into line with international conventions on the status of refugees and that's the supreme court's cardoza for nest good case that discusses that and so if the question is are we in line with these internet this international regime that we're trying to get here to that's a legal persecution and whether the undisputed facts amount to past persecution is a question of law but even if you disagree with that judge jones which i understand you might i think the evidence here is compelling and would require a finding as a matter of law persecution because they're willing to remand simply to consider whether he has a well founded fear of future persecution political opinion why is that not enough to resolve it kate well i think for routes to an asylum conclusion and in particular it can matter for the burden of proof because if he suffered past persecution then that the stablish is a presumption and then that means that it's on the government to prove the country conditions have not changed and that he could not relocate to a different part of the country if all that mr shiloh was able to establish was future persecution then he would happen the burden would be on him and i think that no matter where the burden falls given the government put in no evidence about change country conditions and no evidence about his ability to relocate he would he would win regardless of where the burden falls but that burden shifting question is important and it is an important reason why this court needs to address the past persecution issue and i think it also needs to address the political opinion issue which is squarely teed up in front of this court the government doesn't dispute to express a political opinion as a matter of fact look at pages twenty four and twenty five of the government  well except for the government is asking for a remain and for the board to reconsider it and i don't think that makes sense when no one is actually disputing that he expressed a political opinion i think that this court should decide the issue that there's no reason to send it back when the b considered the question and just got it wrong that's exactly why we should have this court clear up the issue  and then of course there's also the issue of whether the government can control the bondo and we don't think that requires a remained either although i know the government disagrees about that because we think that the evidence here is clear and undisputed that the government of s cannot control the ball you know there's these creature that we've discussed there are the journalists who are frog marched through the streets naked there are the police releasing bondo members after initially detaining them because of threats from the bondo and there's zero evidence in the record of the government of sierra leone ever taking any actions in an arche is the basis for refugee status then ninety percent of the countries in the world populations could come to the u s unfettered and we hear this all the time from honduras as you know i'm from guatemala the police won't step in the police are just scared of the narco terrorists well i think it's more than an arche judge jones it is the bondo actually hold significant and sixty three in five hundred and sixty nine you know in the words of unicef the bondo exercise enormous influence and combat and political support there's a human rights journal from the harvard human rights co opted the arms of the government in the political process to support themselves and to stop anyone who opposes female genital mutilation all right but there are no further questions on good morning runners may it please the court my name is greg i represent attorney general william barr i would like to begin with an update for the court sensitive briefing was concluded i'm advised by d h l us that mr jell o was released from dress the past person so in order for an applicant to be eligible for asylum and withholding removal they have to show persecution by the government or force the government is unable  unwilling to control and on account of a protected grounds so the st issue here is mr j lo's claim was that he faces persecution by the bondo society and he argues that that is a group that the government of syria leone is unable or unwilling to control and the problem with this case is that the b i held that mr jolo failed to demonstrate that the government of sierra leone would punish him for his journalism they didn't address the claim that he's raising which is it's the bondo society that he fears and will the government of sierra leone are they able and willing to protect him from the bondo society that's an issue a fact that my client agency needs to address in the st instance it is not my role here today to adjudicate his claims to say that he will that he should or should not get asylum or withholding  he may well be granted asylum or withholding of removal on remained but at this point the agency has not addressed the issue is the bondo society a group that the government is unable or unwilling to control and i do want to point out that although there is a lot of evidence in this record that the bond a society runs amok i do want to distill it for the court that as mr july bring the court's attention to an article the news article is a police they took action they went into the house they've extracted her from the home they did arrest the bonder society member who did this mr j lo emphasizes of course that the police precinct w surrounded by a bond of society members of the police felt that they needed to release this person that they had detained but the fact that the police took some action that does support the contention that perhaps perhaps this question could go either way also i will note and this is on page two hundred and fifty one of the record of appeal mr joe did not seek police protection and that is often relevant in cases of unable or unwilling to control so that issue a lot for that issue alone the case needs to go back to the agency also there is the issue of whether he was targeted on account of his political opinion the political dimensions of his article was not one's down to a reason for why the bond of society targeted him or they just didn't focus on the fact that his article had a very real to explain and to clarify is to bomb a society targeting him on account of the political nature of the article and again it's not my place to adjudicate his claim here but i do want to point out to the court that when the bomb a society st threatened him that happened before he published his article they went to his home in november of and sixteen and according to his testimony they said to him your the one responsible for noumenal that was his girlfriend not accepting our culture and you should stop if you don't stop we will kill you so they didn't say anything to him in november that was of a political nature maybe they were targeting him on account of his political opinions on the other hand i'm sure mr j lo's good counsel is going to know they came back the following month after he published his article and there were more people they had sticks and rocks we just don't know this is an issue for the agency to resolve in the  noted the case has to be reminded anyways of the b s a the cortney not actually reach this issue it's entirely possible he might be granted asylum or withholding over move all just based upon a well founded fear of future persecution but to the extent the court which it wishes to reach it we maintain that to be correctly held that what he experienced did not rise to the level of past persecution so on this topic i want to begin by noting that the past persecution issues it's analytically distinct from the well founded fear of future persecution when we're looking at a well founded fear we take all of the evidence of does your honor so for him to establish past persecution he needs to prove three things st that he experienced extreme harm that it was on account of a protected ground and by the government or a group the government is unable or unwilling to control so those last two elements are still in play what we're only talking about here is did is what he experienced is that in another self sufficient sleaze severe enough to be characterized as persecution and the b i a correctly held it was not he was threatened on two occasions the st was in november two thousand and sixteen before his article was published five women came to the house as i just said i don't believe in that practice i'm going to investigate and expose what you were doing and he closed the door and went back into his house and we paid them no more attention in fact he even continued on with his investigations and his journalism it did not change his behavior and how he lived it all it was not until december th and event where he did not personally experience he was not at the home that's when people came back several people armed with rocks and sticks they came looking for him and said that when they find it if they were to find him they were to kill him although that's unfortunate for sure and although that is relevant to his claim of a well partly it's a grisly business but this is this is what we have here we look for some sort of some sort of a beating a roughing up of the person in addition to the threats in tomorrow gomez that was he was that man was threatened over the course of a year by the fark and it wasn't just the threats he had to leave his home he and his family moved to another home and then the four count him in another hole and then he had to send his family to the united states and then he had to go live on a military base for protection separated from his wife and children because there wasn't any housing for her so it's not the applicant's decision to leave the country that is the persecution it's the offense that c the st instance is the bondo society group that the government is unable or unwilling to control are they targeting him on account of his political opinions and to the extent the court reaches the past persecution issue you couple of brief points your honor started on the past persecution and the government's claim that this is far less severe than what happened in tamara gomez and in both cases the person was threatened with death and in both cases there was no unless they actually commit robbery rape or murder or whatever of bile and assault we mostly do not say that that is past persecution well i think two  bondo came to his house twice they came it was an armed mob that came to his house and the bondo belonged to a group that is undisputed have a record of violence for good for up going against opponents of female genital mutilation and the fark were definitely a atrocious group that did a lot of horrible things but there are a lot of people they threatened who weren't harmed in this case there's no evidence of anyone who's opposed female genital mutilation in sierra leone who hasn't been harmed by the bond powerful political actors and so we are a little not logically accurate for you suggest that every person who opposes f g am has been persecuted ok that's you have no proof of that that's very wrong i don't have to go that far all have you noticed i have to go to everyone who has spoken out against female genital mutilation that we have evidence of in the record has been harmed by the bondo and that's not just one or two examples we've offered five or six different examples between the preacher who was burned alive the twenty eight year old woman who was bound and gagged by the bondage of the government and many others and then you have the contrary and i'm not saying how would come out i agree with the government on this score but  you do have the contrary evidence where they rescued a young woman well there's no evidence that they actually rescued the woman what it is is the woman after her violence she got away from the bondo she went to the police and complained the police went they didn't initially arrest the woman who caught her and mutilated her but then as soon as the bondo complained and surrounded the police station they let them go but the officer saying it would have gone badly for us if we had released or that showing that the government cannot resist judge said he was at or away one on one and we know what our way to forty eight the what the bondo said going to be my final point judge jones what the what the testimony is that they came to the house on the nd occasion and quote they  said st they come in warned me i should stop and i wrote an article like i'm directly attacked and so the reason for coming the nd time and for seeking to persecute him was because of writing the article that's our way to forty eight if there are no further questions thank you