please court again i'm robert job appearing on behalf of the petitioner to gender saying this is another case where the immigration judge made no finding of past persecution she said that there was no nexus that whatever happened to him it wasn't because of his political opinion on the board they didn't adopt that analysis and instead they assumed as in the second case for purposes of argument that the petitioner had been persecuted on account of  protected ground but in again and analyzing whether this petitioner could relocate safely both the immigration judge and the board focused entirely on the p police which is particularly strange because in this case the the petitioner was never targeted by the punjab police all of his past persecutions downs from attacks by private actors the congress party so it's certainly our perspective that in assessing whether he could safely relocate given the assumption that he was persecuted on account of his political opinion by members of the congress party the the analysis has to be well if he moves to another state and he engages in the same sorts of political activities that got him into trouble in punjab would he be at risk from the congress party or other private actors incredibly however neither the immigration judge nor the board addressed that question they focus entirely on whether the police would engage in some sort of long arm law enforcement and track this individual down to wherever he may relocate for example the immigration judge said only high profile individuals would have any substantial grounds to fear persecution from local authorities and this case when she's referring to local authorities the context makes clear she's talking about the punjab police if they were to relocate to india but that's not the question again the question is would he be in danger of congress party members in another area if he engaged in the same activity the b i a parroted the immigration judges finding and they said that singh was not engaged this is the extent of their analysis singh was not engaged in activities that would implicate him as a high profile member of his party such as to fall within the category of of individuals that the local punjab police would seek out in other parts of the country well that's problematic for a couple different reasons first it's focused entirely on  activities that he previously engaged in the board said that he has not engaged in activities that would implicate him blah blah blah but he testified that he would return to india continue his activities the board completely ignores that but more importantly its analysis is entirely focused on whether the punjab police would seek him out in other areas of the country notwithstanding the fact that this gentleman is past persecution claim is predicated entirely on the three attacks he suffered at the hands of the congress party because neither the immigration judge nor the board considered whether he would be able to freely engage in those activities without further attacks at the hands of the congress party this has to go back in some of these cases the government keeps arguing that this is a question of substantial evidence no it's not there's a legal question here and the legal question is is the board has did the board or the immigration judge properly apply the presumption did they consider whether he would face future persecute houston based on the original claim when there's a showing of past persecution once again we have to presume that the individuals at risk according to the regulations based on the original claim the original claim here was that he was attacked by members of the congress party for engaging  activities you have to presume based on the original claim that he would be in danger of further attacks of that sort if he relocates the border and the immigration judge never applied such a presumption they don't even discuss in their internal relocation analysis whether he might be in danger at the hands of the congress party they focus exclusively on the punjab police and so it's our view that we're not weighing the evidence here we're we're suggesting that the board in the immigration judge committed legal error in this case and all these other cases by not properly applying the presumption either they didn't even decide whether there was past persecution as in the first case  or if they did they didn't analyze the presumption based on the original claim as the regulations dollar so based on what you said in the earlier cases it sounds like obviously from your perspective to be aired because they didn't analyze persecution at the hands of the congress party they focused on the police who were not involved at all but carrying your analogy further though they would not have to analyze the role of the police at all him here's how the regulations set out the presumption they say that a victim of past persecution shall be presumed to have a well founded fear of future persecution on the basis of the original claim and then it goes on to explain however if the applicant's fear of future persecution is unrelated to the past persecution then the applicant bears the burden of establishing that the fear is well founded so the question is whether the threat in the area of relocation is unrelated to the past persecution and he would have to part of his case indicate why i was concerned about the police right well if you look at the case that i submitted last week in a twenty eight a letter matter of eighty in that case what they interpret the basis of the original claim as meaning on the same statutory grounds so if he was persecuted in pu to protect him from unless the claim is unrelated so for example in matter of and i may in that case for example the guy was persecuted because he was opposed to the communist government in afghanistan that was in power he was he was persecuted out on account of political opinion but then when by the time his case went to the board that the communist had been overthrown and the taliban was in power and he was expressing a fear of the taliban and there they said well now this is a different it's not related to your anti communism it's related to a different kind of political or ethnic claim that's the analysis that the judge had doing gauge it but in none of these cases did they engage in that analysis they either didn't assess whether there's past persecution or they did they never characterized exactly what the original claim was or they never assess whether or not the harm that this person might face in the perhaps by implication the state police but he claims that the police were involved in any persecution of this particular petitioner it was just members of the congress party and the members of the congress party is role was not analyze it all by the be why is he wrong he's wrong your honor because although he was beaten by the congress party members his claim before the immigration judge and the board was that he these the police the the the police are controlled by congress party members and so when he or if if he lives outside in this substantially better location it's the police who will be able to find him because when he has to register for tenant verification drives or find a job the police will send back his records to his village and that is how he will come to the attention so you're coming at this in the opposite way that he does but you get there in the same way he's saying yeah the congress party was involved but they also had to go into account the police because they're part of the same issue and over it if you're going to be persecuted by anybody they have to take that into account and the police could have been involved you're saying the same thing only the opposite direction they didn't specifically talk about the congress party they talked about the police but they're all part of one package because they were going to persecute him is that correct that is correct and evidence admitted by d h as shows that again it's in order for mr singh to come to the attention of these other police living outside punjab he would have to be a high profile militant or a high profile leader in order for the police but what about the members of the congress party when they're all they were all over the place probably still are not as much in power but they're still all over the place yes i'm somebody an uncle of somebody that lives and some other part of india and they said there's this guy that was over here before and he was raising all kinds of again and we understand he's over your way take care of it wife why shouldn't that be an issue because in the country  one way that the agency or the d h s s rebutted the presumption by the minute you have the burden to show this past persecution that you've satisfied that he's not going to be  ed in the future by relocating that's clear and has to be reasonable in this particular case your opponent has said the reason for the attack was a member of the congress party not the police attacked him you're now saying that by looking at whether or not he's the hired private high profile terrorist which the police would look at based on the country record is enough to respond to the concept that members of the congress party would not attack the very absence of evidence basically was evidence so your honor my answer just to clarify would be two fold in that one his claim was that he would be reached or he would not be unable to relocate one because these congress party members control the police and that's why that was the claim that here to created before the agency and so that's why the agency examined the police and their long imo you are relying upon his statement that the congress party controlled basically they were one of the same is apparently what he's saying and so he's saying that when he relocates he will and be unable to find a job or find an apartment because when he does so wherever he is whatever jurisdiction they will they will go back to his to his hometown in punjab which is controlled by these poor congress party members and that's how they will supply the information that what you what your reference and the record that you're best evidence that the congress party controls the police are the congress party basically while you're at page one fifty one fifty one when he's asked at that point he's living in a different state and he's asked who is it that he fares on page one fifty  one he says anywhere i would have gone to work i would have gone to ask for a job and first to find out from the local police station from i was working and then judged as well why did that matter and then the mr singh says because once i've gone to this local police station  they would have to then take the report back to his his his local police station in punjab and that's how he would be found and that's why he faris it's pretty unrealistic probably to think that he goes to some place else in some other place in india that the punjab police are going to go after him i mean that's what you're focused on but is that all that he focused on i mean the issue really is whether some someone else whether it's the government has the burden of proof of showing that the congress party or the central police or the police or some other state wouldn't go that the department of homeland security supplied is in the u is in the country ports where it says that generally individuals may criticize the government publicly or privately with our prize all at one eighty three in the record at page one eighty nine again it states that the law provides for freedom of internal movement and the government generally generally respects these rights a page two hundred thirty six in the record it states that individual or individuals fair is a local police and the vigil in the individual is not of interest to the central authorities that relocation is feasible and would not be a problem again at two hundred thirty six in the record that punjabi sikhs are evil to relocate and that there sikh communities all over india to thirty six of the record again internal relocation to escape the attention of local police in their home country would not be unduly harsh the police force have neither the resources nor the language abilities to perform background checks on people arriving from other parts of india there's no system of registration for citizens often people have no identity cards it's in the record again that a lot of times these police departments or offices keep their ledgers in handwritten form and so it would be virtually a he said impossible or very difficult if somebody or if the police in the local area were to confirm an identity they just don't have the infrastructure or the resources to do sell all their tunes to me to go to what happened in the past the issue is how they would react to he's carrying out the same activities in the future yes your honor and so the agency did know that he would be able to that his claim in this is page three of the board decision that he wouldn't that he is they say he was not engaged in activities that would implicate him as a high profile member of his party such as to fall within the category of individuals that the local local police would seek out in other parts of india and the immigration and so that plus like i mentioned in these other instances in the records are talking about a forward a forward looking fair they're saying that in the punjab police again because that's that's his fairy on our he's saying that if he's able if  look at some he's not he's not able to relocate because when he moves outside the point job they will get in touch or contact the his local police and job and that is how they would find him  even though he was attacked just by members of the congress party he expressed the fear that when he went to look for work outside the punjab he would have to register with the police that the police there would contact the police and put in job to find out about him and the people basically the congress party would then know because they were only exactly is that that's his claim and i see my time is up your honor but just again to show just if i meet just repeat the point again that there's no there the the reports or the country evidence reports show that there's no infrastructure that the put that the police the central authorities will only do so if somebody is a high profile  expect him to return to india and to be forced to live in a state of hiding merely to avoid detection by the congress party or the police not the punjab police or the police who do the party's bidding he clearly raise the issue of whether he'd be harmed by the congress party it's just that neither the immigration judge nor the board addressed it all right thanks to both of you for your argument investigation the case