Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-05-02084/USCOURTS-ca8-05-02084-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Alberto Gonzales
Respondent
Hafza H. Hassan
Petitioner

Document Text:

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 05-2084

___________

Hafza H. Hassan, * 

* 

Petitioner, * 

* Petition for Review of a

v. * Final Decision of the Board 

* of Immigration Appeals.

Alberto Gonzales, Attorney General *

of the United States, * 

* 

Respondent. *

___________

Submitted: February 12, 2007

 Filed: May 7, 2007

___________

Before WOLLMAN, SMITH, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

SMITH, Circuit Judge.

Hafza H. Hassan, a native and citizen of Somalia, petitions for review of an

order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirming an immigration judge's

(IJ) denial of her application for asylum. We grant the petition and remand the case

to the BIA for further proceedings.

I. Background

Hassan entered the United States in 1997. That same year, she applied for

asylum in Atlanta, Georgia, claiming that if returned to Somalia, her interclan

marriage to Abdullah Mohamed Kulmiye, a member of the Midgan tribe, would

Appellate Case: 05-2084 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/07/2007 Entry ID: 3306593
-2-

subject her to persecution by members of her own clan, the Hawiye. The IJ rejected

this claim but granted Hassan asylum after concluding, sua sponte, that if Hassan were

returned, her American-born daughters would be forced to move to Somalia and

undergo female genital mutilation (FGM). The government appealed and the BIA

remanded for further factual findings.

On remand, venue was changed to Minnesota, where Hassan petitioned for

asylum stating three grounds: (1) her interclan marriage to Kulmiye would subject her

to persecution; (2) her own FGM experience entitled her to asylum and (3) her

daughters would be subject to FGM if they returned with her. To support her FGM

claim, Hassan produced a letter from a physician asserting that Hassan had undergone

FGM; her own testimony detailing her FGM experience at age six; and a Department

of State report noting that 98% of women in Somalia had undergone FGM.

The IJ concluded that (1) her interclan marriage claim lacked credibility; (2)

Hassan had undergone FGM but was not entitled to asylum based upon her

experience; and (3) if Hassan were returned, her daughters could remain in the United

States with Kulmiye, their father and a United States asylee. The BIA affirmed.

Hassan appeals her two FGM-based asylum claims.

II. Discussion

We review de novo the BIA's conclusions of law but give substantial deference

to its interpretations of statutes and regulations. Habtemicael v. Ashcroft, 370 F.3d

774, 779 (8th Cir. 2004). A denial of asylum is reviewed for abuse of discretion;

underlying factual findings are reviewed for substantial support in the record.

Manivong v. Dist. Dir., United States Dep't of Justice INS, 164 F.3d 432, 433 (8th Cir.

1999). An IJ's factual determinations must be upheld if supported by reasonable,

substantial, and probative evidence on the record considered as a whole. Tang v. INS,

223 F.3d 713, 718 (8th Cir. 2000). "[This] standard is a deferential one, requiring a

reviewing court to uphold a denial of asylum unless an alien demonstrates that the

Appellate Case: 05-2084 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/07/2007 Entry ID: 3306593
-3-

evidence he presented was so compelling that no reasonable fact finder could fail to

find the requisite fear of persecution." Nyama v. Ashcroft, 357 F.3d 812, 816 (8th Cir.

2004) (internal quotations and citations omitted).

A. Fugitive Disentitlement Doctrine

Preliminarily, we address the government's claim that Hassan has waived her

asylum claim under the fugitive disentitlement doctrine. The BIA permitted Hassan

to depart voluntarily from the United States. She did so within the required 30-day

time frame, moving with her children to Canada. From Canada, Hassan requested a

stay of deportation. Because Hassan failed to meet with government officials to

discuss her request, the government asserts that she thus waived her claim. 

The fugitive disentitlement doctrine is an extreme sanction that permits a court

to waive an appellant's right to appeal if the appellant fails to appear before a relevant

tribunal. Degen v. United States, 517 U.S. 820, 828 (1996). Disentitlement serves two

purposes: "[it] punishes those who evade the reach of the law and thus discourages

recourse to flight" and it avoids making judgments that could not be enforced should

the government prevail. Antonio-Martinez v. INS, 317 F.3d 1089, 1091 (9th Cir.

2003).

We decline to apply the doctrine here. Hassan's leaving the country is not

analogous to a fleeing felon avoiding prosecution. Hassan apparently left the country

in compliance with the IJ's and the BIA's order to leave the country within 30 days.

The record does not show Hassan's voluntary departure was an attempt to evade the

reach of the law. Her pursuit of additional legal remedies while in Canada does not

frustrate the execution of our judgment should the government prevail. We therefore

reject the government's waiver argument.

Appellate Case: 05-2084 Page: 3 Date Filed: 05/07/2007 Entry ID: 3306593
1

Experts divide FGM into three categories. The record indicates that Hassan

underwent Type III FGM, a conclusion that is consistent with State Department

reports noting that Type III is the most prevalent form of FGM in Somalia. See Report

on Female Genital Mutilation as Required by Conference Report (H.Rept.106-997)

to Pub.L. 106-429 (Foreign Operations, Export Financing and Related Programs

Appropriations Act, 2001); see also Female Genital Mutilation, Integrating the

Prevention and the Management of the Health Complications into the curricula of

nursing and midwifery. A Teacher's Guide. World Health Organization. (2001).

Type III FGM is by far the most invasive and painful form of the procedure. A

young woman, usually between the ages of four and twelve, is restrained as an old

woman or local barber slices the girl's clitoris, labia minora and labia majora with

knives, razors, scissors, shards of glass or sharp stone. Teachers Guide at 31;

Conference Report at 5. Anaesthesia, especially in rural areas, is rarely given and

-4-

B. Asylum

To obtain asylum, an applicant must demonstrate a well-founded fear of

persecution on account of her race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular

social group, or political opinion. 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42)(A). An asylum applicant

may establish a well-founded fear of persecution by showing that the applicant was

persecuted in the past. Eta-Ndu v. Gonzales, 411 F.3d 977, 983 (8th Cir. 2005). Once

an applicant demonstrates past persecution, she is entitled to a presumption of a

well-founded fear of persecution. 8 C.F.R. § 1208.13(b)(1)."The burden then shifts

to the government to show by a preponderance of the evidence that conditions in the

applicant's country have changed to such an extent that the applicant no longer has a

well founded fear of being persecuted if he or she were to return." Vonhm v. Gonzales,

454 F.3d 825, 828 (8th Cir. 2006).

1. Past Persecution

Hassan contends that she possesses a well-founded fear of persecution based

upon her past FGM experience .The government argues that Hassan failed to prove

that she suffered from past persecution. The government concedes that Hassan has

undergone FGM1

 but avers that this court has never held that a petitioner who has

Appellate Case: 05-2084 Page: 4 Date Filed: 05/07/2007 Entry ID: 3306593
depending upon the sharpness of the instruments and the girl's resistence, the

procedure may take up to 20 minutes to complete. Teachers Guide at 31; Conference

Report at 5. In many instances, the instruments used to perform the procedure are not

sterilized. Conference Report at 5.

Once the cutting has concluded, the old woman or barber will remove the

amputated flesh and stitch the vaginal opening together, "leaving a very small

opening, about the size of a matchstick, to allow for the flow of urine and menstrual

blood." Conference Report at 5. "Thorns may be used for pricking the prepuce and for

holding the labia together." Teachers Guide at 31. To stop the risk of infection, the

wound is "dabbed with anything from alcohol or lemon juice to ash, herb mixtures,

porridge, coconut oil or cow dung. . ." Teachers Guide at 31. For 40 days, the young

woman is immobilized; her legs are bound together from hip to ankle, preventing her

from moving so that scar tissue can form along the mutilated vaginal opening.

Conference Report at 5.

-5-

undergone FGM is entitled to a presumption of past persecution as a matter of law.

The government is correct. However, we now join the growing number of our sister

circuits that have considered this issue and concluded that there is "no doubt that the

range of procedures collectively known as female genital mutilation rises to the level

of persecution within the meaning of our asylum law." Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400

F.3d 785, 795 (9th Cir. 2005); see also Barry v. Gonzales, 445 F.3d 741, 745 (4th Cir.

2006) (holding that "we recognize as an initial matter that FGM constitutes

persecution within the meaning of the Immigration and Nationality Act"); Niang v.

Gonzales, 422 F.3d 1187, 1197 (10th Cir. 2005) (holding that "FGM constitutes

persecution, whether for the purpose of determining past persecution or the purpose

of determining well-founded fear of persecution"); Abay v. Ashcroft, 368 F.3d 634,

638 (6th Cir. 2004) (holding that "[f]orced female genital mutilation involves the

infliction of grave harm constituting persecution . . . that can form the basis of a

successful claim for asylum"); Balogun v. Ashcroft, 374 F.3d 492, 499 (7th Cir. 2004)

Appellate Case: 05-2084 Page: 5 Date Filed: 05/07/2007 Entry ID: 3306593
-6-

(stating that "[t]he Agency does not dispute, at least with any force, that the type of

FGM which Ms. Balogun has alleged is 'persecution"'). 

In addition to showing past persecution, Hassan must also show that this

persecution is "on account of" her membership in one of five protected categories.

Hassan argues that her Somali persecution is on account of her gender, a particular

social group. In Safaie v. INS, 25 F.3d 636 (8th Cir. 1994), we rejected a petitioner's

argument that the Iranian government's oppression of women was sufficient to make

Iranian women a recognized particular social group. We held that such a

categorization was "overbroad, because no factfinder could reasonably conclude that

all Iranian women had a well-founded fear of persecution based solely on their

gender." Id. at 640. Here, however, we hold that a factfinder could reasonably

conclude that all Somali females have a well-founded fear of persecution based solely

on gender given the prevalence of FGM. As the Ninth Circuit noted in Mohammed,

"there is little question that genital mutilation occurs to a particular individual because

she is a female. That is, possession of the immutable trait of being female is a

motivating factor–if not a but-for cause-of the persecution. "Mohammed, 400 F.3d at

797. We, therefore, conclude that Hassan was persecuted on account of her

membership in a particular social group, Somali females. 

The BIA acknowledged, and the government does not dispute, that Hassan, a

Somali woman, underwent FGM as a child. Accordingly, Hassan has satisfied her

burden of showing that she suffered previous persecution and is entitled to the

presumption that she has a well-founded fear of future persecution. 

2. Future Persecution

Hassan's establishment of past persecution creates a presumption that she also

possesses a well-founded fear of future persecution. The proof burden should have

then shifted to the government to show by a preponderance of the evidence that

conditions in Somalia have changed to such an extent that Hassan's well-founded fear

Appellate Case: 05-2084 Page: 6 Date Filed: 05/07/2007 Entry ID: 3306593
2

We note that, in this case, the government faces a significant challenge. The

record before us indicates that Somali women face severe hardships. The 2005

Somalian Report on Human Rights Practices prepared by the Department of State

notes that "societal discrimination and violence against women and widespread abuse

of children continued to be serious problems." The report states that "[l]aws

prohibiting rape exist; however, they generally were not enforced. There were no laws

-7-

of future persecution if returned to Somalia has ceased. The record is clear that the

BIA failed to shift the burden of proof from Hassan to the government. 

The government, however, argues that the case should not be remanded,

because the record establishes that Hassan does not have well-founded fear of

persecution as she cannot be subjected to FGM a second time. In essence, the

government argues that FGM cannot be done to her again so she should not be afraid.

The government's argument erroneously assumes that FGM is the only form of

persecution in Somalia and that having undergone the procedure, Hassan, as a Somali

woman, is no longer at risk of other prevalent forms of persecution. Ramirez Rivas v.

INS, 899 F.2d 864, 869–70 (9th Cir. 1990). We have never held that a petitioner must

fear the repetition of the exact harm that she has suffered in the past. Our definition

of persecution is not that narrow. Pavlovich v. Gonzales, 476 F.3d 613, 616 (8th Cir.

2007) (defining persecution as "the infliction or threat of death, torture, or injury to

one's person or freedom on account of a statutorily protected ground"). 

The government also argues that the IJ's adverse credibility determination

adequately rebuts Hassan's past persecution. However, the IJ's credibility findings

only addressed Hassan's interclan marriage claim. Hassan's FGM evidence, which

included a letter from a physician, the State Department Report, and her own

testimony, were unrebutted. On remand, the government must prove, by a

preponderance of the evidence, that conditions in Somalia have changed to such an

extent that Hassan no longer has a well-founded fear of the infliction or threat of

death, torture, or injury to her person or freedom.2

Appellate Case: 05-2084 Page: 7 Date Filed: 05/07/2007 Entry ID: 3306593
against spousal rape. There were no reports that rape cases were prosecuted during the

year." Id. "Police and militia members raped women, and rape was commonly

practiced in inter-clan conflicts." Id. "In Somaliland there was an increase in incidents

of gang rape in urban areas, primarily by youth gangs, members of police forces and

male students." Id. See also Hernandez-Montiel v. INS, 225 F.3d 1084, 1097–98 (9th

Cir. 2000) (holding that rape by police officers that is ignored by the government

constitutes persecution sufficient to establish asylum).

-8-

C. Derivative Asylum

Hassan also argues that she is entitled to asylum based upon her well-founded

fear that her daughters would be persecuted. The IJ rejected Hassan's argument

without analysis believing that Hassan's children could remain in the United States

with their father Kulmiye. After the IJ issued his decision, the government reopened

Kulmiye's asylum proceedings and terminated his asylum status. He too was ordered

removed to Somalia. Given the falsity of the IJ's assumption, we remand Hassan's

derivative asylum claim for consideration by the BIA on its merits. INS v. Orlando

Ventura, 537 U.S. 12 (2002); Gonzales v. Thomas, 547 U.S. 183 (2006).

III. Conclusion

For the foregoing reasons, we grant the petition for review and remand the

case to the BIA for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 05-2084 Page: 8 Date Filed: 05/07/2007 Entry ID: 3306593