Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-04-01155/USCOURTS-ca8-04-01155-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
John Ashcroft
Respondent
Patience Njowe Esaka
Petitioner

Document Text:

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 04-1155

___________

Patience Njowe Esaka, * 

* 

Petitioner, * 

* Petition for Review of an Order of

v. * the Board of Immigration Appeals.

* 

John Ashcroft, Attorney General * 

of the United States, * 

* 

Respondent. *

___________

Submitted: November 17, 2004

Filed: February 16, 2005 

___________

Before SMITH, BEAM, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

SMITH, Circuit Judge.

Patience Njowe Esaka seeks review of an order by the Board of Immigration

Appeals (BIA) affirming an Immigration Judge's (IJ) denial of her application for

asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against

Torture. We deny the petition for review.

I. Background

Patience Njowe Esaka was born on October 1, 1969, in Muyuka Cameroon. In

Cameroon, people fall within one of two linguistic populations: English speaking

persons referred to as Anglophones, and French speaking persons referred to as

Appellate Case: 04-1155 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/16/2005 Entry ID: 1868303 
-2-

Francophones. Esaka and her family are Anglophones. Esaka began high school in

1986 at a government run school in Limbe, Cameroon. She claimed that while in high

school she, along with other students, opposed the rule of Cameroon President Paul

Biya. Esaka's opposition included protesting President Biya's alleged discrimination

against, and persecution of, Anglophone students. Esaka claimed to have attended her

first anti-government demonstration during her first year of high school where she

and other demonstrators protested government tuition increases. The government

responded by arresting several students and using police to disperse the crowd. Esaka

avoided arrest. 

Then in February 1987, Esaka protested against the government while

preparing for a Youth Day celebration. Students gathered at school in the early

morning to sing the Cameroon National Anthem. On one occasion, Esaka, along with

other students, sang the Nigerian National Anthem in defiance of President Biya's

government. School administrators punished the defiant students by assigning them

to cut grass instead of attending class the following day. Instead of cutting grass,

however, Esaka and other protestors initiated a demonstration that required police

intervention. 

According to Esaka, several students were trampled to death in the ensuing

chaos. She claimed that she was arrested for disturbing the peace and taken, along

with other students, to a detention camp outside of Limbe. While in detention, Esaka

claimed that she was forced to sleep on the floor and given no food or water during

her first day. In addition, she claimed that she was beaten with a bamboo cane and a

belt, and kicked several times. On the third day, Esaka and a group of her friends

escaped by tying together their shirts and bras and using them to scale the detention

wall. During her escape, Esaka cut her leg on the barbed wire that topped the

detention wall. Esaka asserted she then walked fifty miles back to her home in Limbe.

Appellate Case: 04-1155 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/16/2005 Entry ID: 1868303 
-3-

Although Esaka stated she feared for her life, she nonetheless returned to

school the following day after receiving a statement from President Biya's

government indicating that those who did not return would suffer further sanctions.

When she returned to school, Esaka noticed that several of her classmates were

curiously absent. Esaka heard reports that some students were forcibly removed from

their homes by the Cameroon military. Due to the instability in the country, Esaka

fled Cameroon with her brother to pursue her studies in the United States.

In 1987, Esaka was granted entry into the United States as a nonimmigrant

student and soon joined the Cameroon Student Association (CAMSA). As a member

of CAMSA, Esaka claimed to have participated in various anti-government

demonstrations in the United States and asserted that President Biya's government

had declared CAMSA a subversive group. Furthermore, Esaka asserted that President

Biya issued warrants for the arrest of all CAMSA members and arrested, imprisoned,

tortured, and/or killed many students upon their return to Cameroon. 

While in the United States, Esaka also joined the Social Democratic Front

(SDF) and participated in its meetings and paid dues until 1995. According to Esaka,

her parents' government benefits were cut and their pay withheld in 1988 as the

economic situation in Cameroon worsened. Esaka claimed that she discontinued her

studies and sought employment without the permission of the United States

Government because she could no longer afford to pay tuition.

In addition to her claimed personal persecution, Esaka asserted that members

of her family suffered political persecution in her absence. Specifically, she alleged

that President Biya's government summarily shot and killed two of her cousins during

a protest in 1991. Esaka's mother produced death certificates of Esaka's deceased

cousins from Cameroon. However, in response, the government produced evidence

showing the certificates to be fakes. According to Esaka, one of her uncles, a leader

in the SDF, was frequently arrested, had his businesses burned down by the

Appellate Case: 04-1155 Page: 3 Date Filed: 02/16/2005 Entry ID: 1868303 
-4-

government, suffered beatings to the soles of his feet, and eventually went into

hiding. Another uncle, an active member of the SDF, was similarly arrested, beaten,

and tortured before he also went into hiding. In 1998, Esaka's father returned to

Cameroon. Esaka's mother returned to Cameroon some time later.

On January 22, 1991, proceedings for deportation against Esaka commenced.

An order to show cause was filed, charging Esaka with deportability for failing to

maintain her student status and obtaining employment in the United States without

permission. Esaka failed to appear at her hearing and was ordered deported in

absentia. On February 18, 1992, Esaka filed an administrative asylum application

with the Immigration and Naturalization Service and appeared for an asylum hearing

on April 24, 1996. At the hearing, Esaka was arrested under the prior order of

deportation. However, her deportation was stayed and the case reopened.

At a master calendar hearing on July 29, 1997, Esaka, represented by counsel,

conceded her deportability. Nonetheless, Esaka sought asylum, withholding of

removal, suspension of deportation, and voluntary departure. An IJ conducted a

hearing wherein Esaka submitted evidence. The IJ denied Esaka asylum, withholding,

and suspension, but granted her voluntary departure. Esaka appealed the decision to

the BIA, which summarily denied her relief and ordered deportation or voluntary

departure. Esaka then filed the instant action as a petition for review. 

II. Discussion 

The BIA adopted the IJ's adverse credibility finding and ruled that Esaka failed

to meet her burden of proof. When the BIA summarily adopts an IJ's decision without

adding further reasoning, we limit our review to the decision produced by the IJ. See

Hassanein v. Ashcroft, 380 F.3d 324, 327–28 (8th Cir. 2004). 

Appellate Case: 04-1155 Page: 4 Date Filed: 02/16/2005 Entry ID: 1868303 
-5-

A. Adverse Credibility Finding

The thrust of Esaka's argument is that the IJ improperly determined her

credibility. We defer to an IJ's negative credibility finding where it is "supported by

a specific, cogent reason for disbelief." Hassanein, 380 F.3d at 327–28. "[B]ecause

the [IJ] is in the best position to evaluate an alien's testimony, his or her credibility

determinations are to be given much weight." See Perinpanathan v. I.N.S., 310 F.3d

594, 597 (8th Cir. 2002) (citing Estrada v. I.N.S., 775 F.2d 1018, 1021 (9th

Cir.1985)). 

 The IJ first noted that Esaka resorted to misrepresentation when she considered

it to be in her interest to do so. Specifically, she misrepresented her immigration

status to employers in order to gain unauthorized employment. The IJ then examined

Esaka's historical account of her persecution in Cameroon. The IJ noted discrepancies

between Esaka's hearing testimony and her written application for asylum. In her

application for asylum, she failed to mention that she had been beaten while detained.

In Esaka's later testimony, however, she claimed to have been beaten with a bamboo

cane and a belt, and kicked several times. Esaka explained that the discrepancy arose

out of the translation of her handwritten statement into a typed statement. The IJ

found the explanation "shaky" remarking that she signed the type-written document

and was educated in the English language. The IJ then turned to Esaka's explanation

of her detention and escape after a purported arrest for protesting President Biya's

government. The IJ disbelieved Esaka's claim that she escaped from a guarded

detention facility by climbing over barbed wire with ropes made from T-shirts and

bras. The IJ was particularly critical of Esaka's claim that her escape was not

hampered by the guards. The IJ added that Esaka's stories changed and that she gave

different descriptions of the wall she escaped over.

Appellate Case: 04-1155 Page: 5 Date Filed: 02/16/2005 Entry ID: 1868303 
1

Esaka contends that the IJ violated her due process rights by allowing the

government to submit evidence that the death certificates provided were fraudulent.

Esaka failed, however, to make this argument to the BIA. We lack jurisdiction to hear

a claim that an alien fails to raise before the BIA in the first instance. Gebremaria v.

Ashcroft, 378 F.3d 734, 736 n.4 (8th Cir. 2004). 

-6-

The IJ found "most damaging" Esaka's submission of fake death certificates for

her cousins.1

 After receiving the death certificates of Esaka's two cousins, the

government sought to authenticate the documents by having the United States

Embassy in Yaounde conduct an investigation. That investigation revealed that the

death certificates were not authentic. In addition, the court noted that the death

certificates were obtained by Esaka's mother who was formerly employed at the

hospital purportedly issuing the certificates. The IJ noted inconsistencies in Esaka's

mother's account of how she received the death certificates that further cast doubt on

their authenticity. 

An immigration judge can base a credibility determination on the lack of

corroborating evidence if the judge also encounters inconsistencies in testimony,

contradictory evidence, or inherently improbable testimony. Zewdie v. Ashcroft, 381

F.3d 804, 808 (8th Cir. 2004). In this case, Esaka's evidence suffered from

inconsistencies. For example, her testimony about the circumstances of her departure

were inconsistent and not credibly explained. In addition, the death certificates used

to support her family persecution claims were determined to be fake and there were

inconsistencies regarding the origin of the fake documents. The IJ, who watched

Esaka give her testimony, was within his discretion to disbelieve her escape account

given the improbabilities of its details. 

Esaka points this court to Zewdie, 381 F.3d at 809, where we explained that as

long as an "applicant's testimony is generally consistent, rational, and believable,"

inconsistencies in the testimony "need not be fatal to credibility, especially if the

Appellate Case: 04-1155 Page: 6 Date Filed: 02/16/2005 Entry ID: 1868303 
-7-

errors are relatively minor and isolated." (quotations omitted). In Zewdie, we

explained that a petitioner's failure to mention beatings to an asylum officer or 

indicate them on her asylum application should not be conclusive as to her credibility,

given the obvious translation difficulties revealed in the record. Id. In this case,

however, there is no issue of translation difficulties; rather, it is clear that as an

Anglophone, Esaka is educated in the English language. Likewise, in Hassanein v.

Ashcroft, 380 F.3d 324 (8th Cir. 2004), we upheld an adverse credibility finding

where the petitioner lied several times in connection with an application for

adjustment of status, misrepresented to the Immigration and Naturalization Service

the death of his father, and gave testimony regarding membership in the Socialist

Labor Party that was inconsistent with a specific question asked on his application.

Id. Here, Esaka misrepresented her immigration status to gain unlawful employment,

misrepresented the death of her two cousins, and gave testimony of persecution that

was inconsistent with her application for asylum. 

Inconsistencies or omissions in an asylum application that relate to the basis

of persecution are not minor but are at "the heart of the asylum claim." Kondakova

v. Ashcroft, 383 F.3d 792, 796 (8th Cir 2004) (citations omitted). In Esaka's asylum

application, she left out the fact that she had been beaten while she was detained.

Esaka's claim of asylum is predicated on the fact that she was beaten and it clearly

relates to the "heart of her asylum claim." We hold that the IJ made the adverse

credibility findings based on specific, cogent reasons. 

Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, the attorney general has the

discretion to grant asylum to a refugee, defined as a person who is unable or

unwilling to return home "because of persecution or a well-founded fear of

persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a political social

group, or political opinion." 8 U.S.C. §§ 1158(b)(1), 1101(a)(42)(A). "In most cases,

the critical inquiry is whether the applicant has a well-founded fear of future

persecution upon return to his or her country." Perinpanathan v. I.N.S., 310 F.3d 594,

Appellate Case: 04-1155 Page: 7 Date Filed: 02/16/2005 Entry ID: 1868303 
-8-

597–98 (8th Cir. 2002) (citation omitted). The applicant must demonstrate a fear that

is subjectively genuine and objectively reasonable. Id. For an alien's fear of

persecution to be objectively reasonable, the fear must have basis in reality and must

be neither irrational nor so speculative or general as to lack credibility. 8 U.S.C. §

1101(a)(42)(A). "The applicant is entitled to a presumption of a well-founded fear of

future persecution if past persecution is established, and the burden then shifts to the

INS 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 wellfounded fear of being persecuted if he or she were to return.'" Id. (citing Cigaran v.

Heston, 159 F.3d 355, 357 (8th Cir.1998)). Esaka must demonstrate that her evidence

"was so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could fail to find the requisite fear

of persecution." I.N.S. v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 483-84 (1992).

 Esaka failed to meet her burden of proof because the IJ found her asylum

claims lacked credibility. When Esaka failed to demonstrate that she was eligible for

asylum, she consequently also failed to meet the higher burden of proof required for

obtaining withholding of removal. Krasnopivtsev v. Ashcroft, 382 F.3d 832 (8th Cir.

2004).

B. Convention Against Torture 

Esaka also seeks reversal on her claim under the United Nations Convention

Against Torture (CAT). Article 3 of the CAT establishes that "it shall be the policy

of the United States not to expel, . . . or otherwise effect the involuntary return of any

person to a country in which there are substantial grounds for believing the person

would be in danger of being subjected to torture." To receive protection under the

CAT, Esaka must show that she is more likely than not to suffer torture if returned to

Cameroon. See 8 C.F.R. § 208.16(c)(2). An IJ's adverse credibility determination and

adverse decisions on asylum and withholding of removal are not determinative of the

CAT claim. Sivakaran v. Ashcroft, 368 F.3d 1028, 1028–1029 (8th Cir. 2004).

However, an IJ can properly consider a claimant's discounted credibility when

Appellate Case: 04-1155 Page: 8 Date Filed: 02/16/2005 Entry ID: 1868303 
-9-

determining whether he or she will be subjected to torture. Hassan v. Ashcroft, 388

F.3d 661, 668 (8th Cir. 2004). A denial of relief under the Convention Against

Torture is reviewed to determine whether the evidence was so compelling that a

reasonable factfinder must have found the alien entitled to relief. Ngure v. Ashcroft,

367 F.3d 975 (8th Cir. 2004).

The code requires the IJ to consider testimony of the applicant as to past

torture, the possibility of relocation within the country, mass violations of human

rights, or other relevant information regarding conditions within the country. 8 C.F.R.

§ 208.16(c)(3). Esaka relies solely on evidence that demonstrates the general dangers

present in Cameroon. She notes newspaper articles indicating that protesters are

beaten, imprisoned, and murdered. She also submitted a summons for her issued in

November of 1987. Torture is defined as an act by which severe pain or suffering,

whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted, and it is an extreme form of

cruel and inhuman treatment; it does not include lesser forms of cruel, inhuman, or

degrading treatment. 8 C.F.R. § 208.18(a)(1), (2). 

Esaka's claim lacks credible evidence of past torture as defined by the code.

Presenting evidence of general conditions is insufficient to establish that one is more

likely than not to suffer torture. Esaka has failed to establish that it is more likely than

not that she would be tortured if she returned to Cameroon. See Zakirov v. Ashcroft,

384 F.3d 541, 547 (8th Cir. 2004).

For the foregoing reasons, we deny Esaka's petition for review.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 04-1155 Page: 9 Date Filed: 02/16/2005 Entry ID: 1868303