2005 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 8-24-2005 

# T ahira j v . Atty Ge n U SA P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 04-1521

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2005 D e c i sion s b y an authori z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " T ahir a j v . Atty Ge n U SA" (2005). 2005 D e cisio n s . P ape r 655. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005/655A t t orneyG ener al A l bert o G onzal es has been s ubs t i tut ed forform erA t t orneyG ener al * J o h n A s h c ro f

t, th e o ri g in a l r e s p o n d e n t in th is c a s e , p u rs u a n t to F e d . R . A p p . P . 4 3 (c ). NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT N o. 04- 1521 A R D IA N T A H IR A J, Pet i t i oner

v. A LB E RT O G ONZA LE S , ATTO RN EY * GEN ERA L OF THE U NI TED STATES R es pondent P ET I TI ON FOR RE VI EW OF AN ORDER OF TH E BO AR D O F I M M I GR ATI ON APPEALS

A gencyN o. A 79- 329- 844 A r gued: A pr i l 4, 2005 B efor e: B A R R Y , A M B R O , and C O W E N , C i r cui tJ udges

( O pi ni on Fi l ed: A ugus t24, 2005)2

M ar co Pi gnone, I I I , E s q. ( A r gued) W i l s on & Pi gnone 117 Sout h 17 St r eet

th Sui t e 908 Phi l adel phi a, PA 19103 C ouns el forPet i t i oner St acyS. Paddack, E s q. ( A r gued) A nthonyW . N orw ood, E s q. D ougl as E . G i ns bur g, E s q. J ohn D . W i l l i ams, E s q. U ni t ed St at es D epart m entof J us t i ce O ffi ce of I m m i gr at i on L i t i gat i on B en Fr ankl i n St at i on P. O . B ox 878 W as hi ngt on, D . C . 20044 C ouns el forR es pondent

OP I NI ON

B A R R Y , C i r cui tJ udge A rdian T ah ir aj, a n ati v e a n d cit izen o f A lban ia, p eti ti o n s fo r rev iew o f a F eb rua ry 9, 2004 fi nal or derof the B oar d of I m m i gr at i on A ppeal s ( “B I A ”) . T he B I A di s m i s s ed T ah ir aj’s ap p ea l from an Im m igrati o n Ju d g e’s (“IJ” ) de cisi o n d en y ing T ah ir aj’s appl i cat i ons foras y l um , w i thhol di ng of r emoval , and pr ot ect i on underthe C onvent i on A g a in st T o rtu re . T h e B IA a lso d e n ied T a h ira j’s m o tio n to re m a n d th e c a se to a llo w h im t o s ubm i taddi t i onal evi dence . W e have j ur i s di ct i on pur s uantt o 8 U . S. C . § 1252( a) , and3

w i l l denythe pet i t i on. I. W e w ill li m it o u r f

a c tu a l d is c u s s io n to th o s e e v e n ts re le v a n t to o u r d e c is io n . T ahi r aj w as born i n A l bani a i n 1970. A ccor di ng t o hi s t es t i m ony , he form al l yj oi ned A l bani a’ s D emocr at i c Partyon A ugus t4, 1994, al though he bec ame an act i ve s uppor t er of thatpartyi n 1990. I n 1990, T ahi r aj part i ci pat ed i n a demonstr at i on i n hi s hom et ow n of Pat os i n s uppor tof a s tudentm ovement . W hen governm entagent s i nt ervened t o end that d e mo n s tr a t i o n , T a h i r a

j wa s s tru c k b ya g o v e rn me n ta g e n ta n d l o s tc o n s c i o u s n e s s . He t es t i fi ed thathe w as arr es t ed and br oughtt o a pol i ce s t at i on, w her e he w as i nt err ogat ed and mi s tr eat ed byboth a pol i ce of fi cerand a mem berof the Si gur i m i , A l bani a’ s s ecr et pol i ce. T ahi r aj al s o cl ai m ed that , begi nni ng w i th the M ar ch 22, 1992 el ect i on, he s erved as a ca m pai gn w or kerforthe D emocr at i c Party . H e w r ot e pr opaganda , w or ked on the campai gn t eam of a partyoffi ci al , and s erved as an el ect i on obs erver . W hi l e ca m pai gni ng fo r th e Ju n e 2 9 , 1 9 9 7 elec ti o n s, T ah ir aj asse rt ed , h e a n d h is co u sin, Z ihn i D eli b ash i, w ere r i di ng i n a ca r avan of

car s behi nd a pol i ce e s cortw hen the ca r avan w as att acke d by m achi ne gun fi r e and D el i bas hi w as s hot . T hough the ca r avan ha d been tr ans por t i ng t he partyoffi ci al t o a meet i ng, i tturned bac k, r eturned the off i ci al t o hi s offi ce, and br ought D e lib a sh i to a h o sp ital. A ccor di ng t o T ahi r aj , he r emai ned ac t i ve i n the D emocr at i c Party , s ervi ng as anT ahi r aj ’ s w i fe, M aj l i nda, and s on ar e now l aw ful perm anentr es i dent s of the U ni t ed 1 S t a t e s , h a v i n g wo n a n i mmi g r a n tv i s a th r o u g h th e Di v e r s i tyVi s a p r o g r a m. 4 el ect i on m oni t orforan O ct ober1, 2000 m ay or al el ect i on. A ft err efus i ng t o cert i fythat e lec tio n b e c a u se o f

v o tin g irre g u lar iti e s, T a h ira j w a s a rre ste d b yth e p o lice a n d a lleg e d ly beat en, thr eat ened, and hel d forone ni ght . T ahi r aj w as agai n arr es t ed bypol i ce on O c to b e r 1 6 , 2 0 0 0 . H e c laim e d th a t o n th is o c c a sio n h e w a s b e a ten a n d h e ld a lo n g w ith otheri ndi vi dual s w ho, l i ke hi m , had pea cef ul l ypr ot es t ed a c el ebr at i on fora form er di ct at or . D ur i ng a t en- hourdet ent i on, the pol i ce c uffe d hi m , ur i nat ed on hi s fac e, and thr eat ened t o ki l l hi m i f he “ t al ked bac k”. U l t i m at el y , T ahi r aj obt ai ned a f ake pa s s por tand fl ed A l bani a on N ovember4, 2 0 0 0 , c la im in g th a t h is lif e w a s in d a n g e r a n d th a t h e w o u ld b e k ille d if h e re tu rn e d . T ahi r aj t es t i fi ed that , aft erhe l eftA l bani a, hi s w i fe r ece i ved s ever al thr eat s aft err efus i ng t o r evea l hi s w her eabout s , i ncl udi ng a thr eatthatthei rs on w oul d be ki dnaped. O n J une 1 25, 2001, T ahi r aj appl i ed foras y l um w i th the form erI m m i gr at i on and N atur al i zat i on S e r v i c e ( “ I NS ” ) . Af

t e rc o n c l u d i n g th a th e h a d f a i l e d t o p r o v e e l i g i b i l i tyf o ra s y l u m, I NS r efe rr ed the ca s e t o t he I J fora hea r i ng. In a th irty -six p a g e o p in io n , in w h ich th e m o st c a re f u l co n sid e ra tio n w a s g iv e n to the i s s ues befor e hi m , the I J deni ed Tahi r aj ’ s appl i cat i on and or der ed hi m r emoved. T he I J s t at ed thatw hi l e he w as noti ncl i ned t o m ake a n adver s e cr edi bi l i tyfi ndi ng, he w as c o n c e rn e d w ith T a h ir a

j’ s f a ilu re to c o rr o b o ra te c e rt a in a s p e c ts o f h is te s tim o n y .5

Speci fi cal l y , the I J obs erved thats t at ement s s ubm i t t ed byboth T ahi r aj and hi s w i fe f ai l ed to m e n tio n th e th re a ts w h ic h w e re a lle g e d ly m a d e to h is w if e a f te r T a h ir a

j le f t A lb a n ia . Th e I J ma d e “ a f

a v o r a b l e c r e d i b i l i tyf

i n d i n g wi th a c a v e a tth a tth e [ I J ] h a s s o me cr edi bi l i tyconce r ns w i th r egar d t o the al l eged thr eat s comm uni cat ed thr ough r es pondent ’ s w i fe. ” A pp. at32- 33. D es pi t e cr edi t i ng m uch of Tahi r aj ’ s acc ount , the I J concl uded thatT ahi r aj ’ s “br i ef det ent i ons ” and a t t endant“mi s tr eatm ent ” i n O ct ober2000 di d nots uppor ta fi ndi ng of p ast p erse cu ti o n an d the d eten ti o n in 1 9 9 0 d id n o t tri g g er the p resu m p ti o n o f f u ture per s ecut i on beca us e “i tw as perpetr at ed bya pr i orr egi m e thati s no l ongeri n pow er . ” I d. at33. T he I J al s o concl uded thatT ahi r aj “has notpr oven thati ti s m or e l i kel ythan not thathe w oul d be t or tur ed byoratthe i ns t i gat i on of orw i th the cons entoracqui es cenc e of a publ i c off

i ci al ” s houl d he r eturn t o A l bani a. I d. at33- 34. I n comi ng t o thi s concl us i on, the IJ c o n side red an d reli ed o n the H u m an R igh ts W atch R ep o rtfo r 20 0 2 an d the C o u n try R e p o rt o n H u m a n R ig h ts P ra c tice s f o r 2 0 0 1 . S e e id . at 3 4 -3 7 . A lth o u g h h e b e liev e d it w as a “r el at i vel ycl os e ca l l , ” the I J found thatT ahi r aj w oul d notbe per s ecut ed bey ond

“ m e re h a ra ss m e n t an d b rie f d e ten tio n s” sh o u ld h e re tu rn to A lb a n ia a n d p a rticip a te in oppos i t i on pol i t i cs . I d. at39. R eturn ing to the issue o f th e c o n ti n u ing threa ts sup p o sed lyrec eive d b yT ah ir aj’s w i fe, the I J not ed thatther e w as no m ent i on of anys uch thr eat s i n T ahi r aj ’ s appl i cat i on foras y l um , i n hi s w i fe’ s l ett er , ori n hi s s w orn s uppl ement al s t at ement , w hi ch, he s t at ed,6

he s ubm i t t ed pr i ort o t he hea r i ng t o pr ovi de “‘ m or e det ai l s about[hi s ] as y l um cl ai m ’ ” and

“‘ t o i nform the C our taboutnew pol i t i cal devel opm ent s i n A l bani a w hi ch [w e] r e r el evant t o [hi s ] as y l um cl ai m . ’ ” I d. at41. H avi ng det erm i ned thatT ahi r aj ’ s t es t i m onyr egar di ng cont i nui ng thr eat s s houl d have be en corr obor at ed, the I J concl uded thathe coul d notgi ve th a t tes tim o n ysig n if

ica n t w e ig h t. O n a p p e a l, th e B IA c o n c lu d e d th a t T a h ira j sh o u ld h a v e c o rro b o ra ted n o t o n lyh is t es t i m onyr egar di ng the cont i nui ng thr eat s m ade t o hi s w i fe, butal s o hi s t es t i m ony r egar di ng hi s tw o arr es t s and det ent i ons i n O ct ober2000. I d. at5 ( ci t i ng A bdul ai v. A s h c ro f t, 2 3 9 F .3 d 5 4 2 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 1 )) . H e w as abl e t o obt ai n a J une 2002 s t at ementfr om hi s w i fe, a J une 2002 “ce r t i fi cat i on” fr om an off i ci al i n the D emocr at i c Party , a J une 2002 decl ar at i on fr om the l eade rof the D emocr at i c Partyi n hi s ar ea unt i l 1994 and a mem berof Par l i amenti n 1996, and t es t i m onyfr om hi s cous i n w ho w a s w o u n d e d in th e 1 9 9 7 sh o o tin g in c id e n t. T h e se a re p e rso n s w h o sh o u ld be fa m i l i ar w i th som e or al l of the essent i al fact s ei ther di rect l yor atl east thr ough otherper s ons . H ear s ayevi dence i s admi s s i bl e i n i m m i gr at i on proceed i ng s. Id . at 5 . T h e B IA a lso c o n c lu d e d th a t in a d d iti o n to h is f a ilu re to c o rro b o ra te th e th re a ts and the O ct ob er 2000 arr est s and d et enti on s, T ahir aj ’s exp l anati on s for fai l i ng t o d o so w er e “unc onvi nci ng”: E ven though he t es t i fi ed thatper s ons have thr eat ened hi s w i fe, and eve n thr eat ened t o ki dnap hi s s on, t o fi nd outw her e he i s , hi s onl yexpl anat i on forthe l ack of

anyr efe r ence t o thi s as w el l as t o the tw o arr es t s and d e te n tio n s b yh is w if

e w a s th a t h e d id n o t a s k h e r t o w ri te th e w h o le s to ry. In a d d iti o n , itm a k e s n o se n se th a t th e D e m o c ra tic P a rtyo f f icia l w o u ld m ent i on the conf

r ont at i on w i th the Soci al i s tPar tym i l i t ant s and the pol i ce dur i ng the 2000 el ect i on, butnegl ectt o m ent i on the s ubs equentarr es tandT he governm entcont ends thatT ahi r aj has w ai ved anycl ai m t o el i gi bi l i tyforas y l um 2 bas ed on pas tper s ecut i on, w i thhol di ng of r emoval , orpr ot ect i on underthe C A T by f a ili n g to ra ise a n yo f

th e se c laim s in h is o p e n in g b rie f. In lig h t o f o u r d isp o sitio n o f

th is cas e, w e dec l i ne t o addr es s thi s i s s ue. 7 det ent i on beca us e he di d notbel i eve i tt o be “i m por t ant . ” Fur therm or e, the r es pondentdi d notcl ai m thatthe mem berof par l i amentdi d notknow about the r es pondent ’ s arr es t s i n 2000, butcl ai m ed thatthe off i ci al w as notas ked to w rite “ f

u rth e r in f

o rm a tio n .” In sh o rt, se v e ra l p e rso n s h a d th e o p p o rtu n ity t o r efe rt o s i gni fi cantevent s i n the r es pondent ’ s l i fe, butfai l ed t o do s o. I d. at6. Fi nal l y , the B I A deni ed Tahi r aj ’ s m ot i on fora r emand t o enabl e the I J t o cons i der an af fi davi tfr om T ahi r aj ’ s w i fe c l ai m i ng thats he had r ece i ved thr eat eni ng, anonym ous lette rs a f ter T a h ira

j lef t A lb a n ia, re a so n in g th a t T a h ira j h a d n o t ad e q u a telye x p lain e d h is fai l ur e t o obt ai n t hi s s t at ementpr i ort o the hea r i ng befor e the I J . T hi s pet i t i on forr evi ew fol l ow ed. II. T h e c ru x o f

T a h ira j’s a rg u m e n t to u s is th a t, giv e n th e IJ’ s f a v o ra b le c re d ib ili ty d e ter m in a tio n , the c o rro b o ra tin g e v id e n c e h e p ro d u c e d w a s s u f f icie n t to su sta in h is bur den of pr oof as t o a w el l - founded f earof futur e per s ecut i on. W e fi nd thi s ar gum ent 2 u n p e rs u a s iv e . In A b d u lai v . A sh cro ft, 2 3 9 F . 3 d 5 4 2 , 5 5 1 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 1 ), w e h eld th at th e B IA m ayr equi r e a c r edi bl e appl i cantt o pr ovi de evi dence corr obor at i ng the s peci fi cs of hi s or hert es t i m onyi f i ti s “‘ r eas onabl e’ t o expec tthe appl i cantt o do s o. ” “[ I ] f i tw oul d be8

r eas onabl e t o expec tcorr obor at i on, then an a ppl i cantw ho nei theri ntr oduces s uch evi dence noroffe r s a s at i s fac t oryexpl anat i on as t o w hyhe ors he ca nnotdo s o m aybe found t o have f

ai l ed t o m eethi s orherbur den of pr oof. ” I d. H ow ever , befor e deny i ng th e a p p l i c a n tr e l i e f

o n th i s g r o u n d , th e B I A m u s tu n d e r t a k e a th r e e - p a r ti n q u i ry: ( 1) an i dent i fi cat i on of the fa ct s forw hi ch i ti s r eas onabl e t o expec t corr obor at i on; ( 2) an i nqui r yas t o w hetherthe appl i canthas pr ovi ded i nform at i on corr obor at i ng the r el evantfac t s ; and, i f he ors he has not , ( 3) an an aly sis of

w h ethe r th e a p p li ca n t has ad eq u atelyex p lai n ed h is or h er f ail u re t o do s o. Id. at 55 4 (qu o tat ion m ark s o m itted) (citi n g In re S -M -J-, 2 1 I. & N . D ec . 7 2 2 (19 9 7 )). H er e, the B I A ci t ed A bdul ai and di s cus s ed ea ch r equi r ement . I ts peci fi ed the p a rticu lar a sp e c ts o f

T a h ira j’s te stim o n yth a t o n e w o u ld re a so n a b lyh a v e e x p e c ted h im to corr obor at e, not ed thatT ahi r aj had notpr ovi ded the r equi s i t e corr obor at i on, and e x p lain e d w h yh is p ro f

f e re d re a so n f

o r n o t p ro v id in g c o rro b o ra tio n w a s in a d e q u a te. T h is cas e i s , ther efor e, di s t i ngui s habl e fr om cas es s uch as M ul anga v. A s hcr oft , 349 F. 3d 123 ( 3d C i r . 2003) , w her e the I J fai l ed t o expl ai n w hatevi dence w oul d r eas onabl ybe e x p e c ted a n d n e g lec ted to p ro v id e th e a p p lica n t w ith a n o p p o rtu n ityto e x p lain its ab sen ce . S ee id. at1 3 6 . S ee also V o ci v. G o n za les, 4 0 9 F . 3 d 6 0 7 , 6 1 7 & n . 7 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 5 ). H aving de t erm i ned that there w as no technical problem w i th the B IA ’s analy si s, w e mustr evi ew i t s concl us i ons . B I A pr ece dentes t abl i s hes thati ti s r eas onabl e t o expec t an appl i cantt o corr obor at e “f act s w hi ch ar e ce ntr al t o hi s orhercl ai m and ea s i l ys ubj ectT a h ira j ar g u e s th a t th e B IA e rre d in re q u irin g h im to c o rro b o ra te h is c laim w ith 3 h ea rsaystat em en ts, b u t i t did n o su ch thing . T h e c lear im p li ca ti o n fro m the B IA ’s s ta te m e n t is th a t h e a rs a yw a s o n e w a yT a h ir a j c o u ld h a v e tr ie d to c o rr o b o ra te h is c la im . 9 t o ver i fi cat i on, ” s uch as “evi dence of [the appl i cant ’ s ] pl ace of bi r th, m edi a ac count s of l ar ge demonstr at i ons , evi dence of a publ i cl yhel d offi ce, ordocument at i on of m edi cal tre a tm e n t.” In re S -M -J- , 2 1 I. & N . D e c . at 7 2 5 . “T h e B o a rd h a s a lso sta ted th a t itis g en era ll yrea so n ab le t o ex p ec t app li ca n ts t o p rod u ce let ters fro m fa m il ym em b ers rem ainin g in the ap p li ca n t’ s h o m e c o u n try . ” A b d u lai , 2 3 9 F . 3 d at 55 4 . “[ A ]n a p p li ca n t’ s abi l i tyt o obt ai n corr obor at i ng evi dence m ayoft en depe nd on the s oci al and pol i t i cal ci r cumst ance s of a gi ven countr y . ” I d. at555 n. 9. T h e O c to b e r 2 0 0 0 a rre sts a n d d e ten tio n s a n d th e a lleg e d th re a ts w e re c e n tra l to T ahi r aj ’ s cl ai m of fe arof futur e per s ecut i on, es peci al l yi n l i ghtof the conc eded i nadequa cyof pr oof of pa s tper s ecut i on. Fur therm or e, the corr obor at i ng evi dence w as eas yt o obt ai n. T ahi r aj as ked hi s w i fe t o w r i t e a s t at ementand, w hol l yapartfr om the fa ct that o n e w o u ld h av e e x p ec ted h er o n h er o w n to lead o ff w ith the th rea ts m ad e to h er, T ahi r aj coul d s i m pl yhave a s ked hert o m ent i on thos e thr eat s and hi s arr es t s and det ent i ons i n O ct ober2000. T he D emocr at i c Partyoffi ci al s coul d al s o have be en as ked t o m ent i on the O ct ober2000 i nci dent s . T ahi r aj ’ s cous i n t es t i fi ed i n det ai l r egar di ng t he J une 1997 s hoot i ng and, agai n, coul d have be en as ked t o t es t i fyas t o the O ct ober2000 i n c i d e n t s , e v e n i f

h i s k n o w l e d g e w a s b a s e d o n h e a r s a y. 3 Fi nal l y , w e agr ee thatT ahi r aj ’ s expl anat i ons as t o w hyhe di d notpr ovi de anyT a h ira j ex p lain s o n lyw h yh e d id n o t o b tain c o rro b o ra tin g e v id e n c e , n o t w h yh e c o u ld 4 n o t. T h e tes t w e u p h e ld in A b d u lai re q u ire s a n a p p lica n t w h o f a ils to p ro d u c e re a so n a b le c o rro b o ra tin g e v id e n c e to e x p lain w h yh e o r sh e “ c a n n o t” d o so , n o t w h yh e o r sh e “ d id n o t” d o so . 2 3 9 F .3 d a t 5 5 1 . In a n ye v e n t, ou r a b ili tyto re v iew T a h ira j’s a rg u m e n t in th is reg ard ap p ea rs t o b e larg elyfo rec lose d b ythe R ea l I D A ct. T h e A ct pro v ides that “[ n ]o c o u rt sh a ll rev e rse a d e ter m in a tio n m a d e b ya f in d e r o f f a c t w ith re sp e c t to th e a v a ilab ili ty o f c o rro b o ra tin g e v id e n c e . . . u n les s th e c o u rt f in d s . . . th a t a r e a so n a b le f in d e r o f f a c t is compel l ed t o concl ude thats uch corr obor at i ng evi dence i s unavai l abl e. ” R eal I D A ctof 2 0 0 5 , § 1 0 1 (e ), P u b . L . N o . 1 0 9 -1 3 , 1 1 9 S ta t. 2 3 1 , 3 0 5 , to b e c o d if ie d a t 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 5 2 (b )( 4 ). W e s e e n o c o m p e llin g re a s o n to re v e rs e a n ys u c h f in d in g s in th is c a s e . 10 corr obor at i on of thes e i nci dent s ar e l es s than convi nci ng. I ti s notenough t o s aythatt he p a rtyo f f icia ls d id n o t d e e m th e se in c id e n ts to b e im p o rta n t en o u g h to in c lu d e . N o r is T a h ira j’s a rg u m e n t th a t itis g e n e ra llyd if f icu lt t o o b tain d e taile d sta tem e n ts f ro m p e o p le out s i de the countr ypart i cul ar l yper s uas i ve, cons i der i ng thathe s ucce s s ful l yobt ai ned s t at ement s fr om thr ee pe opl e s t i l l l i vi ng i n A l bani a. 4 T a h ira j m a k e s m u c h o f

w h a t h e d id p ro d u c e : (1 ) h is p a ss p o rt, (2 ) h is f a m ily c e rtific a te, (3 ) b irth c e rtific a tes f o r h im a n d h is w if

e a n d so n , (4 ) h is D e m o c ra tic P a rty m em b ersh ip ca rd, (5) a c erti fica te fro m the P atos b ran ch o f th e D em o cra ti c P arty , (6) a new s paperart i cl e r efe r enci ng the J une 1997 s hoot i ng, ( 7) t ax document s , ( 8) a dec l ar at i on b ya f o rm er D em o cra ti c P artyo ff ici al st ati n g that T ah ir aj ca m p aign ed w ith h im , (9) a “ce r t i fi cat i on” fr om a D emocr at i c Partyl eade rs t at i ng thatT ahi r aj w as a mem berof the el ect or al comm i s s i on i n O ct ober2000 and thatT ahi r aj w as “conf r ont ed” bypol i ce a nd m ili tan ts b u t “d e f

e n d e d th e v o tes f

o r a f a ir p ro c e ss ,” a n d (1 0 ) h is w if e ’s le tter, p re v io u sly d isc u ss e d . N o n e o f

th is e v id e n c e , h o w e v e r, co rro b o ra tes T a h ira j’s a c c o u n t o f

th e a rre sts11

an d d eten ti o n s in O ctob er 2 0 0 0 o r th e c o n ti n u ing threa ts m ad e to h is fam il y . M o reo v er, bes i des hi s w i fe’ s s t at ementthatT ahi r aj “has even be en hi tand mi s handl ed, ” none of t he evi dence des cr i bes phy s i cal abus e, arr es t , ordet ent i on of anyki nd. I ndeed, even Tahi r aj does notal l ege thathe w as i nj ur ed, m uch l es s thathe s uffe r ed i nj ur i es r equi r i ng m edi cal tr ea tm en t. S ee V o ci, 4 0 9 F . 3 d at 61 5 ; C h en v . A sh cro ft, 3 8 1 F . 2 d 2 2 1 , 2 3 4 -35 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 4 ). W e a lso re

jec t T a h ira

j’s a rg u m e n t th a t th e B IA e rre d w h e n it d e n ied h is m o tio n to re m a n d . T h e B IA tr e a ts m o tio n s to re m a n d a s m o tio n s to re o p e n . In re C o e lh o , 2 0 I. & N . D e c . 4 6 4 , 4 7 1 (1 9 9 2 ). “A m o tio n to re o p e n p ro c e e d in g s s h a ll n o t b e g ra n ted u n les s it a p p e a rs to th e B o a rd th a t ev id e n c e so u g h t to b e o f f e re d . . . w a s n o t av a ilab le a n d c o u ld n o t hav e b ee n d isco v ere d o r pre sen ted a t th e f o rm er h ea ri n g . ” 8 C . F . R . § 1 0 0 3 . 2 (c)(1); se e a lso IN S v . D o h e rty , 5 0 2 U .S . 3 1 4 , 3 2 3 (1 9 9 2 ) (listin g “ f a ilu re to in tro d u c e p re v io u sly unavai l abl e, m at er i al evi dence ” as one of “ atl eas t ” thr ee i ndepende ntgr ounds on w hi ch the B I A m i ghtdenya mot i on t o r eopen) ; I n r e C oel ho, 20 I . & N . D ec. at472 ( s ame, c iti n g 8 C .F .R . § 1 0 0 3 .2 a n d D o h e rty ). B e c a u se T a h ira j h a s n o t d e m o n stra ted th a t h is w if e ’s f o llo w -u p a f

f id a v it w a s p re v io u slyu n a v a ilab le, w e c o n c lu d e th a t th e B IA p ro p e rly deni ed Tahi r aj ’ s m ot i on. III . F o r t h e f o re g o in g re a s o n s , th e p e titio n f o r r e v ie w is d e n ie d .12 T ahi r aj v. G onzal es N o. 04- 1521 A M B R O , C i r cui tJ udge, di s s ent i ng I j oi n m ycol l eague s i n comm endi ng the I m m i gr at i on J udge ( “I J ”) forhi s exce l l ent opi ni on and es peci al l yforhi s w i l l i ngnes s t o acknow l edge thathe “be l i eves thatthe fi ndi ngs i n t hi s m att erar e a r el at i vel ycl os e ca l l . . . . ” I n r e Tahi r aj , A 79- 329- 844, at33 (I J Sep t . 20 , 20 02 ) ( “IJ O p. ”). T hat bei ng sai d, i ti s the B oard of Im m i grat i on A pp eal s’ ( “B I A ”) deci s i on w e r evi ew . T he B I A avoi ded w r es t l i ng w i th the di ffi cul ti s s ue of w hetherT ahi r aj w as ent i t l ed t o as y l um bas ed on al l of the eve nt s i n T ahi r aj ’ s pas tby deci di ng thati tdi d nothave t o cons i ders om e of them. Forthatand the otherr eas ons n o ted b e lo w , I re sp e c tf

u llyd iss e n t. I. T h e B IA co u ld n o t re a so n a b ly ex p ec t T a h iraj to co rr o b o ra te h is t w o d e te n ti o n s in 2 0 0 0 . T he B I A concl uded thatT ahi r aj s houl d have c orr obor at ed hi s t es t i m onyr egar di ng h is tw o d e te n tio n s in O c to b e r 2 0 0 0 . I n r e Tahi r aj , A 79- 329- 844, at2 ( B I A Feb. 9, 2004) (“ B IA O p .”). It re a so n e d th a t T a h ira j w as abl e t o obt ai n a J une 2002 s t at ementfr om hi s w i fe, a J une 2002 “ce r t i fi cat i on” fr om an off i ci al i n the D emocr at i c Party , a J une 2002 decl ar at i on fr om the l eade rof the D emocr at i c Partyi n hi s ar ea unt i l 1994 and a mem berof Par l i amenti n 1996, and t es t i m onyfr om hi s cous i n w ho13

w a s w o u n d e d in th e 1 9 9 7 sh o o tin g in c id e n t. T h e se a re p e rso n s w h o sh o u ld be fa m i l i ar w i th som e or al l of the essent i al fact s ei ther di rect l yor atl east thr ough otherper s ons . H ear s ayevi dence i s admi s s i bl e i n i m m i gr at i on proceed i ng s. Id . I n A b d u la i v. A sh c ro ft , 239 F. 3d 542 ( 3d C i r . 2001) , w e w r ot e that“i f i tw oul d be r eas onabl e t o expec tcorr obor at i on [of a cr edi bl e as y l um appl i cant ’ s cl ai m ] , then an a p p lica n t w h o n e ith e r in tro d u c e s s u c h e v id e n c e n o r o f f e rs a sa tisf

a c to rye x p lan a tio n a s to w hyhe ors he ca nnotdo s o m aybe found t o have f ai l ed t o m eethi s orherbur den of pr oof. ” I

d. at 55 1 . H o w ev er, be fo re d en y ing the a p p li ca n t r eli ef o n this gro u n d , the B IA m u s tu n d e r t a k e a th r e e - p a r ti n q u i r y: ( 1) an i dent i fi cat i on of the fa ct s forw hi ch i ti s r eas onabl e t o expec t corr obor at i on; ( 2) an i nqui r yas t o w hetherthe appl i canthas pr ovi ded i nform at i on corr obor at i ng the r el evantfac t s ; and, i f he ors he has not , ( 3) an an aly sis of

w h ethe r th e a p p li ca n t has ad eq u atelyex p lai n ed h is or h er f ail u re t o do s o.

I d. at554 ( quot at i on m arks om i t t ed) ( ci t i ng I n r e S-M- J- , 2 1 I. & N . D e c . 7 2 2 (1 9 9 7 )) . Fur ther , i n D ia v . A sh c ro ft , 3 5 3 F . 3 d 2 2 8 , 2 5 3 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 3 ) ( en banc ) , our C o u rt14

re c o g n ize d th a t w e have caut i oned [that ] “[i ] ti s obvi ous thatone w ho es cape s per s ecut i on in h is or h er o w n land w il l r are lyb e in a p o sit ion to b ri n g d o cu m en tary evi dence orot herki nds of corr obor at i on t o s uppor ta s ubs equentcl ai m for a sy lu m . It i s e q u a llyo b v io u s th a t o n e w h o f lee s to rtu re a t h o m e w ill ra re ly have the for es i ghtorm eans t o do s o i n a mannerthatw i l l enhanc e the c h a n c e o f

p re v a ilin g in a s u b s e q u e n t c o u rt b a ttle in a f o re ig n la n d . C om m on s ens e es t abl i s hes thati ti s es cape and fl i ght , notl i t i gat i on and corr ob orat i on , that i s forem osti n the m i nd of an al i en w ho com es t o these s h o re s f le e in g d e te n tio n , to rt u re a n d p e rs e c u tio n .”

I d. at253 ( quot i ng S e n a th i r a j a h v . I NS , 157 F. 3d 210, 215- 16 ( 3d C i r . 1998) ) ( s econd s et o f in terna l qu o tat ion m ark s o m itted). I bel i eve thatthe B I A di d nots at i s fyA b d u lai’s firstreq u ir em en t as t o T ah ir aj’s tw o d et enti on s i n 2 00 0. Itcou l d n ot r easona blyexp ectT ahir aj t o co rr ob orat e t hese e v e n ts . S e e D ia , 3 5 3 F . 3 d at 25 3 (“A tm ost , an appl i cantm us tpr ovi de corr obor at i ng evi dence onl yw hen i tw oul d be re a so n a b ly expec t ed. ” ( fi r s temphasi s added, s econd em p h asis in o ri g inal)). M yc o llea g u e s w rite th a t “T a h ira j ar g u e s th a t th e B IA e rre d in re q u irin g h im to corr obor at e hi s cl ai m w i th hear s ays t at ement s , buti tdi d no s uch thi ng. T he cl earF i r s t , s e c o n d , a n d th i r d : wr i t t e n s t a t e me n t s f r o m T a h i r a

j ’ s wi f e o re i th e ro f

th e two 5 D em o cra ti c P arty(“D P ”) o ff ici als— w h o w ere in A lban ia w h en T ah ir aj ap p ea red b ef o re the I J , and w ho di d notdi r ect l yw i tnes s ei therof the det ent i ons — w oul d have be en h e a rs a yw ith in h e a rs a y . C f. Fed. R . E vi d. 805. Such s t at ement s w oul d have be en T a h i r a j ’ s w i f e ’ s a n d th e D P o f

f i c i a l s ’ o u t - o f

- c o u r ts t a t e m e n t s ( th e f

i r s tl e v e l o f

h e a r s a y) aboutT ahi r aj ’ s out - of- courts t at ement s t o them (a s s um i ng anyw er e eve reven made) des cr i bi ng the det ent i ons ( the s econd l evel of hea r s ay ) . Four th: T ahi r aj ’ s cous i n— w ho a rriv e d in th e U n ited S tate s f ro m A lb a n ia in 1 9 9 8 , tw o y e a rs b e f o re th e d e ten tio n s in 2000— w oul d know aboutthe det ent i ons onl yfr om out - of- courts t at ement s byT ahi r aj or h is f a m ily(a s th e B IA im p licitlya c k n o w led g e d , B IA O p . at 2 -3 ). T e stim o n ial s tate m e n ts d e s c ri b in g s u c h s ta te m e n ts w o u ld h a v e b e e n h e a rs a y . T he onl ypeopl e otherthan Tahi r aj w i th fi r s thand know l edge of w hatoccurr ed dur i ng 6 the det ent i ons i n 2000 ar e Tahi r aj ’ s capt or s , and s ur el yhe ca nnotbe r eas onabl yexpec t ed t o br i ng them her e fr om A l bani a t o gi ve the I J non- hear s ayt es t i m onyabouthow they b e a t, u ri n a te d o n , a n d th re a te n e d to k ill T a h ir a j. See I n r e S-M- J- , 21 I . & N . D ec. at725 (“ U n re a so n a b le d e m a n d s a re n o t p lac e d o n a n a sy lu m a p p lica n t to p re se n t ev id e n c e to corr ob orat e part i cularexp eri ences ( e. g. , c o rr o b o ra tio n f ro m th e p e rs e c u to r) .” ). 15 i m pl i cat i on fr om the B I A ’ s s t at ementi s thathear s ayw as one w ayT ahi r aj coul d have tr i ed t o corr obor at e hi s cl ai m . ” M aj . O p. at9 n. 3. H ow ever , the fours t at ement s thatt he B I A s pecul at ed Tahi r aj m i ghthave f ur thercorr obor at ed hi s tw o det ent i ons i n 2000 w o u ld have a ll b e e n h e a r s a y . F u r th e r , th e r e a p p e a r s t o b e n o o th e re v i d e n c e o f th e two 5 det ent i ons i n 2000 t hatT ahi r aj coul d have be en r eas onabl yexpec t ed t o pr es ent . T hus , as 6 th e f o u r sta tem e n ts th a t th e B IA sp e c u late d c o u ld c o rro b o ra te T a h ira j’s tw o d e ten tio n s in 2000 w oul d have be en hea r s ay , and no otherr eas onabl e ave nue of c orr obor at i on even e x i s t s , th e BI A d id

re q u ire h im to c o rro b o ra te h is c laim w ith h e a rsa ysta tem e n ts. W h ile it i s true thathear s ayi s perm i s s i bl e i n i m m i gr at i on pr ocee di ngs , thatthe type of e vi dence that the B IA ex p ec ted f rom T ah ir aj w as h ea rsayis r elev an t t o w h ethe r th e B IA ’s expec t at i on of thatevi dence w as r eas onabl e.16

F urtherm ore, there i s no evi dence thatT ahi r aj evert ol d hi s w i fe, hi s cous i n, ort he D P offi ci al s anythi ng aboutthe tw o det ent i ons i n 2000 orthattheyotherw i s e knew anythi ng aboutthem. T he B I A m er el ys pecul at ed that“[t ] hes e ar e per s ons w ho s hould be fami l i arw i th s om e oral l of the es s ent i al fac t s ei therdi r ect l yoratl eas tthr ough other per s ons . ” B I A O p. at2 ( emphasi s added) . I tw as notr eas onabl e forthe B I A t o expec t T a h ir a j to p re s e n t e v id e n c e , th e e x is te n c e o f w h ic h w a s p u re s p e c u la tio n . C f. D ia , 353 F. 3d at253 ( “‘ U nl es s the B I A anchor s i t s demands forcorr obor at i on t o evi dence w hi ch i nd i cat es w hat the p et i t i on er can reas on ablybe ex pected t o p rovi de, there i s a ser i ou s r i sk thatunr eas onabl e demands w i l l i nadvert ent l ybe made. . . . W hati s ( s ubj ect i vel y ) natur al t o demand m aynot. . . be ( obj ect i vel y ) r eas onabl e. ’ ” ( quot i ng Q u i v. A sh c ro ft , 329 F. 3d 1 4 0 , 1 5 3 -54 (2d C ir . 2 0 0 3 ))) . T h e p r i ma r yr e a s o n th e BI A u n r e a s o n a b l ye x p e c t e d c o rr o b o r a t i o n o f th e two d e ten tio n s in 2 0 0 0 is th is: becaus e nei therthe BIA nor ourC our thas eve rr equi r ed an al i en to pr es ent

the t ype of s tat em ent

s the BIA dem anded, Tahi r ajhad no w ay of know i ng th a t h e h a d

to p re se n t su c h sta tem e n ts . N ei therthe I J , the B I A , m ycol l eague s , northe G o v e rn m e n t h a s c ited a c a se in w h ich th e B IA o r o u r C o u rt h a s e v e r re q u ire d a n a lien to pr es entthe type of s t at ement s the B I A des cr i bed. H ow coul d i thave be en r eas onabl e for the B I A t o expec tT ahi r aj t o r ead i t s m i nd and pr edi ctthati tw oul d change the l aw and re q u ire o f

h im w h a t ith a s n e v e r re q u ire d o f a n ya sy lu m a p p lica n t b e f o re : sta tem e n ts a b o u t h e a rs a

y sta tem e n ts th e BI A s

peculat ed th e a p p lic a n t m a d e .17

E v e n th is n e w tw ist w o u ld n o t b e so sig n if ica n t w e re it n o t th a t in m o st, if n o t all, pr evi ous as y l um cas es w her e corr obor at i on of an a s y l um appl i cant ’ s cr edi bl e t es t i m ony w a s a p o ten tial iss u e , the B IA o r o u r C o u rt c o u ld h a v e re q u ire d su c h sta tem e n ts b u t d id n o t. If th e B IA a n d th e m a

jo ritya re rig h t ab o u t w h a t th e law is, th e n in w h a t ca se c o u ld notthe B I A orourC our thave s t at ed: “The event s the al i en cr edi bl yt es t i fi ed he exper i ence d s ound horr i bl e. W e s pecul at e thathe musthave t ol d s om e peopl e about th e m. Be c a u s e we d o n o th a v e s t a t e me n t s f r o m th o s e p e o p l e a b o u tth e s t a t e me n t s we s p e c u l a t e th e a l i e n ma d e t o th e m, we wi l l d e n yth e a p p l i c a n te l i g i b i l i tyf o ra s y l u m. ” ? N eith er the B IA n o r ou r C o u rth as e v er m ad e su ch a statem en t. T h u s I be li ev e the B IA h a s p u s h e d th e re q u ir e m e n t o f c o rr o b o ra tio n to o f

a r. A d d iti o n a lly , itis re a so n a b le to e x p e c t an a sy lu m a p p lica n t to c o rro b o ra te o n ly “fa ct s w hi ch ar e . . . eas i l ys ubj ectt o ver i fi cat i on . . . . ” I n r e S-M- J- , 21 I . & N . D ec. at 7 2 5 . In S-M

-J , the B IA e n u m e ra ted e x a m p les o f f a c ts th a t ar e e a silysu b

jec t to ver i fi cat i on: “evi dence of [the appl i cant ’ s ] pl ace of bi r th, m edi a ac count s of l ar ge demonstr at i ons , evi dence of a publ i cl yhel d offi ce, ordocument at i on of m edi cal tr eatm ent . ” Id . I tthus i m pl i ed thatfac t s ar e ea s i l yver i fi ed i f theycan be s how n t o be tru e b ye x istin g d o c u m e n tar ye v id e n c e , su c h a s o f f icia l d o c u m e n ts iss u e d b yg o v e rn m e n ts orotherus ual l yr el i abl e non- governm ent al or gani zat i ons , r el i abl e medi a ac count s , or otherdocument s fr om cr edi bl e s our ces notcr eat ed forl i t i gat i on purpos es . T he narr at i ve s t at ement s des cr i bi ng hear s ays t at ement s thatthe B I A s pecul at es T ahi r aj m ade a r e none18

of thes e thi ngs . T hatthe tw o det ent i ons i n 2000 w er e noteas i l ys ubj ectt o ver i fi cat i on f u rt h e r s u p p o rt s th a t it w a s u n re a s o n a b le f o r t h e B IA to re q u ir e c o rr o b o ra tio n o f th e m . See I d. (“ [ S ]p e c if

ic d o c u m e n tar yc o rro b o ra tio n o f a n a p p lica n t’s p a rticu lar e x p e rie n c e s is notr equi r ed unl es s the s uppor t i ng document at i on i s of the type thatw oul d nor m al l ybe c re a te d o r a v a ila b le in th e p a rt ic u la r c o u n tr ya n d is a c c e s s ib le to th e a lie n . . . .” ). T h e m a jo rityis c o rre c t A bdulain o ted th a t “[ t]h e B o a rd h a s a lso sta ted th a t itis g en era ll yrea so n ab le t o ex p ec t app li ca n ts t o p rod u ce let ters fro m fa m il ym em b ers r emai ni ng i n t he appl i cant ’ s hom e country . ” 239 F. 3d at554. H ow ever , w e w er e qui ck t o add that“[i ] n s ett i ng outthi s s um m aryof the B oar d’ s cas e l aw , w e expr es s no opi ni on as t o w hetherw e agr ee thati ti s ‘ r eas onabl e’ t o expec tappl i cant s foras y l um or w i thhol di ng of r emoval t o corr obor at e thes e types of i nform at i on. ” I d. at555 n. 9. M or e i m por t ant l y , the B I A pr ece dentthatw e ci t ed i n A bdulaia s p o ten tially re q u ir in g le tte rs f

ro m f a m ily m e m b e rs , I

n r e M- D- , 2 1 I. & N . D e c . 1 1 8 0 (B IA 1 9 9 8 ), is vas t l ydi ffe r entfr om thi s cas e. 239 F. 3d at554- 55. I n M- D- , an as y l um appl i cantfr om M a u ritan ia c laim e d a s f o llo w s: th e m ili tar yc a m e to h is h o u se a n d a rre ste d h im a n d h is fami l ybeca us e of thei rethni ci ty ; he w as s epar at ed fr om hi s fami l yand det ai ned forover a y e a r a n d h is f

a m ilyw a s f

o rc e d to g o to S e n e g a l; af ter h is re lea se , h e jo in e d u p w ith h is fami l yi n a Senega l es e r efuge e ca m p and l i ved w i th them for e l even mont hs ; and he then c a m e to th e U n ite d S ta te s , b u t h is f a m ily re m a in e d in th e c a m p . I d. a t 1 1 8 0 -8 1 . T h e B IA h e ld th a t th e a p p lic a n t h a d in s u f f ic ie n tly c o rr o b o ra te d h is c la im . I d. at19

1184. I tr eas oned that“ther e i s no evi dence t o confi r m the r es pondent ’ s purpor t ed M aur i t ani an nat i onal i ty , a ce ntr al el ementof hi s cl ai m . N o pas s por t , bi rth cert i fi cat e, or i dent i fi cat i on car d has been s ubm i t t ed . . . . ” I d. at1183. I n contr as tt o M- D- , to d e m o n s tr a t e h i s n a t i o n a l i ty a n d th e n a tu r e o f h i s i n v o l v e m e n tw i th th e D e m o c r a t i c P a r ty, T a h ira j p re se n ted , am o n g o th e r th in g s, h is p a ss p o rt, h is f a m ilyc e rtific a te, b irth cert i fi cat es forhi m , hi s w i fe a nd s on, hi s D P m ember s hi p car d, a ce r t i fi cat e fr om the Pat os br anch of

the D P, a dec l ar at i on bya form erD P offi ci al s t at i ng thatT ahi r aj cam paigned w i th h i m , and a “cert i fi cat i on ” from a D P l eader st at i ng that Tah i raj w as a m emberof the el ect or al comm i s s i on i n O ct ober2000 and thathe w as “conf r ont ed” by p o lic e a n d m ilita n ts b u t “ d e f e n d e d th e v o te s f

o r a f a irp ro c e s s .” T he B I A i n M-D - al s o w r ot e that“the r es pondenthas s ubm i t t ed no s uppor t i ng e v id e n c e f

ro m h is f a m ily , . . . . W e f

in d it rea so n a b le to e x p e c t s o me corr obor at i on of the re s p o n d e n t’ s id e n tity, a rr e s t, a n d d e te n tio n , oratl eas tof the fa m i l y ’ s for ci bl e expul s i on fr om M aur i t ani a. ” I

d. at1183 ( emphase s added) . T hi s m eans , i n eff ect , corr obor at i on fr om fami l ym ember s of eve nt s theyhad w i tnes s ed orexper i ence d ( the al i en’ s arr es tand det ent i on, orthe fa m i l y ’ s expul s i on fr om the country ) . T her e i s no evi dence that T a h ira j’s f a m ilym e m b e rs h a d a n yk n o w led g e o f (le t alo n e w itn e ss e d o r e x p e rie n c e d ) h is tw o det ent i ons i n 2000. Fur therm or e, i n contr as tt o M- D- , T a h ira j d id pr es ent c o rr o b o ra tin g e v id e n c e f ro m h is f a m ily m e m b e rs o f

e v e n ts th e yw itn e s s e d o r e x p e ri e n c e d . H e pr es ent ed hi s cous i n’ s i n- court , s peci fi c, det ai l ed, cr edi bl e t es t i m onyaboutthe 1997T ahi r aj ’ s w i fe’ s s t at ementw as noti nt ended t o be a c om pr ehens i ve ac countof the 7 exper i ence s on w hi ch Tahi r aj bas ed hi s as y l um cl ai m . I t s i s onl yei ghts ent ence s l ong, and fourof them re l at e t o T ahi r aj ’ s deci s i on t o fl ee f r om A l bani a and hi s tr avel t o the U ni t ed St at es , as evi dence of hi s dat e of e ntryforpurpos es of the one y earfi l i ng deadl i ne foras y l um appl i cat i ons . T hus , i ti s pl aus i bl e thatT ahi r aj ’ s w i fe w oul d notm ent i on the tw o det ent i ons i n O ct ober2000. S h e a lso d id n o t m e n tio n th a t m e n f ire d m a c h in e g u n s a t T a h ira j an d h is c o u sin d u ri n g a 1 9 9 7 D e m o c ra tic P a rt yc a m p a ig n tr ip . See inf ra Par tI I . T ahi r aj ’ s corr obor at ed hi s t es t i m onyaboutthe 1997 s hoot i ng w i th a new s paperart i cl e and hi s cous i n’ s s peci fi c, d e taile d , an d c re d ib le te stim o n y . T h u s th e 1 9 9 7 sh o o tin g a p p e a rs to h a v e o c c u rre d . T h is is an ev en t on e m igh t exp ec t T ah ir aj’s w ife to in clud e if sh e w as re cit ing all o f T ah ir aj’s exper i ence s thatw er e i m por t antt o hi s as y l um cl ai m , y ets he di d not . T her efor e, as the 1 9 9 7 sh o o tin g a p p a re n tlyd id o c c u r a n d T a h ira j’s w if e d id n o t m e n tio n it i n h e r sta tem e n t, i ti s qui t e pl aus i bl e thatthe det ent i ons i n O ct ober2000 occurr ed, even though s he di d not m e n tio n th e m in h e r s ta te m e n t. 20 shoo t i ng , and his w i fe’s bri ef st at em ent i nd i cat i ng that “i n the cou rs e of [ T ahir aj ’s ] po l i t i cal act i vity[he] has of t en fo un d h i m sel f un der the p res sure and thr eat s of S ocial i st P a rtysu p p o rte rs. H e so m e tim e s e v e n h a s b e e n h it an d m ish a n d led b yth e m in f ro n t o f h is f a m ily.” 7 M or eover , “[w ] her e the r ecor d cont ai ns gener al countryi nform at i on, and an a p p lica n t’s c laim re lies p rim a rilyo n p e rso n a l ex p e rie n c e s n o t re a so n a b lysu b jec t to ver i fi cat i on, corr obor at i ve document aryevi dence of the as y l um appl i cant ’ s part i cul ar exper i ence i s notr equi r ed. ” M- D- , 21 I . & N . D ec. at1182 ( quot i ng S- M- J- , 2 1 I . & N. D e c . at 7 2 5 ). T h e B IA c o n c e d e d th a t th e T a h ira j d id c o rro b o ra te h is tw o d e ten tio n s in 2000 w i th gener al countr yi nform at i on: “The backgr ound evi dence s how s thatthe pol i ce have a rr es t ed and a bus ed D emocr at i c Partym ember s w i th the D emocr at i c Partyal l egi ng th a t 2 1 o f

its su p p o rte rs, lo c a l g o v e rn m e n t o f f icia ls, a n d f

o rm e r n a tio n a l p a rtyo f

f icia ls21

w er e ki l l ed fr om 1997 t o 1998[, ] w hi ch gene r al l ycorr obor at es the r es pondent ’ s t es t i m ony a b o u t h is tw o a rre sts .” B IA O p . at 2 . T h a t T a h ira j co rro b o ra ted h is tw o d e ten tio n s in 2000 w i th gener al countr yi nform at i on fur thers uppor t s thati tw as unr eas onabl e forthe B IA to re q u ir e f

u rt h e r c o rr o b o ra tio n o f

th e m . F inally , as f

o r T ah ir aj’s t esti m o n yreg ard ing h is tw o d eten ti o n s in 2 0 0 0 , the IJ f o u n d it cre d ib le. T a h ira j g a v e sp e c if

ic a n d d e taile d tes tim o n ya b o u t th e f o llo w in g : h is pos i t i on w i th t he D emocr at i c Party ; hi s conce rns aboutthe O ct ober1, 2000 el ect i on i rr egul ar i t i es ; hi s O ct ober2, 2000 arr es tand i nt err ogat i on aboutw hyhe r efus ed t o s i gn o ff o n the e lecti o n resu lt s; ho w p o li ce b ea t and threa tene d h im d u ri n g the O ctob er 2 det ent i on; the demonstr at i on on O ct ober16, 2000 and hi s s ubs equentarr es tand det ent i on, dur i ng w hi ch a pol i ce man w ho r ecogni zed hi m fr om the i nci denton O ct ober2 ur i nat ed and thr ew the ur i ne i n hi s fac e and thr eat ened t o ki l l hi m i f he t al ked bac k. I J O p. at11- 13. I n I

n r e Y- B- , 21 I . & N . D ec. 1136 ( B I A 1998) , the B I A r equi r ed corr obor at i ve evi dence beca us e the as y l um appl i cant ’ s t es t i m onyw as “gene r al and vague . ” I d at1139 . B ycontr as t , T ahi r aj ’ s t es t i m onyabouthi s tw o det ent i ons i n 2000 w as nei thergener al nor vague. I n Y- B- , the B I A s t at ed that“the w eake ran al i en’ s t es t i m ony , the gr eat erthe nee d forcorr obor at i ve evi dence . ” Id . A s n e e d f o r c o rro b o ra tio n is in v e rse lyp ro p o rtio n a l to s tr ength of t es t i m ony , i f an a s y l um appl i cant ’ s t es t i m onyi s s uffi ci ent l ys tr ong, ther e i s no need f orcorr obor at i on. T hatT ahi r aj gave s peci fi c, det ai l ed, and cr edi bl e t es t i m onyaboutT he maj or i tyw r i t es i n a footnot e that 8 o u r a b ili tyto re v iew T a h ira j’s a rg u m e n t in th is re g a rd a p p e a rs to b e lar g e ly f o re c lo se d b yth e R e a l ID A c t. T h e A c t p ro v id e s th a t “[ n ]o c o u rt sh a ll r ever s e a de t erm i nat i on m ade bya fi nderof fa ctw i th r es pectt o the a v a ila b ili ty o f

c o rro b o ra tin g e v id e n c e . . . u n les s th e c o u rt f in d s . . . th a t a r eas onabl e fi nderof fa cti s compel l ed t o concl ude thats uch corr obor at i ng evidence is u n a v a ila b le . ” R eal I D A ctof 2005, § 101( e) , Pub. L . N o. 109- 13, 119 St at . 231, 305, t o be codi fi ed at8 U . S. C . § 1252( b) ( 4) . W e s ee no c o m p e llin g re a s o n to re v e rs e a n ys u c h f in d in g s in th is c a s e . M a j. O p . at 1 0 n .4 (e m p h a se s a d d e d ). N e ith e r T a h ira j n o r I a rg u e th a t th e B IA e rre d in fi ndi ng thatcorr obor at i ng evi dence of the tw o det ent i ons i n 2000 w as “ava i l abl e” ( though I s us pects uch a f

i ndi ng w oul d be s pecul at i ve) . R ather , even a s s um i ng s uch corr obor at i ng evi dence w as “ava i l abl e, ” the B I A coul d notr eas onabl yexpec tT ahi r aj t o pr es ents uch e v id e n c e . 22 h is tw o d e ten tio n s in 2 0 0 0 (n e ith e r th e IJ, th e B IA , n o r th e m a jo rityc laim s o th e rw ise ) is s t i l l fur thers uppor tthati tw as unr eas onabl e forthe B I A t o r equi r e corr obor at i on of th e m. 8 I I . T he B I A ’ s j ust i f i cat i on f or not cons i deri ng t he 1997 s hoot i ng i s not v a lid . B o th T a h ira

j an d h is c o u sin c re d ib lytes tifie d th a t in 1 9 9 7 th e y , as w e ll as a d e p u ty o f th e D P , w e re o n a c a m p a ig n tr ip w h e n m e n f ir e d s h o ts a t th e irc a r w ith m a c h in e g u n s . T ahi r aj ’ s cous i n w as i nj ur ed byone of the fi ve bul l et s thathi tthe ca rand w entt o the hos pi t al fortr eatm ent . T ahi r aj cr edi bl yt es t i fi ed that , beca us e the pol i ce di d nothi ng a b o u t th e sh o o tin g a f

ter h e re p o rte d it, h e b e liev e d th e g u n m e n w e re S o c ialist P a rty23

m ember s . I J O p. at10. Fur ther , T ahi r aj corr obor at ed hi s and hi s cous i n’ s acc ountw i th a new s paperart i cl e r efe r enci ng the 1997 s hoot i ng. T he B I A hel d t hat , i n deci di ng w hetherT ahi r aj had es t abl i s hed pas tper s ecut i on or a w el l - founded f

earof futur e per s ecut i on, i tw oul d notcons i derthe 1997 s hoot i ng becau se the testi m o n yo f [ T ah ir aj] an d h is co u sin reg ard ing [it ] d o e s n o t in d ica te thathe w as s i ngl ed- outby the at tacke rs on account of his pol i t i cal

opi ni on . T he s hot s came fr om the r earand s truck the l as tcarof the pol i ce e s cort ed c o n v o y . T h e o n lyp e rso n w o u n d e d w a s h is c o u sin , w h o w a s s itt in g d ire c tly behi nd the el ect ed D emocr at i c Party. . . offi ci al r i di ng i n [the] fr onts eat w ho appea r s t o have be en the t ar getof the att ack.

B I A O p. at2 ( emphasi s added) . T he B I A err ed bec aus e, fori tt o cons i derthe s hoot i ng as s om e evi dence thatT ahi r aj w as el i gi bl e foras y l um , T ahi r aj di d notneed t o s how he w as “s i ngl ed- out ” on ac countof hi s pol i t i cal opi ni on. R ather , he had t o s how the s hoot i ng w a s to s o m e e x te n t “ b e c a u s e o f ” h is p o litic a l o p in io n . See 8 U . S . C . § 1 1 5 8 (b)(1 )(A ) & ( b) ( 1) ( B ) ( i ) ; 8 U . S. C . § 1101( a) ( 42) ( A ) . E ven i f Tahi r aj w as not“s i ngl ed- out ” bythe g u n m an , h e w as p u t i n d an g er b e c a u se o f hi s pol i t i cal opi ni on as ( 1) he puthi m s el f i n the danger ous s i tuat i on ( the D P campai gn tr i p) beca us e of hi s pol i t i cal opi ni on ( pr o- D P) , and ( 2 ) th e g u n me n c r e a t e d th e d a n g e rb e c a u s e o f th e i rmo t i v e t o s u p p r e s s th e p r o - DP24

pol i t i cal opi ni on. T hus the B I A s houl d have c ons i der ed the 1997 s hoot i ng i nci dentas s o m e e v id e n c e o f

p a s t p e rs e c u tio n o r a w e ll- f o u n d e d f e a r o f f u tu re p e rs e c u tio n . I I I . W e s h o u l d r e ma n d t o t h e BI A. T he B I A di d notcons i derw hetherT ahi r aj ’ s tw o det ent i ons i n 2000 and the 1997 sh o o tin g g iv e h im a w e ll-fo u n d e d f e a r o f f u tu re p e rse c u tio n a n d th u s m a k e h im e lig ib le f o r a sy lu m . B e c a u se th e B IA ’s r e a so n s f o r n o t co n sid e rin g th e se e v e n ts w e re n o t leg a lly val i d, and bec aus e w e maynotr ai s e thi s i s s ue su a sp o n te a n d d e c id e it de novo , we s h o u ld re m a n d s o th a t th e B IA m a yh a v e th e f ir s t o p p o rt u n ity to a d d re s s th e is s u e . See IN S v. V entura , 5 3 7 U .S . 1 2 , 1 5 -1 6 (2 0 0 2 ) (h o ld in g th a t th e N in th C irc u it err e d in a d d re ss in g a n iss u e n o t y e t ad d re ss e d b yth e B IA a n d sta tin g th a t “[ a ] c o u rt o f a p p e a ls ‘is notgener al l yempow er ed t o conducta de novo i nqui ryi nt o the mat t erbei ng r evi ew ed and t o r eac h i t s ow n concl us i ons bas ed on s uch an i nqui ry . ’ R ather , ‘ the pr opercour s e, exce pti n r ar e ci r cumst ance s , i s t o r emand t o the age ncyforaddi t i onal i nves t i gat i on or expl anat i on. ’ ” ( quot i ng F la. P ow er& Li ghtC o. v. Lori on , 4 7 0 U .S . 7 2 9 , 7 4 4 (1 9 8 5 )) ). I ti s w or th not i ng, how ever , thatT ahi r aj ’ s tw o det ent i ons i n 2000 and the 1997 sh o o tin g m a y , in f

a c t, giv e h im a w e ll-fo u n d e d f e a r o f f u tu re p e rse c u tio n . T h e q u e stio n is w h e th e r h e w o u ld f

a c e a “ re a so n a b le p o ss ib ili ty ” o f p e rse c u tio n if

h e w e re to re tu rn to A l bani a. 8 C . F. R . § 208. 13( b) ( 2) ( i ) ( B ) . I f s o, hi s fea rof per s ecut i on i s “w el l - founded. ” 8 C . F. R . § 208. 13( b) ( 2) ( i ) . “O ne ca n cert ai nl yhave a w el l - founded f earof an e vent happeni ng w hen ther e i s l es s than a 50% chanc e of the occ as i on t aki ng pl ace . ” I N S v.T ahi r aj t es t i fi ed that , i n addi t i on t o the tw o det ent i ons i n 2000 and the 1997 s hoot i ng, 9 a f ter h e lef t A lb a n ia h is w if

e re c e iv e d se v e ra l th re a ts a f ter re f u sin g to re v e a l h is w her eabout s , i ncl udi ng a thr eatthatthei rs on w oul d be ki dnapped. W hi l e the B I A w as 25 C ar doz a- Fons eca , 480 U . S. 421, 431 ( 1987) . E ven a 10% chanc e of pe r s ecut i on can be s u f f ic ie n t to e s ta b lis h a w e ll- f o u n d e d f e a r. I d. a t 4 4 0 ; Kn eze v ic v . A sh c ro ft , 367 F. 3d 1 2 0 6 , 1 2 1 2 (9th C ir . 2 0 0 4 ). Per s ecut i on does notencompas s al l tr eatm entours oci etyr egar ds as unfai roreven un con st i tuti on al , bu ti tdo es i nclude “thr eat s t o li fe, con fi nem ent, [and ] t orture . . . so s ever e thattheycons t i tut e a thr eatt o l i fe orfr eedom. ” Fa t i n v . I NS , 12 F. 3d 1223, 1240 ( 3d C i r . 1993) . Per s ecut i on m us tbe “c om m i t t ed bythe governm entorfor ces the governm enti s unabl e orunw i l l i ng t o contr ol . ” G a o v . A sh c ro ft , 299 F. 3d 266, 272 ( 3d C ir . 2 0 0 2 ). P ers ecuti on m ustbe o n acco un tof o ne o f t he st atutor i l yenu m erat ed b ases, one of w hi ch i s pol i t i cal opi ni on. 8 C . F. R . § 208. 13( b) ( 1) & ( b) ( 2) ( i ) ( A ) . T ahi r aj c re d ib lytes tifie d th a t b e c a u se o f h is p o lit ica l o p in io n h e w a s d e tain e d a n d b e a ten m u lti p le t i m es , r ece i ved a de ath t hr eat , had ur i ne thr ow n on hi s fac e, and w as s hotatbythe governm entorbyfor ces the governm entw as unabl e orunw i l l i ng t o contr ol . T hus , he m a yh a v e e sta b lish e d p a st p e rse c u tio n (w h ich w o u ld trig g e r a p re su m p tio n o f a w e llf o u n d e d f e a r o f f u tu re p e rs e c u tio n , 8 C .F .R . § 2 0 8 .1 3 (b )( 1 )) . B utT ahi r aj ’ s bes tcl ai m i s that , as i de fr om w hetherthe tw o det ent i ons i n 2000 and the 1997 s hoot i ng cons t i tut e per s ecut i on, thes e eve nt s gi ve hi m a w el l - founded f earof fu ture p erse cu ti o n . If the se e v en ts w o u ld m ak e a rea so n ab le pe rson co n clud e tha t, w ere 9lik e lyp e rm itt e d to d e m a n d c o rro b o ra tio n o f th e th re a ts th a t h is w if

e p e rso n a lly e x p e ri e n c e d , it d id n o t h a v e to d o s o . S e e G a o v . A sh c ro ft , 2 9 9 F . 3 d 2 6 6 , 2 7 2 (3d C ir . 2002) ( ci t i ng 8 C . F. R . § 208. 13( a) ) ( “Test i m ony , byi t s el f, i s s uffi ci entt o m eet[the] b u rd e n [ o f

sh o w in g a w e ll-fo u n d e d f e a r o f f u tu re p e rse c u tio n ] if

‘c re d ib le.’” ); D ia , 353 F . 3d at25 3 (“‘ [C ]orroborat i on i s notr equi r ed t o es t abl i s h cr edi bi l i ty . ’ ” ( quot i ng S e n a th i r a

j a h v . I NS , 1 5 7 F . 3 d 2 1 0 , 2 1 5 -16 (3d C ir . 1 9 9 8 ) (em p h asis ad d ed )). If the B IA had al l ow ed thes e cont i nui ng thr eat s t o be cons i der ed, T ahi r aj ’ s cl ai m of a w el l - founded f e a r o f f u tu re p e rs e c u tio n w o u ld b e e v e n b e tte r. 26 T ahi r aj t o r eturn t o A l bani a, he w oul d fac e a s i gni fi cantchanc e of e xper i enci ng tr eatm ent th a t d id ri s e to th e le v e l o f p e rs e c u tio n , th e n h e c o u ld b e e lig ib le f o r a s y lu m . * * * * * T h e B IA c o u ld n o t re a so n a b lye x p e c t T a h ira j to c o rro b o ra te h is tw o d e ten tio n s in 2 0 0 0 , a n d th u s it s h o u ld h a v e c o n s id e re d th e m w h e n it r e v ie w e d h is a s y lu m c la im . F u rt h e r, t h e B IA ’s ju s tif ic a tio n f o r n o t c o n s id e ri n g th e 1 9 9 7 s h o o tin g is n o t v a lid . I w o u ld th u s re m a n d f

o r th e B IA to c o n sid e r w h e th e r th e se in c id e n ts g iv e T a h ira j a w e llf o u n d e d f e a r o f f u tu re p e rs e c u tio n . In th is c o n te x t, I re s p e c tf u lly d is s e n t.