# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls

For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

No. 1 2- 12 62

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

Bo ga le Ass efa Teg eg n

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Peti ti on er

v.

Eric H. Hold er, J r., Att or ne y Gen eral of t he Uni te d S ta te s

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Resp on de nt

__ __ __ __ __ __

Pet it io n fo r Rev ie w of a n Ord er o f th e Bo ard of I m

m ig rat io n Ap pe al s

__ __ __ __ __ __

Su bm it te d: Octo be r 17 , 20 12
Fil ed : J an ua ry

11 , 20 13

__ __ __ __ __ __

Befo re LOKEN, SMITH, and BENTON, Circu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __

LOKEN, Ci rcu it Ju dg e.

Bo ga le Ass efa Teg eg n, a 68 -y ear- ol d ci ti zen of Eth io pi a, la wfu ll y en te red th e
Uni te d St at es in Feb ru ary 20 08 an d ti mel y ap pl ie d fo r as y lu m , wit hh ol di ng of

rem ov al

, an d rel ie f un de r th e Co nv en ti on Aga in st Tort ur e. An im m ig rat io n jud ge (IJ )

de ni ed rel ie f aft er a he ari ng , reject in g Teg eg n’s cl ai m s of pa st pe rs ecu ti on an d a well

fo un de d fear of fu tu re pe rs ecu ti on ba se d pr im ari ly on hi s po li ti cal op in io n. TheBo ard of Im

m ig rat io n App eal s (BIA) di sm is se d Teg eg n’s ad m in is tra ti ve ap pe al in an

op in io n ag reei ng wit h th e IJ ’s de te rm in at io ns bu t no t ad op ti ng he r op in io n. Teg eg n

pe ti ti on s fo r jud ic ia l rev ie w of t h e B I A ’s fin al ag en cy act io n. W e co nc lu de th at

su bs ta n t i al ev id en ce on th e ad m in is tra ti ve reco rd as a who le su pp or ts th e BIA’s

de te rm in at io n th at Teg eg n fai le d to de m on st rat e pa st pe rs ecu ti on

. See Keb e de v.

Gon zal es , 48 1 F.3 d 56 2, 56 4 (8 th Ci r. 20 07 ) (s ta nd ard of rev ie w). Howev er, th e BIA

di d no t ad eq ua te ly co ns id er on e as pe ct of hi s di st in ct cl ai m of a well -fo un de d fear of

fu tu re pe rs ecu ti on th at was su pp or te d by cred ib le te st im on y a n d by ot he r reco rd

ev id en ce in cl ud in g St at e Dep art m en t Hum an Ri gh ts Rep or ts

. Acco rd in gl y , we gr an t

th e p et it io n fo r rev ie w and rem an d fo r fu rth er co ns id erat io n o f th is is su e.

I. Pa st Pers ecut io n

The Att or ne y Gen eral ha s di sc ret io n to gr an t as y lu m to a “ refu ge e.” 8 U.S.C.
§ 11 58 (b ) ( 1 ) (A). As rel ev an t he re, th e te rm refu ge e m ean s a pe rs on un ab le or

un wil li ng to ret ur n to hi s co un try of or ig in “ be cau se of pe rs ecu ti on or a well -fo un de d

fear of pe rs ecu ti on on acco un t of race , rel ig io n, na ti on al it y , m em be r s h i p in a

pa rti cu la r so ci al gr ou p, or po l i t ic al op in io n.” 8 U.S.C. § 11 01 (a)( 42 )(A). An

ap pl ic an t who es ta bl is he s pas t pers ecu ti on is pre su m ed to ha ve a well -fo un de d fear

of pe rs ecu ti on

. 8 C.F.R. § 20 8.1 3( b) (1 ). Thu s, a cred ib le cl ai m of pa st pe rs ecu ti on

m us t us ua ll y be res ol ve d be fo re th e IJ an d th e BIA co ns id er a cl ai m of well -fo un de d

fear of fu tu re pe rs ecu ti on

. Co m pa re Bu sh ira v. Gon zal es , 44 2 F.3 d 62 6, 63 2- 33 (8 th

Ci r. 20 06 ), wit h P av lo vi ch v. Go nz al es , 47 6 F .3d 61 3, 6 17 (8t h C ir. 2 00 7)

.

“ Pers ecu ti on is an ex tre m e co nc ep t th at do es no t en co m pa ss lo w-le ve l

in ti m id at io n an d ha ras sm en t.” Lad y ha v. Hol de r, 58 8 F.3 d 57 4, 57 8 (8 th Ci r. 20 09 ).

Abs en t a sh owi ng o f p h y si cal ha rm , in ci de nt s of ha ras sm en t, un fu lfi ll ed th reat s of

in jury, an d eco no m ic de pr iv at io n are no t pe rs ecu ti on

. Quo m si eh v. Gon zal es , 47 9

F.3 d 60 2, 60 6 (8 th Ci r. 20 07 ). A th reat of de at h on acco un t of po li ti cal op in io n can
be en ou gh to es ta bl is h pa st pe r se cu ti on , bu t “ no t al l al le ge d th reat s of de at h

-2

-ne ces sa ril y am ou nt to pe rs ecu ti on ,” fo r ex am pl e, th reat s th at are e xa gg erat ed , n on

sp eci fic

, la ck in g in im m ed ia cy , or no t ba se d on a pr ot ect ed gr ou nd

. Co rad o v

. Ash cro ft, 38 4 F.3 d 94 5, 94 7- 48 (8 th Ci r. 20 04 )

. W e wil l affi rm th e BIA’s

de te rm in at io n th at an al ie n ha s fai le d to pro ve pa st pe rs ecu ti on un le ss th e ev id en ce

was so co m

pe ll in g th at no reas on ab le fact fin de r co ul d fai l to f i n d t o t h e co nt rary.
Lad y ha , 58 8 F .3d at 5 77

.

Teg eg n su bm it te d de ta il ed ev id en ce of th e po li ti cal co nd it io ns he ex pe rie nc ed

in Eth io pi a in hi s Ju ly 20 08 Fo rm I-5 89 as y lu m ap pl ic at io n, a le ng th y Feb ru ary 20 10

affi da vi t, an d te st im on y at th e Mar ch 20 10 he ari ng

. The IJ fo un d hi m to be a cred ib le

wit ne ss

. To br ie fly su m

m ari ze th is ev id en ce, th e Eth io pi an Peo pl e’s Rev ol ut io na ry

Dem oc rat ic Fro nt (EPRDF)

, fo rm ed by th e Tig ray Peo pl e’s Lib erat io n Fro nt (TPLF),

be cam e th e ru li ng pa rty in Eth io pi a in 19 91 aft er the pr io r Mar xi st go ve rn m en t was

ov ert hr own

. Teg eg n, a co ll eg e-ed uc at ed m em be r of th e do m in an t Am

ha ra et hn ic

gr ou p wit h ex pe rie nc e in ag ro no m y an d farm m an ag em en t, was th en wor ki ng at th e
Add is Aba ba Uni ve rs it y Lib rary. He res is te d rep eat ed req ue st s th at he joi n th e TPLF.

In 19 95

, he in st ead joi ne d th e All -Am ha ra Peo pl e’s O r g a n iz at io n (AAPO), an

et hn i c a ll y -b as ed op po si ti on pa rty. He was so on de m ot ed at th e Uni ve rs it y Lib rary

an d u lt im at el y

di sm is se d i n 1 99 9.

Afte r in it ia ll y se rv in g as se cret ary of an AAPO reg io na l of fic e, Teg eg n ro se to

le ad ers hi p po si ti on s, se rv in g at ti m es as a m em be r of th e Cen tra l Co m

m it te e an d th e

Exe cu ti ve Co m

m it t e e , a s ch ai rm an of th e pa rty ne wsp ap er Edi to ria l Bo ard

, an d as

Secr et ary Gen eral

, Fi rs t Vice Pres id en t, an d m em be r of th e Nati on al Co ng res s. The se

la st po si ti on s pr ov id ed “ an op po rtu ni ty to m eet wit h ot he r op po si ti on po li ti cal pa rty

le ad er s, fo re ign em

ba ssi es , int er

na tio na l or gani zat io ns an d in te rn at io na l ne ws m ed ia

. ”

He pu bl is he d ov er tw o hu nd red art ic le s co m m en ti ng on th e go ve rn m en t in pr iv at e an d

AAPO pu bl ic at io ns , in cl ud in g a 20 04 bo ok en ti tl ed The Great Co ns pi racy th at

cri ti ci zed th e TPLF pa rty’ s ow n ers hi p an d co nt ro l of Eth io pi an in du st rie s. Teg eg n

en te red th e Uni te d St at es in Feb ru ary 20 08

. His wife vi si te d hi m in May, st ay ed two

-3

-m on th s, an d re t u rn ed to Eth io pi a to be wit h th ei r gr own ch il dr en

. His fam il y ha s

co nt in ue d to li ve in Eth io pi a un ha rm ed

, al th ou gh hi s wife was di sm is se d fro m he r job

at a go ve rn m en t-r un tel ev is io n s ta ti on in Ju ly 200 9.

Teg eg n’s b as es hi s cl ai m of p as t p ers ecu ti on on th e fo ll owi ng in ci de nt s:

-- W hi le in Eth io pi a, he rece iv ed rep eat ed th reat s, ha ra s s men t

, an d warn in gs

ov er t he y ears in res po ns e to hi s AAPO ac ti vi ti es an d h is writ in gs

.

-- In 20 02

, whi le he was walk in g to th e AAPO of fic e, ot he r pe de st ria ns warn ed
Teg eg n th at a car was ab ou t to hi t hi m fro m be hi nd

. He jum pe d ou t of th e way , an d

th e car sp ed away. W hi le walk in g ho m e fro m th e AAPO of fic e th at ev en in g, a y ou ng

m an ap pr oa ch ed an d sa id

, “ y ou sa ve d y ou rs el f fro m th e acci de nt

. . . y ou wil l ge t [it ],

do n’t w o r r y.” Th ou gh he co ul d no t id en ti fy th e car, it s dr iv er, or th e y ou ng m an , Teg eg n te st ifi ed th at th is type of hi t-a nd -ru n at ta ck was a m et ho d th e go ve rn m en t

us ed to eli m in at e it s p ol it ic al op po ne nt s.

-- Alt ho ug h hi s 20 04 Co ns pi racy bo ok was pu bl is he d by a go v e r n m en t

pu bl is he r, of

fic ia ls warn ed hi m to st op hi s an ti -g ov ern m en t writ in gs wit h co m m en ts

su ch as , “ Thi s is ag ai ns t ou r br ead .” An affi da vi t by Teg eg n’s wife av erre d th at sh e

was rep eat ed ly warn ed to te ll he r hu sb an d to qu it pa rti ci pa ti ng in th e A A P O a n d

pu bl is hi ng art ic le s. “ If he do es no t st op ,” on e un id en ti fie d pe rs on sa id

, “ y ou wil l ge t

hi s d ead bo dy in fr on t o f y ou r ga te .” Thei r ch il dr en rece iv ed si m il ar t hr eat s.

-- In 20 05

, aft er pa rti ci pa ti ng in co nt es te d na ti on al el ect io ns , op po si ti on pa rti es

to ok to th e st reet s in pr ot es t whe n th e r u l in g pa rty an no un ced it ha d won

. Secu rit y
fo rces res po nd ed by arre st in g op po si ti on le ad ers an d th ou sa nd s of de m on st rat o rs

. Hun dr ed s were ki ll ed

, an d so m e were im pr is on ed fo r lo ng pe rio ds

. Teg eg n te st ifi ed

th at he av oi de d im

pr is on m en t by hi di ng wit h rel at iv es an d fri en ds fo r th ree m on th s.

-4

--- Teg eg n’s wife ’s affi da vi t reci te s th at

, aft er he le ft fo r th e Uni te d St at es , sh e

rece iv ed cal ls fro m un kn own pe rs on s as ki ng hi s whe reab ou ts

. W he n sh e sa id he was

un de rg oi ng m ed ic al tre at m en t an d wou ld ret ur n whe n it was fin is he d, th ey to ld he r

th ey want ed hi m

ba ck by the en d o f Aug us t 2 00 9.

On ap pe al

, Teg eg n arg ue s th at th e 20 02 hi t-a nd -ru n in ci de nt -- a “spe ci fic

, cred ib le

, an d im m ed ia te th reat of de at h on acco un t of po li ti cal op in io n”
-- es ta bl is he d

pa st pe rs ecu ti on

. Co rad o, 38 4 F.3 d at 94 7. W e di sa gr ee. Teg eg n tes ti fie d th is was

a m et ho d of

te n us ed by th e go ve rn m en t to el im in at e po li ti cal op po ne nt s. Bu t he

p r e s en te d no ev id en ce co rro bo rat in g th at op in io n. Bec au se th e car ap pr oa ch ed
Teg eg n fro m be hi nd

, th ere is no co m pe ll in g ev id en ce th at th i s w as an in te nt io na l

as sa ul t; if it was , Teg eg n was un ab le to id en ti fy hi s at ta ck ers

. Thu s, th e reco rd fu ll y

su pp or ts t h e IJ ’s fin di ng s th at “ th ere is no ev id en ce th at ti es th e car to th e

go ve rn m en t,” an d it is un di sp ut ed th at Teg eg n rem ai ne d in Et hi op ia un ha rm ed fo r

y ears fol lo win g t hi s i nc id en t. Aft er ca refu l re vi ew, we co nc lu de th e ad m in is tra ti ve

reco r d am

pl y su pp or ts th e BIA’s fin di ng th at Teg eg n su ffer ed on ly in ti m id at io n,

ha ras sm en t, an d un fu lfi ll ed t h r e a ts of ph y si cal in jury th at di d no t es ta bl is h pa st

pe rs ecu ti on

. See Mal on ga v. Hol de r, 62 1 F.3 d 75 7, 76 4, 76 6 (8 th Ci r. 20 10 )
(u ph ol di ng BIA’s fin di n g o f n o pa st pe rs ecu ti on be cau se de at h th reat s were

“ ex ag ge rat ed , no ns pe ci fic , or l ack in g i n i m m ed ia cy ”); Quo m si eh , 47 9 F .3d at 6 06

.

II . Wel l-Fo unde d Fea r o f Future Pers ecut io n

Ev en if an ap pl ic an t fai ls to es ta bl is h pa st pe rs ecu ti on , he can qu al ify fo r

as y lu m by sh owi ng well -fo un de d fear of fu tu re pe rs ecu ti on

. 8 C.F.R. § 20 8.1 3( b) (2 ).

To be well -fo un de d, th e ap pl ic an t’s fe a r of fu tu re pe rs ecu ti on m us t be “ bo th

s u bjec ti ve ly ge nu in e an d ob jecti ve ly reas on ab le .” Eta- Ndu v. Gon zal es , 41 1 F

. 3 d

97 7, 98 3 (8 th Ci r. 20 05 ). In m os t cas es , th is req ui res a sh owi ng of an ob jecti ve ly

reas on ab le fear of pa rt ic ul ar iz ed pe rs ecu ti on on th e b a s i s of hi s po li ti cal op in io n.
Fel ek e v. INS, 11 8 F.3 d 59 4, 59 8 ( 8 th Ci r. 19 97 ). Howev er, an ap pl ic an t can al so

-5

-pr ov e a well -fo un de d fear by sh owi ng (A) a “ pa tt ern or pr act ic e

. . . of pe rs ecu ti on of

a gr ou p of pe rs on s si m il arl y si tu at ed to th e ap pl ic an t o n a c c ou nt of

. . . po li ti cal

op in io n,” an d (B) “ hi s or he r own in cl us io n in

, an d id en ti fic at io n wit h, su ch gr ou p of

pe rs on s su ch th at hi s or he r fear of pe rs ecu ti on up on ret ur n is reas on ab le .” 8 C.F.R.
§ 20 8.1 3( b) (2 )(i ii ); se e Mak on ne n v. INS, 44 F.3 d 13 78

, 13 82 -8 3 (8 th Ci r. 19 95 ). “ A

pa tt ern or pr act ic e of pe rs ecu ti on m us t be syste m ic

, pe rv as i v e , or or ga ni zed .”

W ol de m ic ha el v. Ash cro ft, 44 8 F.3 d 10 00

, 10 04 (8 th Ci r. 20 06 ) (q uo ta ti on om it te d)

.

Teg eg n arg ue s th e BIA erre d in fin di ng th at he fai le d to pr ov e a well -fo un de d

fear of pe rs ecu ti on ba se d up on th e Eth io pi an ru li ng pa rty’ s p a tt ern or pr act ic e of

pe rs ecu ti ng le ad ers of op po si ti on po li ti cal gr ou ps

. His M e mo r a n d um to th e IJ

, th ou gh fo cu se d pr im ari ly on th e is su e of pa st p e rs ecu ti on , cl earl y rai se d th is is su e:

Eth io pi a to da y is a cl as si c la wles s di ct at or sh ip

. . . . Po li ti cal op po ne nt s

are reg ul a r l y ki ll ed wit h im pu ni ty, in cl ud in g m em

be rs of th e AAPO.
Secu rit y fo rces kn ow th at th ey can to rtu re an d ki ll pe op le whe ne ve r th ey ch oo se , an d a co rru pt jud ic i a r y w i l l d o no th in g.

. . . Bo ga le Teg eg n be li ev es th at if he is se nt ba ck to Eth io pi a he wi l l b e a ta rg et of th e

se cu rit y for ces

.

Lik ewis e, hi s br ie f to th e BIA in cl ud ed th is is su e, arg ui ng th at St at e Dep art m en t an d

ot he r rep or ts in th e ad m in is tra ti ve reco rd est ab li sh ed

a de ad ly pa tt ern an d pr act ic e of ki ll in g, im pr is on m en t an d pe rm an en t di sa pp eara nc e of po li ti cal op po ne nt s. Thi s is tru e no t on l y f o r A A P O
le ad ers bu t al so fo r le ad ers of ot he r op po si ti on pa rti es i n Eth io pi a. Teg e g n is cl earl y a vo cal le ad er of a m ajor op po si ti on pa rty, an d is

“ si m il arl y si tu at ed .”

In su pp or t of th is pa tt ern or pr act ic e cl ai m , Teg eg n te st ifi ed th at he was a lo ng

ti m e le ad er of th e AAPO, an op po si ti on gr ou p, an d kn ew of two AAPO le ad ers an d

an ot he r m em

be r who were ki ll ed

, on e in 19 99 an d two in 20 02

. His affi da vi t li st ed

,

-6

-by na m e an d po li ti cal affi li at io n, do zen s of g o v e r n men t op po ne nt s who al le ge dl y

ha ve “ di sa pp eare d” or b e e n k i l l e d, ha rm ed , o r im pr is on ed by t he cu rren t Eth io pi an

reg im e, or who fle d th e co un try. He su bm it te d two affi da vi ts co rro bo rat i n g h is

te st im on y th at he i s an AAPO l ead er, te st im on y th e IJ fo un d cred ib le

. The le ng th y
affi da vi t o f Dr. Bek el e Ma m o, an Eth io pi an ci ti zen who is no w a lawf ul pe rm an en t

res id en t of thi s cou nt y , av erre d th at “ [t]he Eth io pi an go ve rn m en t con ti nu es to carr y

ou t te rro r an d syste m at ic so ci al an d po li ti cal as sa ul ts to pu ni sh cri ti cs an d op po si ti on

act iv is ts .” Dr. Mam o de sc r i b e d n ew la ws -- de ta il ed in an Am ne st y In te rn at io na l

rep or t -- th at su bjec t no n- vi ol en t po li ti cal di ss en te rs to br oa d po li ce po wers an d ha rs h

cri m in al pe na lt ie s. Dr. Mam o st at ed th at Teg eg n “i s a s e l e ct ed op po si ti on pa rty

m em be r be in g so ug ht aft er and m ay al read y be on th ei r ‘bla ck ’ li st ,” an d th at ret ur n

to Eth io pi a wou ld en da ng er h is li fe.

The ad m in is tra ti ve reco rd al so in c lu de s 20 08 an d 20 09 St at e Dep art m en t

Hum an Ri gh ts Rep or ts an d ot he r so ur ces de ta il in g ex am pl e s of di sa pp eara nc es , ki ll in gs , arre st s, be at in gs , an d ot he r ab us es by th e go ve rn m en t ag ai ns t le ad ers an d

m em be rs of op po si ti on po li ti cal gr ou ps

. Tho ug h m os t wid es pr ead aft er th e co nt es te d

20 05 el ect io n, whe n Teg eg n te st ifi ed he wen t in to hi di ng to av oi d im pr is on m en t, th e
ab us es ap pa ren tl y co nt in ue

. Fo r ex am pl e, th e 20 09 St at e Dep art m en t Rep or t st at ed

,

“ Hum an rig ht s ab us es rep or te d du rin g th e y ear in c l u d e d u n la wfu l ki ll in gs , to rtu re,
be at in g, ab us e an d m is tre at m en t o f de ta in ees an d o pp os it io n s up po rte rs by s ecu rit y
fo rces , of te n act in g wit h ev id en t im pu ni ty.” In ad di ti on , th e R ep or t st at es , “ The

go ve rn m en t co nt in ue d to arre st

, ha ras s, an d pr os ecu te jou rn al is ts

, pu b l i sh ers , an d

ed it or s.”

Afte r an al y zi ng Teg eg n’s cl ai m of p as t pe rs ecu ti on in so m e de ta il

, th e BIA

ga ve th is cl ai m o f well -fo un de d fear li tt le or no co ns id erat io n. The BIA be ga n by

ch arac te riz in g Teg eg n’s p at te rn or p ract ic e cl ai m as “ ba se d o n hi s m em

be rs hi p an d

act iv e su pp or t of th e [AAPO].” Tha t un du ly li m it s th e cl ai m

. W hi le Teg eg n’s cl ai m

of pa st pe rs ecu ti on foc us ed on hi s l ead ers hi p p os it io ns in th e AAPO, h is cla im of a

-7

-well -fo un de d fear of fu tu re pe r s e c u t i o n was ex pl ic it ly ba se d on th e go ve rn m en t’s

al le ge d pa tt ern or pr act ic e of pe rs ecu ti ng le ad ers or act iv e su pp or te rs of al l op po si ng

po li ti cal gr ou ps

. He ex pl ai ne d t ha t th e go ve rn m en t ha s ke pt op po si ti on po li ti cal

pa rti es frac tu red by req ui rin g th em to or ga ni ze al on g et hn ic li ne s, an d th en ha s

su pp res se d op po si ti on by syste m at ic al ly pe rs e c u ti ng an y le ad ers who pe rs is t in

op po s i n g t h e g ov ern m en t. Thi s is a no t-i m pl au si bl e cl ai m of pa tt ern or pr act ic e

po li ti cal pe rs ecu ti on

. Su ch pe rs ecu ti on can be co nf in ed to a pa rti c u l a r o p p os in g

po li ti cal pa rty or et hn ic gr ou p, bu t it can al so be di rect ed at a br oa de r gr ou p m ad e up

of al l who as su m e le ad ers hi p of gr ou ps op po si ng th e gr ou p in po wer. Co m pa re Ky aw

Zwar Tun v. INS, 44 5 F.3 d 55 4, 57 0 (2 d Ci r. 20 06 ) (rem an di ng fo r co ns id erat io n of

po ss ib le pa tt ern or p ract ic e o f pe rs ecu ti on ag ai ns t p ro -d em oc racy acti vi st s)

.

The BIA ack no wled ge d th e pa tt ern or pr act ic e st an da rd bu t su m m ari ly reject ed

th is cl ai m : “ Alt ho ug h [Teg eg n] rai se s a cl ai m t ha t th ere is a pa tt ern or pr act ic e of

pe rs ecu ti on of pe rs on s si m il arl y si tu at ed to hi m , no co ge nt ar gu men t fo r it s exi st en ce
ha s be en mad e .” In li gh t of th e ex te ns iv e ev id en ce we ha ve br ie fly su m m ari zed

, an d

th e ab ov e-q uo te d po rti on of Teg eg n’s br ie f to th e BIA, we can no t ag r e e t h a t no

co ge nt arg um en t was m ad e.

Asylum cl ai m s ba se d on an al le ge d pa tt ern or pr act ic e of po li ti cal pe rs ecu ti on

r a i s e c o mp l ex an d di ffi cu lt is su es , p art ic ul arl y in a co un try s uc h as Eth io pi a th at is
pl ag ue d by et hn ic riv al rie s an d ha s ex pe rie nc ed dr a mat i c po li ti cal up he av al s.

Co m pa re Gem ech u v. Ash cro ft, 38 7 F

. 3 d 9 4 4

, 94 6- 47 (8 th Ci r. 20 04 ), an d

W on dm ne h v. Ash cro ft, 36 1 F.3 d 10 96

, 10 98 (8 th Ci r. 20 04 ), wit h Fel ek e, 11 8 F.3 d

at 59 8- 99

, an d Mak on ne n, 44 F.3 d a t 13 82 -8 4. In co ns id eri ng su ch a cl ai m , th e
rel ev an t po li ti cal gr ou p or gr ou ps m us t be id en ti fie d, an d th e ap pl ic an t’s in cl us io n in

th e g ro up es ta bl is he d. Eve n if th e go ve rn m en t ha s no t th reat en ed al l m em be rs of a

po li ti cal op po si ti on wit h syste m at ic pe rs ecu ti on , t he ris k th at a pa rti cu la r ap p l i c a n t

wil l be pe rs ecu te d “ can ris e to th e le ve l req ui red fo r es ta bl is hi ng a well -fo un de d fear

of pe rs ecu ti on

. . . a s a res ul t of an in di vi du al ’s act iv it ie s in su pp or t of th e gr ou p.”

-8

-Mak on ne n, 44 F.3 d at 13 83

. He r e , t h e s e is su es were cl earl y rai se d by Teg eg n an d

su pp or te d by cred ib le e v id en ce, y et th e BIA m ad e no fin di ng s reg ard in g ei th er th e

su bjec ti ve or ob

jecti ve co m

po ne nt s of th e well -fo un de d fear an al y si s. I n th es e
ci rcu m st an ces , we m

us t rem an d be cau se we la ck “ reas on s th at are ‘spe ci fic ’ en ou gh

th at a rev ie win g co ur t can a p p r e c i at e th e reas on in g be hi nd th e [ag en cy ’s] de ci si on

an d pe rfo rm th e req ui si te jud ic ia l rev ie w,” whi ch in as y lu m cas es i s hi gh ly

de fere nt ia l. Si ng h v . Gon zal es , 49 5 F .3d 55 3, 5 57 (8t h C ir. 2 00 7)

.

Fo r th es e reas on s, we gr an t th e pe ti ti on fo r rev ie w an d rem an d to th e BIA fo r

fu rth er p ro ceed in gs no t i nc on si st en t wi th th is op in io n.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-9

-