FI L ED U.S. COURT OF A P P E A LS E LE V E N T H C IR C U IT MAY 09, 2007 THOMAS K. KAH

N CL ERK

* Honora ble Eug ene E . Siler, J r., United States Circuit J udg e for the Six th Circuit, sit ting by desig nation. [ DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FO R T HE EL EV EN TH CIRC UI T

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ N o. 06- 1266 7

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ A ge nc y N o. A 95 9 03 8 27 GE RMA N A ND RE S V AS QU EZ O LI VA R , Petitioner , ve rs us
U.S. ATTO RNEY GENERAL, Re spon de nt
.

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ Pe tit ionf or Re vie w of

aD ec isi on o f the Bo ar d of I m m igr at ionA ppe al s

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ _ (M ay 9 , 200 7) Be fo re T JO FL A T , F A Y a nd S IL E R, Ci rc uit Jud ge s . * PE R CU RIA M:2

Pe tit ion er G er m anA ndr es V as que z O liv ar ( “ O liv ar ”) appe al s th e Bo ar d of Im m igrati o n Ap peals’ (“ Board”) affir m ance of the I m

m igration Ju dge’ s (“ IJ”) decision den y ing hi s petition for asy lum or w ithho lding of rem ov al
. The B oard
summ arily

adopted the IJ’ s decision. The IJ, while finding Olivar credible, held th at his te sti m ony

r eg ar din g hi s f

ear of pe rs ec uti on w as not

ba se d onpol iti ca l op ini on o r rel ig io us be li efs , t he two pr ot ect ed gr ou nd s h e rai se d. Fo r th e rea so ns set ou t b el ow,
w e re m an d to the Bo ar d to r em an d to the I J f or a ddi tio na l f

ind ing s. BACKGRO UND A ft er ahe ar ing to de te rm ine if O liv ar w as e lig ibl e fo r as y lum or w ith hol din g of rem oval, the IJ f

ound that Olivar is a

citizen of Colo m

bia who entere d the United States on August 27, 2001
. Olivar applied for asy lum because he had been threa tened and confronted bythe Revolution ary Ar m ed Force s of Colom

bia (“ FA RC”)
. O liv ar te sti fi ed tha t he gr ew up in a C athol ic f am ily a nd a tte nde d C athol ic school. In 1997, he j oined Setem -Pr oind e, an organization found ed by a priest that p r o mo t e s t h e q u a l i t y o f

l i f e a n de du c a t i o n f

o r “u n p r o t e c t e dyo u t h
. ” O l i v a r b e c a me
ac tiv e an d he ld c ha t se ssi ons w ithy out h w he re he w oul d pr om ote Ch ri sti ante ac hin gs to try to convin ce t he y oung people to follow the path of Christ, and to not get invo lved with violent groups such a s FA RC. O livar testified that he publi cly urged th es e v io le nt gro up s t o l ay do wn t he ir we ap on s an d fo ll ow Ch ris t.3

Sp ec if ic al ly , O liv ar

te sti fi ed tha t t he re w er e tw o y oung F A RC m em be rs in pa rt ic ular w ho w an te d to r et ur n to am or e pe ac ef

ul c ivi l l if e. A t O liv ar ’ s su gge sti on, Setem -Pr oind e took steps to hou se these indivi duals and p rotect them from FA RC
re pr isa ls. I n Aug ust

of 200 1, he not ic ed

tw o m enf

oll ow ing him
. Whe n c onf ro nte d,
one of the m en show ed O liv ar tha t he wa s c ar ry ing agun . T he oth er

m anw al ke d up to O liv ar , ide nti fi ed him se lf as a m em be r of FA RC an d as ke d hi m f or ide nti fi ca tio n. Olivar c laim ed not to have identification, and that he wa s not, in fact, Ge rm an Andres V as que z O liv ar . T he F A RC m em be r ca lle d hi m

ali ar , a nd t old

O liv ar he w as goi ng to pay for taking m em

bers aw ay from FA RC. O livar testified that the FA RC m em ber
sa id “ y ou are ta kin g th e y oung m ili tia m en out of our ranks, an d why [are y ou] put tin g int o th ei r he ad s C hr istia n id ea s a nd thin gs tha t r ea lly [ ar en ’ t] f

or the m . ” T he indiv idual struck Olivar and then fled the scene w ith his partner. N ex t, O liv ar

te sti fi ed th at on A ugus t 20 , 200 1, af if te eny ear- old

gir l w ho
a t t e n d e d o n e o f h i s l e c tu r e s g a v e h i m a n l e t t e r , w h i c h h e o p e n e d up o n r e tu rn i n g h o me tha t e ve nin g. T he le tte r w as w ri tte n by ha nd o n F A RC sta tio ne ry . T he le tte r re ad : Son of a bitch I think that the messag e wa s not clear . Ihope this letter will make you understand the messag e that we wanted to g ive t o y ou [when we c onfronted you previously ]. The truth is that to our y oung soldiers or whatever y ou want to ca ll them or us, we a

re not intere sted or shit in y ou to w ash the brain to our soldiers with y our littl e wor kshops or invite them to y our religious t hings the rea lity is we don’t ca re a n ass... Al l o f y o u and those prie sts are some son of the bitch thieves... avoid us the dirty work a nd g et out of her e... Ge t out [of Colombi a y ou] son of a bitch Missioner of sh it.4

A ft er r ec ei vin g th is le tt er , a cc or din g to the I J’ s f ind ing s, O liv ar

c onsu lte d w itha b r o t h e r o f t h e r e l i g i o u s o r g a n i z a t i o n w h o a d v i s e d h i m t o l e a v e t h e c o u n t ry a n dc o me to the U nit ed

S ta te s. DISC US SION To be e ligib le for a sy lum , 8 U. S. C. § 1 158(b)(1)(A ) re quires that an alien qua lif y a s ar ef ugee. A r ef

uge e is d ef

ine d in8 U
. S. C. § 11 01( a) (4 2) (A ) as “ an y person who is outs ide any country of such person's nationalit y or, in the case of a pe rs on h av ing no na tiona lity , is out sid e an y c ountry in w hic h su ch pe rs on l as t habit ua lly re sid ed , an d w ho is una ble or unw ill ing to re tur n to, an d is una

ble or
unw ill ing to av ai l hi m se lf or he rs el f of

the pr ote ct ionof

, tha t c ountry

be ca use of pers ecutionor

aw el l- fo unde d f

ear of pe rs ec uti on o n a cc ount of r ac e, r el igi on,
na ti on al it y , m em

be rs hi p i n a pa rti cu la r so ci al gro up , or p ol it ic al op in io n.” Inhis de ci sio n, the IJ opi ne d that the m oti va tio n f

or F A RC ’ s a ct ion s w as not b ec au s e o f O l i v a r ’s re l i g i o u s o r p o l i t i ca l b el i ef s , b u tra t h ers t emm ed fr o m Ol i v ar ’s attem pts to c o n v i n ce y oung er F ARC m em bers to leave their r anks. While the IJ p o i n t e do u t t h a t O l i v a r ’s p o l i t i c a l o p i n i o n h a d l i t t l e t o d o w i t h h i s w o rk w i t h S e t e mProinde, he does not m ake any specific f indin gs as to the evidence Olivar pre sented about his religious beliefs. Rather, the IJ s im ply concluded that FA RC’ s actions were1. Although a dditional issues were r aised by the petitioner, we find it unnece ssary to consider t h em i nv i ew o f o u r r

u l i n g. 5 th e res ul t o f th e so le fact th at Oli va r was att em pt in g, an d s uc ceed in g i n a t l eas t t wo cases, to get y oung m em

bers to turn away

from FA RC. Ho we v er , the IJ m ade no m ention o f the specific pieces of evidence O livar presented about his religious beliefs. He testified that Setem -Pr oind e is a Christian
or ga niz at ion
. He te sti fi ed tha t he use d Chr ist ’ s tea ch ing s to try to ste er y oung pe opl e
aw ay from FA RC. The le tter FA RC delivered to O livar also m akes several r efer ences to the religious nature of his work. While FAR C’ s ultim ate prob lem with O livar wa s tha t he w as tr

y ing to g et

m em be rs to tur n a w ay f ro m the F A RC , the I J di d no t m en tio n tha t it w as O liv ar ’ s r el igi ous be lie fs a nd t ea ch ing s th at m oti va te d hi m

to re ac h ou t t o y oung F A RC m em

be rs . T he I J si m

ply f ai le d to ex pla in w ha t r ole O liv ar ’ s r el igi ous be lie fs play ed in t

he a ct ionta ke n by

F A RC
. I t i s no a nsw er to sugg es t t ha t t he
m em be rs of F A RC w ho thr ea te ne d O liv ar e xpr es se d no thing as to the ir r el igi ous be lie fs or tha t suchw as the m oti va tio n f or the ir a ct ion s. T he que sti on i s w he the r or not O liv ar w as be ing pe rs ec ute d be ca use of the r el igi ous be lie fs w hic h m oti va te d hi s
ac tio ns. 16

T he pe tit ionis gr an te d inpa rt ; th e m at te r is r em an de d to the Bo ar d of Im m igr at ionA ppe al s f

or r em an d to the Im

m igr at ion Judg e fo r A ddi tio na l F ind ing s spe ci fi ca lly

a ddr es se d to the que sti on o utl ine d he re in.