Interim Decision #2534 

MATTER OF DABAASE 

In Visa Petition Proceedings 

A-18375444 

Decided by Board October 1, 1976 

(1) Where, in visa petition proceedings, proof of termination of a Ghanaian customary 

tribal marriage by customary tribal divorce is sought by securing from a Ghanaian 

District Court a decree confirming the fact that the non-judicial divorce was validly 

obtained, the confirmation decree should be certified as a true copy by the issuing court 

and, in turn, by the appropriate United States embassy or consulate as a decree of the 

court. 

(2) Where proof of such a Ghanaian customary divorce is being sought without the 

assistance of the Ghanaian judicial system, (A) evidence to establish the current customary divorce law of the tribe may be derived from reported cases, legal treaties and 

commentaries, depositions of legal scholars, and advisory opinions from those organizations traditionally recognized by the Ghanaian Government as possessing knowledge of 

the customary law (The Courts Act, 1971, Act 372, see. 50(3)(n)), and (B) evidence to 

establish compliance with the pertinent ceremonial procedures, consisting of affidavits 

from the parties and witnesses involved, must be specific rather than conclusory in 

nature, and the information provided in the affidavits should include, but need not be 

limited to, the date of the customary marriage, the ground for its dissolution, the date of 

the proceeding, the names and birthdates of any children born of the marriage, as well 

as any custody agreement reached, and a description of the tribal formalities observed. 

ON 13EHALr OF 14,1 IONER: Pro se 

The United States petitioner applied for immediate relative status for 

the beneficiary as her spouse under section 201(b) of the Immigration 

and Nationality Act. In a decision dated September 12, 1973, the District Director denied the petition. Although an appeal was taken from 

that decision, it apparently was not forwarded to the Board. A second 

d ecision, again denying the petition, was issued by the District Director 

on February 18, 1976. The petitioner has appealed. The record will be 

remanded to the District Director. 

The beneficiary is a native and citizen of Ghana. He married the 

petitioner on May 12, 1973, in the State of Missouri. At the time of the 

marriage, the petitioner was apparently unaware that her divorce from 

a previous husband was not yet final. After her divorce was granted on 

July 2, 1973, the petitioner and the beneficiary went through another 

39 
Interim Decision #2534 

marriage ceremony on September 22, 1973. The validity of this second 

ceremony remains in doubt, however, since the petitioner has failed to 

prove that the beneficiary's first marriage to a Ghanaian wife had been 

legally dissolved. 

The record indicates that in 1956 the beneficiary was married in 

Ghana according to his tribal custom. He has alleged that his Ghanaian 

wife divorced him in 1973, again according to tribal custom. The evidence submitted to establish the validity of that divorce consists of 

photostats of two letters which the beneficiary's brother allegedly wrote 

to him from Ghana. In the first letter, the beneficiary is informed of the 

divorce which his wife had recently secured. In the second, the beneficiary is advised to explain the procedures surrounding customary 

divorce to the Immigration and Naturalization Service. 

In visa petition proceedings, the petitioner bears the burden of proving the beneficiary's eligibility for the immigration benefit sought. Matter of Brantigan, 11 I. & N. Dec. 493 (BIA 1966). Under 8 C.F.R. 

204.2(c)(2), the petitioner must submit proof of the legal termination of 

all previous marriages of both parties. We agree with the District 

Director that the undocumented opinion of the beneficiary's brother is 

insufficient to establish the validity of the alleged customary divorce. 

In Matter of Akinola, Interim Decision 2400 (BIA 1975), we noted 

that a Ghanaian divorce, governed by customary law, may be granted 

by a Ghanaian District Court or may be effectuated without recourse to 

the courts. In contrast to the court-decreed divorce, the purely customary divorce in a traditional tribal setting is difficult to prove. Since there 

is no document issued for such a divorce and no system of registration, 

proof of its validity, of necessity, must be undertaken by the parties to 

the proceeding. 

Perhaps the simplest method of supplying such proof involves securing from a Ghanaian District Court a decree confirming the fact that the 

n on judicial divorce was validly obtained. For use in immigration matters, this decree of confirmation should be certified as a true copy by the 

issuing court and, in turn, by the appropriate United States embassy or 

consulate as a decree of the court. 

If the party to the tribal divorce prefers to prove the validity of the 

proceeding without the assistance of the Ghanaian judicial system, he 

must provide evidence which establishes (1) the tribe to which he 

b elongs (2) the current customary divorce law of that tribe (3) the fact 

tlhat the pertinent ceremonial procedures were followed. See Matter of 

A►kinaa, supra; Matter of Anwang, Interim Decision 2248 (BIA 1973). 

To establish the current customary law of his tribe, the party may 

present evidence derived from reported cases, legal treaties and cornn-ientaries, and depositions of legal scholars. The evidence could also 

consist of advisory opinions from those organizations traditionally red40 
Interim Decision #2534 

ognized by the Ghanaian Government as possessing knowledge of customary law.** 

Once the law has been established, it remains for the party to prove 

that the divorce was properly perfected. Affidavits from the parties and 

the witnesses involved must be specific rather than conclusory in nature. Information provided should include, but need not, be limited to, 

the date of the customary marriage, the ground for its dissolution and 

the date of the proceeding, the names and birthdates of any children 

born of the marriage as well as any custody agreement reached, and a 

description of the tribal formalities observed. 

We shall remand the case to the District Director to afford the 

petitioner an opportunity to obtain the evidence necessary to establish 

the beneficiary's eligibility for immediate relative status. After receipt 

of such evidence, the District Director should enter a new decision, 

stating his reasons and make appropriate service on the interested 

parties in accordance with Matter of To, Interim Decision 2283 (BIA 

1974). 

ORDER: The record is remanded for the action indicated in the 

foregoing opinion_ 

** See, The Courts Act, 1971, Act 372, section 50(3)(ii) in which the Ghanaian courts 

are allowed to solicit advisory opinions from a "House of Chiefs, or a Divisional or 

Trpainoonl Council or other body possessing knowledge of the customary law in question." No doubt there are numerous domestic tribunals which are capable of rendering 

enpert opinions in the area of tribal divorce. 

41