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

6-17-2005 

# Fi a d jo e 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 : P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 03-2917

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 author i 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

" F i a dj oe v . Atty Ge n U SA" (2005). 2005 D e cisio n s . P ape r 915. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005/915P RE CE DE NT I AL

I N TH E 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 os . 03- 2917 & 04- 1554

L OR RA I NE F I ADJ OE P eti ti o n er,

v. A TTO RN EY G EN ER A L O F TH E U N I TED STA TES,

R e sp o n d e n t.

O n Pet i t i on forR evi ew of O r der s of The B o a rd o f Im m ig ra tio n A p p e a ls A gencyD ocketN o. A 77- 943- 716

A r gued N ovember19, 2004The Honorable Dic k inson R. Debevoise, Senior United * States District Judg e for the District of New J ersey , sitti ngby designation. 2 Bef or e : RO TH , SM I TH , Ci r c ui tJ ud ge s a nd D EB EV O I SE , * Seni orD i s t r i ctC our tJ udge ( Fi l ed: J une 17, 2005) D A V I D E

. PI V E R , E SQ

. ( A r gued) W. J OHN VA NDE NB E RG , E S Q. T he Law O ffi ce of

D avi d E

. Pi ver 150 St r aff

or d A ve. , Sui t e 115 W ayne, PA 19087 P E T E R D

. KE S S L E R, E S Q. A s s i s t antA t t or neyG ener al C i vi l D i vi s i on T E RR I J

. S CA DR ON, E S Q. A s s i s t antD i r ect or J E FFR E Y J

. B E R N ST E I N ( A r gued) L E S L I E M c KAY A t t o r n e ys U

. S. D epart m entof J us t i ce, C i vi l D i vi s i on 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

. 200443 OPI NI ON O F THE COURT

D ebevoi s e, Seni or D i s t ri ct Judge Pet i t i oner , L or r ai ne Fi adj oe, pet i t i ons forr evi ew of or der s of the B oar d of I m m i gr at i on A ppeal s ( “B I A ”) deny i ng herappl i cat i on foras y l um , w i t hhol di ng of r emoval and r el i ef undert he C onvent i on A gai ns tT or tur e and de ny i ng her m ot i on forr econs i der at i on. W i t h t he exc ept i on of an e l even y ea r i n terva l, fro m 1 9 7 8 , w h en M s. F iadjo e w as se v en y ea rs of age , unt i l herfl i ghtfr om hernat i ve G hana t o t he U ni t ed St at es i n M ar ch 2000, M s . Fi adj oe w as hel d as a s l ave of her f a th e r, a p rie st o f

th e T ro k o si s e c t, w h o , in a c c o rd a n c e w ith t he t enet s of the s ect , for ced hi s daught ert o w or k forhi m and abus ed herphy s i cal l yand s exual l y . M s . Fi adj oe s ought asy lum an d o ther relief o n the g rou n d that if sh e w ere r etur ned t o G hana s he, as one of the w om en s ubj ectt o t he p r a c t i c e s o f

t h e Tr o k o s i s e c t , wo u l d l i k e l yo n c e a g a i n b e c o me s ubj ectt o herfather ’ s bondage a nd abus e, a cons equenc e that G h a n ian g o v e rn m e n t au th o rities w e re u n a b le o r u n w ill in g to p re v e n t. B ot h t he I m m i gr at i on J udge ( “I J ”) and the B I A found that M s. F iadjo e’s testi m o n yw as n o t cred ible, an d the B IA found thatM s . Fi adj oe fa i l ed t o es t abl i s h t hatthe governm ent of G hana w as ei t herunw i l l i ng orunabl e t o contr ol her father ’ s s exual abus e. W e conc l ude thatthes e fi ndi ngs ar e not s uppor t ed byr eas onabl e, s ubs t ant i al and pr obat i ve evi dence on t he r ecor d cons i der ed as a w hol e. W e w i l l gr antthe pet i t i on and r emand t he ca s e fora new hear i ng and dev el op m ent of t he record bef ore a di fferentIJ

. I . Pro c e dur alBackg r oundThe enforc ement func tions of the I NS have sincebeen 1 tra n s f er re d tothe Department of H omeland Security , pursuant to §441 of the Ho me land Se c urity Ac t of 20 02 , Pub

. L . N o. 10 7- 29 6, 11 6 St at. 2135 (Nov. 25, 2002). 4 On M a r c h 1 1 , 2 0 0 0 , u s i n g a p a s s p o r tb e a r i n g th e n a me of anotherper s on, pet i t i oner , L orr ai ne Fi adj oe, ent er ed the U ni t ed St at es . She i s a mem berof the Ew e tr i be and a nat i ve and ci t i zen of

G hana. She w as det ai ned as an arr i vi ng al i en and i nt ervi ew ed. U pon herr efus al t o be s entback t o G hana, th e im m ig ra tio n a u th o rities tra n sf e rre d h e r to th e Y o rk C o u n ty [Penns y l vani a] Pr i s on. O n M ar ch 30 A s y l um O ffi cerJ ames L. R eave s con du ct ed an A sy l um P re- S creeni ng Int ervi ew of M s. Fi adj oe, aft erw hi ch he f ound t hats he had e s t abl i s hed a s i gni fi cantpos s i bi l i t yof a c l ai m foras y l um bas ed on her m ember s hi p i n a part i cul ars oci al gr oup ( unm arr i ed w om en over25 i n G hana)

. H e al s o found thatM s . Fi adj oe had e s ta b lis h e d a c re d ib le f

e a r o f p e rs e c u tio n o r t o rt u re . O n t he s ame daythe I m m i gr at i on and N atur al i zat i on S e rv ice (“ IN S ” ) c h a rg e d M s. F iad jo e w ith re m o v e a b ili ty 1 u n d e r § § 2 1 2 (a )( 6 )( C )( i) a n d 2 1 2 (a )( 7 )( A )( i) (I ) o f th e IN A , 8 U

. S. C

. §§1182( a) ( 6) ( C ) ( i ) , ( a) ( 7) ( A ) ( i ) ( I ) ( 2003) and i s s ued a no t i ce t o ap pear. A ta June 1 , 20 00 heari ng befo re an I J M s. Fi adj oe conc eded thats he w as r emovabl e under §212( a) ( 7) ( A ) ( i ) ( I ) of the I N A forbei ng an i nt endi ng im m igran t no t i n p o sses sion o f a v ali d v isa o r oth er e n try d o c u m e n t. M s . Fi adj oe fi l ed appl i cat i ons foras y l um , w i t hhol di ng of rem ov al , and prot ect i on un der the C on ven t i on A gainst T or tur e, A r t i cl e 3 of the C onvent i on A gai ns tT or tur e and O t herFor m s of C ruel , I nhum an orD egr adi ng T r eatm entor Puni s hm ent , G

. A

. R es . 39/ 46, A nnex 39 U

. N

. G A O R Supp. N o. 51 , at19 7, U

. N

. D oc. A / 39 / 51 (1984 ) ( “C A T ”). T he IJ, D o n a ld V in c e n t F e rlise , h e ld a n e v id e n tiary he a rin g o n A p ril5 30, 2002, aft erw hi ch he de ni ed M s . Fi adj oe’ s appl i cat i on for r el i ef a nd or der ed herr emoved t o G hana. M s . F i a d j o e f i l e d a t i me l ya p p e a l wi t h th e BI A. On J une 6, 2003 t he B I A di s m i s s ed the appe al

. M s . Fi adj oe fi l ed a ti m elyp eti ti o n fo r rev iew o f th e B IA ’s de cisi o n in this co u rt and s ubs equent l yfi l ed a mot i on w i t h t he B I A s eeki ng r econs i der at i on of the B I A ’ s J une 6 or der

. O n February18, 2004 t he B I A deni ed the mot i on t o r econs i der

. M s . Fi adj oe f ile d a p e titio n f

o r r e v ie w o f

th e B IA ’s F e b ru a ry 1 8 d e c is io n . T hatpet i t i on has been c ons ol i dat ed w i t h t he fi r s tpet i t i on.

I I . P et i t i oner’ s E vi dence M s . Fi adj oe’ s cl ai m s forr el i ef s t em from heras s ert i on t hatfr om age s even unt i l s he fl ed fr om G hana, w i t h an el even y ear i nterval fr om 19 78 un t i l 19 89 , her fat her hel d h er as a s l ave, s ubj ectt o phy s i cal beat i ngs and fr equentr ape, pur s uant t o the t enets of the T rokosi rel i gion, of w hich her father w as a p rie st. T h e n ature an d ex ist en ce o f th e T rok o si prac ti ce s are d e s c ri b e d in a n u m b e r o f d o c u m e n ts th a t a re in th e re c o rd

. T he U ni t ed St at es D epart m entof St at e C ount r yR epor ton H um an R i ght s Pr act i ces i n G hana r el eas ed i n February2001 ( t he “St at e D epart m entR epor t ” orthe “Repor t ”) i s one exam ple. In a sum m aryst at em ent the R epo rtst at es, “V i ol ence agai ns tw om en i s a s er i ous pr obl em. T r adi t i onal pr act i ces , i ncl udi ng a l ocal i zed f or m of r i tual s ervi tude (T ro k o si) p ra c tice d in so m e ru ra l ar e a s, still res u lt i n cons i der abl e abus e and di s cr i m i nat i on agai ns tw om en and chil dren. ” T he R epo rtfurther noted t hat “[v]i olence against w om en, i ncludi ng rape and do m est i c viol ence, r em ai ns a sig n if ica n t p ro b lem . A 1 9 9 8 stu d yre v e a led th a t p a rticu lar ly i n low -i nco m e, high-densi t ysect i on s of great er A ccra, atl east 5 4 p e rc e n t o f

w o m e n h a v e b e e n a s s a u lte d in re c e n t yea rs ,” a n d th a t “[ w ]o m e n , es p e c iallyin ru ra l ar e a s, re m a in su b jec t to b u rd e n so m e lab o r c o n d iti o n s a n d tra d iti o n a l m a le6 d o m in a n c e .” T h e S tate D e p a rtm e n t R e p o rt d e sc rib e d in so m e d e tail T rokosi pract i ces:

A lth o u g h th e C o n stitu tio n p ro h ib its sla v e ry , it exi s t s on a l i m i t ed s cal e. T r okos i , a tr adi t i onal pr act i ce f

ound among t he Ew e ethni c gr oup and in p a rt o f th e V o lta R e g io n , is a n e sp e c ially se v e re h u m a n rig h ts a b u se a n d a n e x tre m e ly seriou s v iolati o n o f c h il d ren ’s an d w o m en ’s rig h ts. It is a sy ste m in w h ich a y o u n g g irl, s om et i m es underthe age of 10, i s m ade a s l ave to a f e tish sh rin e f

o r o f f e n se s a lleg e d ly co m m itted b ya m em b er o f th e g ir l’ s fa m il y . In ra re in sta n c e s, b o y s a re o f f e re d . T h e b e lief

is t hat , i f s om eone i n t hatfami l yhas comm i t t ed a c rim e , su c h a s s tea lin g , m e m b e rs o f th e f a m ily m aybeg i n to di e i n lar ge n um bers unl ess a y o u n g g irl is g iv e n to th e lo c a l f e tish sh rin e to at one forthe off

ens e. T he gi r l becomes the pr oper t yof the fe t i s h pr i es t , m us tw or k on the p ri e s t’ s f a rm , a n d p e rf

o rm o th e r l a b o rs f

o r h im

. B eca us e theyar e the s exual pr oper t yof the pr i es t s , m os tT r okos i s l aves have c hi l dr en by t he p ri est s. A l t ho ug h the gi rl s’ fam i l i es m ust p rov ide f o r th eir ne ed s su ch as f

o o d , m o st are u n a b le to d o so . T h e re a re a t lea st 2 ,2 0 0 g irls and w om en bound t o var i ous s hr i nes i n t he T r okos i s y s t em, a fi gur e thatdoes noti ncl ude t he s l aves ’ chi l dr en. E ven w hen fr eed byher fet i s h pr i es tfr om the more oner ous as pect s of h e r b o n d a g e , w h e th e r v o lu n tar ilyo r a s a re su lt of i nt ervent i on byact i vi s t s , a Trokos i w om en g e n e ra llyh a s f

e w m a rk e tab le s k ill s a n d little h o p e o f m a rria g e a n d typ ica llyre m a in s b o u n d to t he s hr i ne forl i fe byps y chol ogi cal and s oci al pr es s ur e ar i s i ng fr om a tr adi t i onal bel i ef that7 m isfo rtu n e m ayb ef

all a T rok o si w o m an ’s fami l yorvi l l age i f s he aba ndons herobl i gat i ons t o t he s hr i ne. W hen a f et i s h s l ave di es , her fami l yi s expec t ed t o r epl ace herw i t h another y oung gi r l , thus perpetuat i ng the bondage t o t he fet i s h s hr i ne fr om gener at i on t o gener at i on. In 1 9 9 8 G h a n a ’s P a rliam e n t p a ss e d leg isla tio n th a t, among ot herpr ovi s i ons des i gned t o pr ot ectw om en, banned th e p ra c tic e o f

“ c u s to m a ry se rv itu d e ” (k n o w n a s T ro k o s i)

. A ft erpas s age of

t hi s l egi s l at i on, the R eports t at es , “[t ] he C H R A J a n d In ter n a tio n a l N e e d s h a v e h a d so m e su c c e ss in appr oachi ng vi l l age a ut hor i t i es and fe t i s h pr i es t s atover316 of the maj orand mi nors hr i nes , w i nni ng the r el eas e of 2, 800 T r okos i s l aves t o dat e and r etr ai ni ng them for ne w p rof essio n s. ” H o w ev er, as o f th e ti m e o f th e re p o rt(20 0 0 ), “[t ] her e ar e atl eas t2, 200 gi r l s and w om en bound t o var i ous s hr i nes i n t he Trokos i s y s t em, a fi gur e thatdoes noti ncl ude th e s la v e s ’ c h ild re n .” D es pi t e the 1998 l egi s l at i on, as of the y ear2000, “[t ] he G o v e rn m e n t h a s n o t p ro se c u ted a n yp ra c tit io n e rs o f T ro k o si, and i n A ug ust19 99 , a presi den t i al ai de cri t i ci zed an t i -Troko si act i vi s t s forbei ng i ns ens i t i ve t o i ndi genous cul tur al and ‘reli g iou s’ pra cti ce s. ” T h e S tat em en t D ep artm en t R ep o rt r eci t es atgr eatl ength t he t err i bl e abus es comm i t t ed by G hana’ s pol i ce, not i ng that“[i ] n r ece nty ear s , the pol i ce service i n p art i cularhas com e un der severe cr i t i ci sm fol l ow i ng i nci dent s of pol i ce brut al i t y , corrupt i on, and n e g lig e n c e .” W ith re sp e c t to th e p o lice a n d th e ir re a c tio n to vi ol ence agai ns tw om en, the R epor tr eci t es “[v] i ol ence agai ns tw om en, i ncl udi ng r ape a nd dom es t i c vi ol ence , r emai ns a s i gni fi cantpr obl em . . . a t ot al of 95 per centof the v ictim s o f

d o m e stic v io len c e a re w o m e n , ac c o rd in g to d a ta gather ed byt he FI D A

. T hes e abus es gener al l ygo unr epor t ed a n d se ld o m c o m e b e f

o re th e c o u rts. T h e p o lice ten d n o t to i nt ervene i n dom es t i c di s put es . ”8 Iti s agai nstt his w el l -docum ented back groun d thatM s. F i adjoe’ s accou nt of her ow n ex peri ences u nfo l ds. T hese event s ar e des cr i bed i n heraff i davi ti n s uppor tof heras y l um appl i cat i on ( For m I

- 589) and i n herA pr i l 30, 2002 hear i ng t es t i m ony . T heyar e des cr i bed i n the r eportof the p sy c h o lo g ist w h o tre a ted h e r f o r th e tra u m a th e se e v e n ts caus ed. M s . Fi adj oe w as born a mem berof the Ew e tr i be on M ar ch 17, 1971 i n A ccr a, G hana. W hen s he w as a y oung c h ild h e r p a re n ts s e p a ra ted . S h e w a s to o y o u n g a t th a t ti m e to r emem berherpar ent s l i vi ng t ogether

. H erm otherr emar r i ed and r emai ned i n A ccr a. H erfather , a fa r m er , al s o r emar r i ed a n d liv e d in a v ill a g e c a lled V e k u o u tsid e o f A n lo g a , a re m o te ar ea of rur al G hana. M s . Fi adj oe w as s entt o l i ve w i t h her fa ther. T h e f

a th e r w a s a T ro k o si p rie st, m a in tain in g a sh rin e in h is h o m e w h e re h e a n d o th e r m e m b e rs o f th e T ro k o si c u lt conduct ed Trokos i r i tual s . I n 1978 w hen M s . Fi adj oe w as seven y ears of ag e, her fat her, pu rs uan tt o T rokosi pract i ces, s oughtt o m ake he rhi s s l ave, w or ki ng forhi m and the s hr i ne a n d su b m itt in g to h im se x u a lly . D u rin g a n a p p ro x im a tely t hr ee mont hs per i od t he fa t hers exual l yabus ed M s . Fi adj oe as par tof the Trokos i t enet s . For tunat el yforM s . Fi adj oe, her fat her’ s si st er, A un tD el a, obj ect ed to this abu se and took M s. Fi adj oe t o l i ve w i t h herfami l yi n A ccr a. T her e M s . Fi adj oe no l ongers aw herfatherand w as abl e t o att end s chool and l i ve the l i fe of

an indep end ent y ou ng w om an. S he w as a C hr i s t i an, of the B apt i s tper s uas i on. S a d ly , in 1 9 8 9 A u n t D e la w a s k ill e d in a n a u to m o b ile a c c id e n t. H e r h u sb a n d re m a rrie d a n d d ire c ted M s. F iad jo e to leav e h is ho u se. S h e h ad n o w h ere else to g o ex ce p t t o return t o herfatheri n V eku. T her e s he once agai n beca m e her f a t h e r ’ s s l a v e s u b

j e c tt o b e a t i n g s a n d r a p e . A p p r o x i m a t e l y a y earaft erherr etur n s he des cr i bed t o hergr andmot herthe t or m ent s t o w hi ch s he w as bei ng s ubj ect ed. T he gr andmot her r epor t ed the bea t i ngs t o t he pol i ce butdi d notm ent i on the9 ra p e s b e c a u se o f

th e d isg ra c e th a t su c h a re v e latio n w o u ld br i ng upon t he fa m i l y . T he pol i ce r efus ed t o i nt ervene on the gr ound t hatonl ya domest i c di s put e w as i nvol ved. M s . F ia d jo e a tte m p te d to e s c a p e f ro m th e s e c o n d itio n s . S h e we n tt o wo r k s e l l i n g f i s h i n o r d e rt o a c c u mu l a t e s o me m oney . W hen s he had s aved e nough s he moved outof her father ’ s hous e and r ent ed a r oom of herow n. H ow ever , aft er r etur ni ng t o herr oom one eve ni ng herl andl or d r eturned her r entand t ol d hers he coul d nots t ay . H e had be en thr eat ened byherfather

. M s . Fi adj oe s oughtt o es cape thr ough m arr i age a n d d a ted tw o m e n o f

h e r v ill a g e , firs t T iti a n d th e n A g o l, eac h of w hom w ant ed t o m arr yher

. H erfatherw oul d not al l ow a mar r i age a nd s car ed off eac h of thes e men. I n 1996 M s . Fi adj oe meta M us l i m m an, A hm ed K ubl ano w ho l i ved w i t h hi s par ent s i n A nl oga. H i s br other R as heed l i ved nea rby

. M s . Fi adj oe and A hm ed fe l l i n l ove a n d w a n ted to m a rry . In o rd e r to p e rsu a d e th e f a th e r to c o n se n t A h m e d b ro u g h t h im g if ts, b u t h e c o u ld n o t b rin g h is f a m ily b e c a u s e th e yw e re M u s lim s a n d o p p o s e d th e m a rr ia g e . M s . Fi adj oe had i nform ed A hm ed aboutthe bea t i ngs buthad nott ol d hi m t hatherfatherper i odi cal l yr aped he r . A hm ed p e rsu a d e d h e r to lea v e h e r h o m e a n d g o w ith h im to sta yw ith hi s cous i n i n N i ger i a. T h e tw o f

le d to N ig e ri a a n d s ta y e d w ith th e c o u s in

. T heys t ay ed ther e a w eek, butthe cous i n s t art ed t o appr oach M s . Fi adj oe s exual l yand theyhad t o l eave . H avi ng no m oney i tw as nece s s aryt hattheyr eturn t o G hana. M s . Fi adj oe had no pl ace t o go ot hert han herfather ’ s hous e. A s s he expl ai ned atheras y l um hear i ng, s he had t o go back “ beca us e w e [s he and A hm ed] ar e notm arr i ed and i n G hana be for e y ou can be fr ee f r om y ourfather , y ourfatherhave t o acc epty our m a rr ia g e .” T he fa t herr es um ed bea t i ng M s . Fi adj oe and pour ed boi l i ng w at eroverherbeca us e s he had di s obey ed hi m . T he s exual abus e cont i nued. She and A hm ed cont i nued t o s ee eac h ot herand s t i l l w ant ed t o m arr y . I tw as a s t ar - cr os s ed10 r el at i ons hi p. A s M s . Fi adj oe s t at ed i n heraff i davi t : “M y f a th e r h a ted A h m e d b e c a u se h e d id n o t w a n t m e to b e w ith a n y o n e b u t h im , a n d b e c a u s e A h m e d w a s a M u s lim . M y fa ther w as o p p o sed to the m arriage an d h e sa id tha t I ca n ’t m a rryA h m e d b e c a u se I a m a C h ristia n . A h m e d ’s f a m ilyd id notappr ove of me and di d notw antus t o m arr ybeca us e I am a C h ri s tia n .” M s . Fi adj oe bec ame pr egnantbyA hm ed and hope d th a t th is w o u ld p e rs u a d e h e r f a th e r t o a g re e to h e r m a rr ia g e . W h e n sh e to ld h e r f

a th e r o f h e r p re g n a n c yh e b e a t h e r u n til s h e mi s c a r r i e d

. Ah me d c o n t i n u e d t o v i s i tM s . F i a d j o e . He di d s o on M ar ch 5, 2000, w ai t i ng i n herbedr oom befor e they w entoutt ogether

. M s . Fi adj oe t es t i fi ed thatatthatpoi nt“I w entt o t he s how ert o t ake a bath and then, w hen I came back, wh e n I wa s c o mi n g o u t , I s a w myf a t h e rc o mi n g o u to f

my r oom , butI knew A hm ed w as i n t he r oom , s o w hen I w ent t her e A hm ed w as l y i ng i n bl ood .

. . I hol d [hi s ] hand and he d idn ’ttal k to m e, he w as ju st l y ing in the b loo d an d h e d idn ’t d o a n yth in g , s o to m e I w a s th in k in g h e ’s d e a d .” M s . Fi adj oe s t ar t ed s hout i ng and herfathert ol d her t hati f s he di dn’ ts hutup he w oul d ki l l her

. She t ook t he m o n e ysh e h a d sa v e d a n d lef t th e h o u se . S h e p ro c e e d e d to A h m e d ’s b ro th e r, R a s h e e d , to te ll h im w h a t h a d h a p p e n e d

. S h e the n w en t t o the ro ad side an d too k a c ar to A cc ra. T h ere s he w entt o herm ot her ’ s hous e and t ol d herw hathad h a p p e n e d . T h e m o th e r d id n o t w a n t M s. F iad jo e to sta yw ith herbeca us e s he knew the fa t herw as danger ous . M s . Fi adj oe t hen s oughtr efuge w i t h herA untD el a’ s hus band, w ho di d not even w anthert o s i tdow n, orent erthe hous e bec aus e he w as af raid o f th e f

athe r. N extM s . Fi adj oe w entt o a per s on s he had know n for m a n yy e a rs n a m e d A lf

re d w h o , fo r f

e a r th a t th e f

a th e r w o u ld su sp e c t th a t M s. F iad

jo e w a s w ith h im , too k h e r to h is gi r l fr i end’ s hous e. A s M s . Fi adj oe t es t i fi ed: “W hen he t ook m e to h is girl frien d ’s ho u se, he told m e y o u ca n ’tstayh ere w i t h t hi s pr obl em, y ou can’ ts t ayher e, s o, he t ook m e t o t ow n,11 to o k p a s s p o rt s iz e p ic tu re a n d th e n h e g a v e m e s o m e c lo th e s , I s t ay ed ther e foraboutfi ve day s , I s t ay ed w i th t hem for a bout fiv e d ay s, h e g av e m e p assp o rtto just l ea v e . . . T h e p assp o rt h e g a v e to m e , I’m g o in g to C a n a d a , if I g o to C a n a d a , I w ill m e e t s o m e b o d ya t th e a irp o rt , th e yw ill b e h o ld in g m yn a m e .” M s. F iad jo e g a v e f

iv e h u n d re d th o u sa n d G h a n ian c e d is t o A l fr ed and r ece i ved fr om hi m $130 U

. S. dol l ar s and the pas s por tw hi ch bor e herphot ogr aph and the name M er cy A ppi ah- K ubi

. A l fr ed dr ove hert o t he ai rpor ton M ar ch 10, 2000. She fl ew t o J FK A i rpor ti n N ew Y or k C i t y , arr i vi ng on M arch 11

. T here she w as t aken i nto cust od ybyIN S off i ci al s. I N S offi ci al s ques t i oned M s . Fi adj oe thatdayand c o m p lete d a h a n d w ritten R e c o rd o f S w o rn S tate m e n t in P roc ee d ing u n d er S ec ti o n 2 3 5 (b)(1 ) of the A ct. H er a n sw ers m a d e v e rylittle s e n se . In re sp o n se to th e q u e stio n “ W h yd id y ou l eave y ourhom e countr yorcountr yof l as tr es i dence ?”, she res po nd ed, “I w ant t o look af t er m ym other

. ” In r espon se t o t he ques t i on “D o y ou have a nyfea rorconce r n aboutbei ng r etur ned t o y ourhom e countr yorbei ng r emoved fr om the Un i t e d S t a t e s ? ” s h e r e p l i e d , “ Ye s . I c a n n o tl o o k a f t e rmy s i s t er s and br ot her s . ” I n r es pons e t o t he ques t i on “W oul d y ou be harm ed i f y ou ar e r eturned t o y ourhom e countr yor co u n tryo f last reside n ce ? ”, she resp o n d ed “Y es . . . I ca n ’t s ta n d th e re s p o n s ib iliti e s .” A f terth e IN S tra n sf

e rre d M s. F iad

jo e to Y o rk C o u n ty Pr i s on, O ffi cerR eave s admi ni s t er ed an A s y l um Pr e- Scr eeni ng I nt ervi ew on M ar ch 30. C ont r aryt o t he fa ct s as s he l at er r ecount ed them, M s . Fi adj oe i nform ed O ffi cerR eave s thather f a th e r’s b e a tin g s b e g a n th re e y e a rs a g o , tha t h e r f a th e r trie d to h a v e se x w ith h e r b u t th a t sh e n e v e r a llo w e d it. I n due cour s e M s . Fi adj oe w as r el eas ed fr om det ent i on and t ook up r es i dence atI nt ernat i onal Fr i ends hi p H ous e. She had gr eatdi ffi cul t yadj us t i ng t o herenvi r onm entand nei ghbor hood. H ert hen att orneyr efe r r ed hert o K athl een M

. Jansen, M

. S

. , C

. T

. S

. , a psy cho l og i stand adu l ttherapi st as s oci at ed w i t h t he V i ct i m A s s i s t ance C ent erof Y or k,In p syc ho logy “ dis so c iat io n” is “ a

de fens eme c ha

nis m in 2 which a group of mental proce sses aresegreg ated from the rest of a person’ s mental activity

in order to avoid emotional distress, as in the dissociative disorder

(q.v.), or in which an idea

or obj ect is segreg ated from i ts emotio nal signif ic anc e , in

thefirs t sens eit i s roughly equivalent to splitting, in the second, to isolation.” Borland’s Medic al Dictionary, 27 Edition (1988).

th 12 P e n n s y l v a n i a , wh o f

i r s ts a w M s . F i a d

j o e o n M a y5 , 2 0 0 0

. At t h e o u t s e tM s . J a n s e n f

o u n d th a tM s . F i a d

j o e wa s wi t h d r a wn and hi ghl yanxi ous , m ade a l m os tno ey e cont act , kepther head dow n, s poke verys oft l yand fr equent l ydi s s oci at ed

. 2 M s. Jan sen ’s recit al of

the e v en ts of

M s. F iadjo e’s pr i orl i fe c oi nci ded vi r tual l yi dent i cal l yw i t h event s as l at er des cr i bed i n M s . Fi adj oe’ s as y l um aff i davi t , w hi ch s he ex ec u ted o n Ju ly5 , 2 0 0 1 , an d h er A p ri l 2, 20 0 2 test im o n y . In three resp ec ts M s. Jan sen ’s rep o rtb ec am e a b asis o f th e IJ’s and the B I A ’ s cr edi bi l i t ydet erm i nat i ons . Fi r s t , i ti s appar ent th a t sh e h a d n o u n d e rsta n d in g o f th e T ro k o si s e c t an d its r el at i ons hi p t o t he t or m ent s t o w hi ch M s . Fi adj oe w as s ubj ect ed. I n t hi s r egar d M s . J ans en w r ot e, “M s . Fi adj oe des cr i bes herfatheras havi ng a r el i gi ous ‘ fet i s h’ w hi ch I have come t o bel i eve r efe r s t o w hatw e w oul d cal l an addi ct i on. ” Second, r efe r r i ng t o A hm ed, M s . J ans en w r ot e, “[h] e w as aw are of t he sexu al assaul t s byher fat her, bu tw as pow erl ess to sto p th e m .” T h ird , sh e d e sc rib e d th e d e a th o f A h m e d a s if he had be en s hot , w r i t i ng: “O n t he ni ghtbefor e s he l efther father ’ s hom e fort he l as tt i m e, s he r epor t s bei ng i n t he

‘ s how err oom ’ w hen s he hea r d noi s es . W hen s he emer ged, sh e f o u n d h e r b o y f

rie n d ly in g sh o t o n th e f lo o r. H e w a s s til l a liv e w h e n sh e re a c h e d h im , an d d ied in h e r a rm s.” (e m p h a sis ad d ed ). M s. Jansen d escr i bed M s. F i adjoe’ s em oti on al st atus: W or k w i t h M s . Fi adj oe has been c om pl i cat ed by t he l ong hi s t oryof m ul t i pl e tr aumas a nd the u n d e r l y i n g f

e a ro f b e i n g r e tu r n e d h o me . As13 w ith m a n yin c e st s u rv iv o rs, s h e h a s le a rn e d to e n d u re tra u m a b yd iss o c iatin g , em o tio n a lly re m o v in g h e rse lf

f ro m h e r su rro u n d in g s u n til t he pai n has s ubs i ded.



### ... E ach t i m e I m etw i t h M s . Fi adj oe, I s ee dr amat i c i m pr ovement s . She has es t abl i s hed e a tin g a n d sle e p in g h a b its th a t ar e w ith in nor m al l i m i t s . H ercomm uni cat i on abi l i t i es h a v e im p ro v e d , alth o u g h sh e c o n tin u e s to occa s i onal l ydi s s oci at e w hen di s cus s i ng e m o tio n a llyp a in f

u l ev e n ts. S h e is a b le to m ai ntai n reasonab l e ey e con t actand has a sig n if ica n tlyg re a ter ra n g e o f a f f e c t. S h e is a b le t o di s cus s m anym or e di ffi cul ts ubj ect s w i t hout di s s oci at i ng orbr eaki ng dow n. She r emai ns extr emel yfea r ful of herfatherfi ndi ng out w her e s he i s and of be i ng s entback t o G hana and for ced t o r eturn t o hi s hom e. M s. Jan sen ’s rep o rtthu s d esc ri b ed M s. F iadjo e’s

s om ew hatfr agi l e emot i onal s t at e as s he pr ocee ded t ow ar ds h e r a sy lu m h e a rin g c o n tin u in g “ to o c c a sio n a llyd iss o c iate

w h e n d is c u s s in g e m o tio n a lly p a in f u l e v e n ts .” I I I . A pri l 30, 2002 H eari ng and I ni t i al O ral D eci s i on M s . Fi adj oe’ s as y l um hear i ng on A pr i l 30, 2002 pos ed a cha l l enge t o herabi l i t yt o di s cus s the di ffi cul ts ubj ect s of14 r ape a nd i nces tw i t houtdi s s oci at i ng orbr eaki ng dow n. H er at t or ney , M r . Pi ver , comm ence d byques t i oni ng herabouther

ear l yy ear s , herr el i gi on, T r okos i pr act i ces and the s t artof her father ’ s s exual abus e w hen s he w as s even. W hi l e M s . Fi adj oe t es t i fi ed aboutthe i ni t i al s exual abus e atage s even, t he ce s s at i on of the abus e w hi l e s he w as in A cc ra w ith h er A u n t D ela a n d it s resu m p ti o n elev en y ea rs late r, th e IJ, D o n a ld V . F e rlise , ap p e a re d u n a b le to compre hend thi s s equenc e of e vent s and the fol l ow i ng i nt er change betw een hi m and the w i t nes s t ook pl ace :

Q : W el l , how l ong, how l ong di d t hi s go on, t haty ou w er e bei ng r aped a nd beat en? J U D G E T O M R

. PY V E R ( s i c)

Q : W h a t? A : W e ’re g e tti n g to th a t? Q: We l l , I ’ m g e t t i n g t o i tn o w. J UDGE T O M S

. F I ADJ OE

Q : H ow di d t hi s go on? A : I t , w hen I l eftt o A ccr a i ts t opped, but15 w h e n I c a m e b a c k to m yf a th e r a g a in t hen, atthe age of 18 i tcont i nued fr om t her e. Q : A ll righ t, (i n d isc e rn ib le) a t ag e se v e n , d id y ourfatherbeatorr ape y ou atage s even? A : Y es. Q : Forhow l ong of per i od of t i m e di d t hat go on? A : For , t i l I w as s even, I know m yfather

w as r api ng m e. Q : M a’a m , y o u ’re n o t m ak ing an y- - A : - - Fo r i t w en t - - Q : - - M a’ am, y ou, y ou can c r y , that ’ s fi ne, buty ournotm aki ng anys ens e, and the t ear s do notdo aw ayw i t h t he fa ctthat y o u rn o tma k i n g a n ys e n s e t o me . No w, r atherthan cry i ng, j us tans w erthe ques t i on. Y ou s ai d, y ourfatherr aped y ou atage s even a nd he w oul d beaty ou, c o rre c t? A : Y e s , b u tI d i d n ’ tt e l l a n yb o d y. Q : I don’ tcar e i f y ou di d ornot

. A tage s even, how l ong di d t hi s go on thathe w as r api ng y ou and bea t i ng y ou?16 A : I n fac t , he w as doi ng thatt o m e w hen I cried to m yau n ti e, I w an t t o - - Q : - - M a’ am, I don’ tl i ke i tw hen s om eone beat s ar ound t he bus h, okay , w hen they d o n ’tan sw er m e. A n o ther thin g I do n ’t l i ke i s w hen s om ebodym akes s ounds as if th e ir c ry in g a n d th e ir e y e s s tay dr y , all r i ght

. I t ’ s a form of hi s t r i oni cs , s t age ( i ndi s cerni bl e) , I don’ tl i ke that

. I w ant s t r ai ghtans w er s and I w ants t r ai ght ans w er s r i ghtnow . Y ou s ai d, y ourfather beaty ou and r aped y ou atage s even, how l ong di d t hatgo on w hi l e y ou w er e age s even? A : In f

a c t, i t w e n t u n til a g e se v e n a n d I le f t. A l t hough i thad bee n es t abl i s hed thatM s . Fi adj oe had been born i n 1971, t hatherfather ’ s s exual m ol es t at i on began w h en sh e w as se v en in 1 9 7 8 , that sh e lef t fo r A u n t D ela’s hom e thaty earand r eturned t o herfatherel even y ear s l at er w hen A un tD el a died, the IJ hou nd ed M s. F i adjoe becau se a f ter th e IJ’ s p re v io u s b ro w b e a tin g sh e c o u ld n o t tes tifya s to t he y earw hen s he r eturned t o herfather

. T hi s excha nge ens ued: M R. P YVE R ( s i c ) T O M S F I ADJ OE

Q : O k a y , d id y o u , w h e n y o u w e n t b a c k to l i ve w i t h y ourfather , had y ou, di d, s t r i ke th a t - -, w h e n y o u w e n t b a c k to liv e w ith y ourfather , how w as y ourtr eatm entat t hatt i m e? A

. H e tr i ed t o beatm e and r ape me agai n. Q : O kay , how l ong di d t hats t artaft ery ou17 r eturned t o hi s hom e? A : A fter a y ea r. Q : A fter a y ea r. J UDGE T O M S

. F I ADJ OE

Q : A l l r i ght , w hen di d y ou r eturn t o y our fa ther, w h at y ea r? A : (N o au d ible resp o n se). Q : M adam, pl eas e ans w erm yques t i on? A: I d o n ’ tr e me mb e rth e y e a r , b u tI k n e w I w as 1 8 y ea rs, I do n ’trem em b er the y ea r. Q : Y ou don’ tknow w haty eari toccurr ed i n? M R. P YVE R ( s i c ) T O M S

. F I ADJ OE

Q : N o , h o w , w h at y ea r w ere y o u in - - A : - - W ai ta m i nu t e, pleas e J UDGE T O M S

. F I ADJ OE

Q : D o y ou know w haty eari t , i toccurr ed i n? A : (Ind iscern ible). Q : Y ou know the ques t i on, pl eas e don’ tdo this, d o n ’tb ea t arou n d the b u sh , it ’s aggr avat i ng, y ou know the ques t i on, w h at y ea r did y o u return to y o u r fa ther?18 A : (N o au d ible resp o n se). J UDG E F OR THE R ECORD A l l r i ght , I fi nd the r es pondenti s non r es pons i ve t o t he ques t i on. T he I J chal l enged M s . Fi adj oe’ s t es t i m onythather fat her m ai ntai ned a room i n h i s hou se w hich con t ai ned i do l s: J UDGE T O M S

. F I ADJ OE

Q: Di d y o u e v e rg o i n t o th e r o o m? A : N o. Q : H ow do y ou know w hatw as i ns i de the r oom i f y ou w er e neve ri n t her e?

A : B eca us e I go t her e once a mont h. Q : W ell , h o w d o y o u k n o w - - A : - - T o per form , i n t her e per form i ng, I s ee t hem perform i ng ri tuals

. Q : W e re y o u in th e ro o m o r n o t? A : N o. Q : W e ll th e n h o w d id y o u k n o w w h a t w a s in t he r oom i f y ou w er e neve ri n t her e? A : T h e re ’s (i n d is c e rn ib le ), I d o n ’t k n o w , I19 kn ow there i s i do l s. Q : H ow do y ou know thati f y ou neverw ent i n? A : B eca us e theyhave s om e of them out s i de, out s i de, theyhave s om e of them out s i de. Q : H ow can y ou t el l m e w hat ’ s i n t he r oom if y o u w e re n e v e r th e re , ex p lain th a t to m e? A : I ’ m notal l ow ed ther e bec aus e, I ’ m not p a rt o f th e m a n d I se e so m e o f th e id o ls in sid e a n d o u tsid e th e ro o m , so th a t itis w hyI ’ m s ay i ng thei ri dol s . A nd they ( i n d i s c e r n i b l e ) i n th e r e p a r t i c u l a rd a ys a n d th e y(in d isc e rn ib le) , the yg o th e re to perform ri tuals

. Q : So, i t ’ s beca us e ther e’ s i dol s out s i de the r oom , y ou thi nk ther e’ s i dol s i ns i de the r o o m, a l t h o u g h y o u ’ v e n e v e rs e e n th e m? A : Y es , beca us e theypr epar e food a nd a l ot o f th e m o u t s i d e , th e yt a k e i n t o th e r o o m. T he I J pur s ued w i t h extr eme i ns ens i t i vi t ya s ubj ectthat

m us thave be en part i cul ar l ypai nful t o M s . Fi adj oe - the

m ur derof A hm ed: J UD GE TO M S. FI AD J OE:

Q : Y ou t ol d m e, thaty ou nevert ol d A hm ed,20 t haty ourfatherhad s exual l yas s aul t ed y ou, butappar ent l y , y ou t ol d M s . J ans en, t haty ou t ol d A hm ed aboutthe s exual a ss a u lts, w h yis th a t? A : I n fac t , I t ol d, M s . J ans en, thatI l et A h m ed k n o w that ab u se, bu t I d idn ’t c l a r i f y i tt o d a y. Q : W el l , s he’ s s t at i ng her e, thatA hm ed w as aw ar e of the s exual as s aul t s byy our father , that ’ s pr ett ycl eart o m e. A : B u t, I d id n o t tell h e r a b o u t th e a ss a u lt, t he bea t i ngs and al l , I di dn’ tcl ar i fyi tt o, M s . J ans en. Q : W el l , i s s he, s he a f or tune t el l er , s he ca n rea d y o u r m ind w ith o u t y o u tel li n g h er, i t ’ s cl earher e, s he s ay s thatA hm ed w as aw ar e of the s exual as s aul t s byy our fa ther, so, y o u m u st ha v e told h er. T h at’s notw haty ou t ol d m e t odaythough, w hy i s that , w hyi s ther e a di ffe r ence betw een w hat , M s . J ans en, w r i t es i n herl ett erand w haty ou’ ve t ol d m e? A : B eca us e, M s . J ans en, i s the one w ho l et m e know i t ’ s okayt o t el l , butI di d not expl ai n t hat , I di d nott el l thi s partand t hi s part , I j us ts ay , abus e and s ay ( i ndi s cerni bl e) , I di d expl ai n, cl ar i fythat t o her , buts he l etm e know thati t ’ s okay t o t el l s om ebodys o t haty ou can, I can fe el ok ay , I ca n b e h ea led (ind iscern ible). Q : Y e s , b u tyo u rd o u b l e t a l k i n g m e , i ts a ys21 t hat , j us tans w erm yques t i on, the l ett er fr om M s . J ans en s ay s , thatA hm ed knew ab o u t th e se x u al assa u lt s b yy o u r fa ther, y ou t old m e t hat A hm ed d i d n ot know , so t el l m e w hyM s . J ans en’ s t el l i ng m e one t h i n g , a n d wh yy o u ’ r e t e l l i n g me s om ethi ng el s e? A : (N o au d ible resp o n se). Q : I’m w ait ing fo r y o u r an sw er. A : Pl eas e, I don’ tknow , I don’ thave a ns w er f o r th a t. T he conc l udi ng por t i ons of the hea r i ng fur t her demonstr at ed the I J ’ s cont i nui ng hos t i l i t yt ow ar ds the obvi ous l ydi s t r aughtM s . Fi adj oe and hi s abus i ve tr eatm entof hert hr oughoutt he hea r i ng. H e had s ucce eded i n r eturni ng h e r to th e c o n d iti o n w h ich M s. Ja n se n h a d e n a b led h e r to over come aft err epea t ed ther apys es s i ons , br eaki ng dow n and d iss o c iatin g . A s re f

lec ted in th e tra n sc rip t: J UDG E F OR THE R ECORD A l l r i ght , l etm e go off

the r ecor d and w e’ l ( s i c) deci s i on. ( OF F T HE RE CO RD )

( ON T HE RE CO RD ) J UDGE RE NDE RS OR AL DE CI S I ON J UDGE T O M S

. F I ADJ OE

Q : M s . Fi adj oe, y ou’ ve hea r d m ydeci s i on, y ou’ ve hea r d w hatI ’ ve j us ts ai d? A : (N o au d ible resp o n se). Q : O h , y o u w e re sle e p in g th e re , y o u f e ll as l eep di dn’ ty ou?22 A : (N o au d ible resp o n se). Q : Y ou fel l as l eep dur i ng m ydeci s i on? A : N o, I ’ m fee l i ng heada che. Q : D i d y ou hearw hatI s ai d orw er e y ou as l eep? A : I w as n’ tas l eep. Q : D i d y ou hearw hatI s ai d? A : I thoughtthaty ou ( i ndi s cerni bl e) , s o I d id n ’t

. Q : O kay , al l ri gh t , w el l , w hat I sai d w as, t hatfi r s tof al l , I don’ tbel i eve y our t es t i m ony , I thi nk thaty ou w er e maki ng up y ourt es t i m onyas y ou w er e goi ng al ong. Y ourt es t i m onyi s contr adi ct ed by , m uch of i ti s contr adi ct ed byy our ow n w i t nes s , M s . J ans en, her , herthe l ett erthats he w r ot e, y ourt es t i m ony g e n e ra lly d o e s n ’t m a k e a n ys e n s e . I f u rth e r f o u n d , an d I d e n ied it, b a sic a lly beca us e of that , I fur t herfound thati f I had found thaty ou w er e cr edi bl e, that y ou w er e t el l i ng m e the truth, I do not fin d that - - ( OF F T HE RE CO RD ) ( ON T HE RE CO RD ) J UDGE T O M S

. F I ADJ OE

Q : I don’ tfi nd thaty ou have be en per s ecut ed and on one of the fi ve s t atut orygr ounds

. I don’ tfi nd, fi r s tof al l , ther e ar e r el at i vel yfew w om en in v o lv e d in th is m o v e m e n t, all rig h t, s exual s l aves . T heynum berby2, 200, now y ou des cr i bed i tas , as a s exual23 sla v e , I re a d f

ro m th e S tate D e p a rtm e n t it s eems ther e’ s , ther e’ s s om e s exual sla v e ryin v o lv e d w ith it, b u t ith a s a lo t to d o w ith idiolatryan d v o o d o o an d fe ars and j us ta l otof nons ens e. I don’ tfi nd t hata gr oup of 2, 200 pl us orm i nus w om en w oul d be part i cul ars oci al gr oup, it’s sm a ll g ro u p a n d it’s o n lyin a c e rta in s ect i on of, of G hana, ar ound t he ( i ndi s cerni bl e) r egi on. E ven i f I found t hati tw as a part i cul ars oci al gr oup, the governm enti s notper s ecut i ng any one, al l r i ght , and the governm enti s not al l ow i ng thi s t o cont i nue, theypas s ed a law in 1 9 9 8 a n d th e yh a d , the re try in g to abol i s h T r okos i and appa r ent l yacc or di ng to th e S tate D e p a rtm e n t, th e yth in k th a t it w i l l be abol i s hed i n t he, i n t he nea r futur e. So, even i f i tw er e a pa r t i cul ar so c ial g ro u p , tha t’s th e se w o m e n , a s m a ll gr oup of w om en, I don’ tfi nd thatthey ’ ve been pe r s ecut ed pur s uantt o defi ni t i on of per s ecut i on. A nd forthatr eas on, I ’ ve deni ed y ourappl i cat i on, do y ou u n d e r s t a n d , n o w? A : Y es. Q : O kay , the an sw er i s y es. I V . T he Sani t i zed O ral D eci s i on O n t he hea r i ng dat e the I J al s o del i ver ed a s ani t i zed

v e rsio n o f

h is o rig in a l cr u d e (a n d c ru e l) O ra l D e c isio n . It w ill24 be r efe r r ed t o as t he “I J D eci s i on”. H avi ng found thatM s . Fi adj oe w as “i nadmi s s i bl e for present i ng a bo gu s passportt o the I m m i grat i on authori t i es” and al s o underSect i on 212( a) ( 6) ( C ) ( i ) ( fr aud on an i m m i gr at i on offi ci al ) , the I J s etfor t h gener al l egal pr i nci pl es appl i cabl e t o appl i cat i ons foras y l um and forr es t r i ct i on on

re m o v a l. T ur ni ng t o t he ci r cumst ance s aboutw hi ch M s . Fi adj oe test ifi ed , the IJ re

jected the e v iden ce that T rok o si w as a fo rm of r el i gi on, fi ndi ng t hat“i tdoes notappea rt o t he C our tthat th is is a re lig io n , it is ra th e r a c u lt.” T he bul k of the opi ni on w as devot ed t o t he r eas ons

w hyt he I J found M s . Fi adj oe t ot al l yi ncr edi bl e. A s he s t at ed in h is o ri g in a l o ra l d e c is io n “ I d o n ’t b e lie v e y o u r t e s tim o n y . I

t hi nk t haty ou w er e maki ng up y ourt es t i m onyas y ou w ent alon g . ” T h e f

ir st r ea so n fo r th is find ing w as M s. F iadjo e’s i nabi l i t yt o s peci fyt he y eari n w hi ch s he r eturned t o herfather aft ers pendi ng el even y ear s w i t h A untD el a. T he I J w r ot e:25 T h e re sp o n d e n t w a s a sk e d w h e n sh e re tu rn e d to h er f athe r an d sh e w as u n ab le t o tel l th e C o u rt w hen i toccurr ed. I f i ndeed thi s had tr ans pi r ed i n t he r es pondent ’ s l i fe a nd i f i ndeed s he w as liv in g sa f

e lyw ith h e r a u n t f

o r 1 1 y e a rs, it is abundant l ycl eart o t he courtthatthe r es pondent w oul d be abl e t o t el l m e w hen s he r eturned hom e t o thats i tuat i on thats he fe ar ed s o m uch. T he seco nd reas on that the IJ gave fo r r ej ect i ng M s. Fi adj oe’ s t es t i m onyw as the i ncons i s t encyhe per cei ved b e tw e e n h e r te stim o n yth a t sh e h a d n e v e r b e e n in th e ro o m in w hi ch herfatherand otherpart i ci pant s per form ed r i tual s and h e rt e s t i mo n yt h a tt h e r e we r e i d o l s i n th a tr o o m:

T he r es pondent ’ s fathert ol d herthathe w ant ed hert o be a Tr okos i s l ave, s he s t at ed thatthe fatherhad a r oom i ns i de hi s hous e i n w hi ch s he w as n o t perm itted to en ter, in w h ich th ere w ere i dol s . T he C our tas ked the r es pondenti f s he had neve rent er ed thatr oom , how s he knew t her e w as i dol s i ns i de; and herans w erw as that s he pr es um ed theyw er e i dol s i ns i de the r oom th a t sh e h a d n e v e r e n ter e d sin c e th e yw e re id o ls out s i de the r oom . T hi s l i ne of thoughton t he r es pondent ’ s parti s notpart i cul ar l yper s uas i ve. T he I J found r eas on t o doubtM s . Fi adj oe’ s t es t i m ony i n t he fa ctt hats he r eturned t o herfather ’ s hous e af t er r etur ni ng w i t h A hm ed fr om N i ger i a:

A hm ed and the r es pondenti n A pr i l of 1997, tr av eled to N igeria b yb u s to li v e w ith A h m ed ’s cous i n. T he cous i n of A hm ed appa r ent l ym ade s exual advanc es t o t he r es pondent , s o t hataft er t hr ee w eeks , s he and A hm ed r eturned t o G hana26 an d the re sp o n d en t r eturn ed to h er f athe r’s hom e. T he r es pondentw as as ked w hy , i f s he had bee n beat en and r aped a therfather ’ s hom e, di d s he r eturn t her e. She s t at es thats he r eturned t her e s i nce s he di d notw antherfathert o be a n g e re d b yth e f

a c t th a t s h e w a s w ith A h m e d

. T h is a b so lu telyis to tallyim p lau sib le a n d to tally nons ens i cal t o t he C our t , i ns ofaras the resp o n d en t w as re turn ing to a s itu ati o n w h ere s h e k n e w s h e w a s g o in g to b e ra p e d a n d b e a te n . A nd I don’ tbel i eve thats he w oul d have a ny fea rt hatherfatherw oul d be ange r ed and i f s he di d have a fea r , thatfea rw oul d be a l es s erfea r t han the r ape a nd the bea t i ngs thats he knew aw ai t ed her

. A s i tturned out , w hen the r es pondentdi d r eturn, herfathernotonl ybeat herbutpour ed hotw at eron heras a form of p u n ish m e n t. T he I J r el i ed upon per cei ved i ncons i s t enci es betw een M s . Fi adj oe’ s t es t i m onyand hers t at ement s t o M s . J ans en as ref lected in M s. Jan sen ’s rep o rt

. H e f o u n d that M s. Jan sen ’s r epor tcas tdoubtupon M s . Fi adj oe’ s t es t i m onythather abu si ve fa t her w as partof the T rokosi sector that s he w as a T r okos i s l ave:

T h e re sp o n d e n t su b m itt e d to th e C o u rt a l et t er/r epor tfr om Soci al W or kerK athl een J a n s e n , w h ic h is f

o u n d a t E x h ib it 6 , ta b 2 . A car eful exami nat i on of M s . J ans en’ s l ett er r efl ect s nothi ng t o t he ef fec tthatthe r es pondent ’ s fatherw as a mem berof the T r okos i cul t , northatthe r es pondenther s el f w as a T ro k o si s lav e . T h e re sp o n d e n t w a s n o t ab le to expl ai n w hyw hats he t ol d t he C our t , w as not told to the so cial w o rke r.27 T h e IJ f o u n d th a t M s. F iad

jo e ’s te stim o n yth a t sh e o n ly to ld h e r g ra n d m o th e r a b o u t h e r f a th e r’s se x u a l ab u se is con t radi ct ed b yM s. Jansen’s r epo rtw hich r eci t es that M s. F iadjo e a lso told h er m o ther a b o u t th e se x u al ab u se. T h e IJ found contr adi ct i on of M s . Fi adj oe’ s t es t i m onythats he neve r to ld A h m e d a b o u t th e se x u a l n a tu re o f h e r f a th e r’s a b u se in t he s t at ementi n M s . J ans en’ s l ett erthatA hm ed “w as aw ar e of t he s exual as s aul t s byherfather , butw as pow er l es s t o s t op t hem

. ” F urther, t he IJ not es an i nco nsi st encybetw een M s. Fi adj oe’ s s t at ementt hats he does notknow how herfather ki l l ed A hm ed and the s t at ementi n M s . J ans en’ s r epor tthat “[w ] hen s he emer ged [f r om the s how er ] , s he found he r b o y f ri e n d lyin g s h o t o n th e f lo o r.” T he I J al s o bas ed hi s cr edi bi l i t yeval uat i on on sta tem e n ts th a t M s. F iad jo e m a d e to im m ig ra tio n o f f icia ls w hen s he w as i ni t i al l ypr oces s ed af t erherdet ent i on. A tthe ai rpor ts he di d notdi s cl os e herr eas on forfl eei ng G hana a nd “t ol d t he I m m i gr at i on O ffi cera r atherbeni gn r eas on for c o m in g h e re , the f

a c t th a t sh e w a s n o t ab le to f in a n c ially pr ovi de forhers i bl i ngs . ” The I J r efe r r ed t o t he as y l um pr esc re e n in g in ter v iew d o c u m e n t:

T hatdocumentr efl ect s on page 4, thatthe r es pondentt ol d t he I m m i gr at i on O ffi certhather fathers t art ed bea t i ng herthr ee y ear s ago. T hat i s t hr ee y ear s ago pr i ort o M ar ch 30 of 2000, th cons equent l ythatw oul d be M ar ch of 1997; how ever , the r es pondentt ol d t he C our tthats he w a s 7 y e a rs o f

a g e w h e n th e b e a tin g s b e g a n . T hus , agai n w e have a di amet r i c di ffe r ence betw een w hatthe r es pondentt ol d t hi s C our tand w hatt he r es pondentt ol d t he I m m i gr at i on O ffi cerdur i ng the as y l um pr e- s cr eeni ng i n t e r v i e w. E v e n m o re in ter e stin g is th e f a c t th a t, ag a in a c c o rd in g to th is in ter v iew , the re sp o n d e n t to ld28 t he I m m i gr at i on O ffi certhatherfathernever had s ex w i t h her

. T hi s t ot al l yunderm i nes the ent i r e ca s e i n chi ef, s i nce he rent i r e ca s e i n chi ef is b a s e d o n h e r f

a th e r u s in g h e r a s a s e x s la v e . W h e n e v e r th e C o u rt se e s s u c h a d iam e tric di ffe r ence betw een the t es t i m onythatthe r es pondenthas gi ven t o t he C our tand the t es t i m onythatthe r es pondenthas gi ven another m emberof the I m m i gr at i on Ser vi ce, the c re d ib ili tyo f

th e re sp o n d e n t an d th e c a se in ch ief g rav elysu ff

er. T he I J emphasi zed that“[t ] he cr edi bi l i t yof the r es pondenti s of extr eme i m port ance i n as s es s i ng the r es pondent ’ s cl ai m . . . . T he C our tconcl udes thatthe r es pondenti s m aki ng up hert es t i m onyas s he i s goi ng al ong, s he’ s m aki ng up t hes e s cena r i os and s he i s fabr i cat i ng her t es t i m onyt o t he C our t

. . . . the C our tagai n s t at es forthe r ecor d t hatt hi s w as a fr i vol ous appl i cat i on and thatthe re s p o n d e n t in te n tio n a lly lie d to th is C o u rt .” T he IJ pr ov i ded al t ernat i ve g round s for deny i ng M s. F iad jo e ’s a p p lica tio n s f

o r re lief. H e q u o ted th e S tate D epart m entR epor tdes cr i bi ng the Trokos i cul t , i ncl udi ng the pract i ce of

i t s pri est s of m ai ntai ning sex sl aves atT rokosi s hr i nes . T he I J t hen hel d:

T h e C o u rtfin d s tha t bein g a T rok o si sl av e o r a m emberof the cul t , i s bei ng a mem berof a re lativ e lysm a ll g ro u p . A c c o rd in g to th e S tate D epart m ent , i tnum ber s appr oxi m at el y2, 200 peopl e i n a s m al l ar ea, i n t he s outheas tpor t i on o f G h a n a . T h e C o u rt w ill n o t f in d th a t a T r okos i s l ave c ons t i tut es a part i cul ars oci al gr oup, i ns ofaras i ti s r athera mi nus cul e partof t he gene r al popul at i on of G hana. H ad he f ound T r okos i s l aves t o be a pa r t i cul ars oci al29 gr oup, t he I J hel d t hathe “w oul d notfi nd thatthe r es pondent i s bei ng per s ecut ed as bei ng a mem berof thats oci al gr oup a n d d o e s n o t q u a lifyf

o r a sy lu m , ins o f

a r a s I f in d th a t th is p ra c tice is b e in g sta m p e d o u t b yth e g o v e rn m e n t, ac c o rd in g to t he St at e D epart m entr epor t s ; and thati tcan be er adi cat ed by t he governm entw i t hi n a s hor tper i od of t i m e, w i t h t he p a s s a g e o f

a la w w h ic h o c c u rr e d in 1 9 9 8 .” A r atherconfus i ng obs ervat i on fol l ow ed i n s uppor tof th e IJ’ s f in d in g th a t M s. F iad

jo e h a d n o t es tab lish e d a w e llfounded f

earof per s ecut i on. T he I J appea r ed t o bel i eve that M s . Fi adj oe w as al l egi ng thats he w as bei ng per s ecut ed beca us e s he w as a mem berof the Trokos i s ect , w hen i n fac t s he w as as s er t i ng t hatw i t h t he ac qui es cenc e of gove r nm ent al offi ci al s , t he Trokos i s ectw as per s ecut i ng her , for ci ng her into p rac ti ce s totall yco n tr aryto h er C h ri sti an fa ith

. T h e IJ obs erved: T h e g o v e rn m e n t d o e s n o t c o n d o n e th is s la v e ry.

I ti s perpetuat ed bya r athers m al l num berof peopl e fol l ow i ng an i deol ogy , s om e type of voodoo r el i gi on orvoodoo fol l ow i ng, and the C ou rtdo es not fi nd that i tcon st i tutes a p e rse c u tio n o f

th is g ro u p o f

w o m e n , ev e n if t hes e w om en s houl d be cl as s i fi ed as a part i cul ar soci al group . T he C ou rtcon si ders the T rokosi as an i s ol at ed abe r r at i on of the s m al l s egmentof t he societyi n G han a, bu tI do no tfi nd that i ti s a g rou n d fo r asy lum

. I do n o t fi n d that m em b ers of thatgr oup ar e bei ng per s ecut ed forone of the fi ve s t atut orygr ounds fora gr antof s uch r el i ef. C o n seq u en tl y , fo r all o f th ese rea so n s, the C o u rt fi nds t hatthe r es pondenthas notes t abl i s hed w e ll-fo u n d e d f

e a r o f p e rse c u tio n a s d e f

in e d , if s he w er e r eturned t o G hana. A ccor di ngl yher appl i cat i on foras y l um w i l l be deni ed.30 B as ed on the for egoi ng, the I J det erm i ned i ) i tw as unnece s s aryt o cons i derw hetherM s . Fi adj oe mer i t ed r el i ef a s a m a tter o f

d isc re tio n ; ii ) b e c a u se M s. F iad jo e f a iled to es t abl i s h el i gi bi l i t yforas y l um , s he fa i l ed t o m eetthe hi gher sta n d a rd o f

p ro o f n e c e ss a ryf

o r re stric tio n o n re m o v a l to G hana; and i i i ) M s . Fi adj oe does notqual i fyforr el i ef unde r th e C A T b e c a u se sh e d id n o t es tab lish th a t sh e is m o re lik e ly t han nott o be t or tur ed i f s he r eturns t o G hana. T he IJ ent ered orders den y i ng M s. F i adjoe’ s r equ est foras y l um , forr es t r i ct i on on r emoval t o G hana a nd for w i t hhol di ng r emoval underthe C A T

. H e or der ed thats he be r emoved fr om t he U ni t ed St at es t o G hana.

V . P rocee d i n g b efore the B IA O n a p p e a l f

ro m th e IJ’ s d e c isio n th e B IA re lied h e a v ily upon t he I J ’ s cr edi bi l i t ydet erm i nat i on: “I n deny i ng the r es pondent ’ s appl i cat i ons forr el i ef, the I m m i gr at i on J udge f o u n d t h a tt h e r e s p o n d e n tw a s n o tc r e d i b l e ( I J a t1 1

- 1 2 )

. We a g re e .” T h e B IA a d v a n c e d tw o g ro u n d s f o r its c re d ib ili ty det erm i nat i on - i ) per cei ved i ncons i s t ence s i n hert es t i m onyat t he hea r i ng befor e the I J and i i ) i ncons i s t enci es i n her s t a t e me n ta th e rAs y l u m P r e - S c r e e n i n g I n t e r v i e w. W i t h r es pectt o M s . Fi adj oe’ s t es t i m ony , the B I A not ed t hatM s . Fi adj oe made confl i ct i ng cl ai m s as t o t he age w hen herT r okos i r i tual s exual abus e byherfatherbegan, r efe r r i ng t o the foll ow i ng i nco nsi st encies or suppo sed i nco nsi st encies : i ) i n h er as y l um app l i cat i on and du ri ng her t est i m on yM s. F iad jo e c laim e d th a t h e r f

a th e r b e g a n to a b u se h e r se x u a lly a n d a ttem p ted to ra p e h e r w h e n sh e w a s s e v e n y e a rs o ld ; ii ) in fur thert es t i m onys he as s ert ed thatherfatherhad i n fac tr aped herw hen s he w as s even; i i i ) i n hers t at ementgi ven ather A sy l um P re- S creeni ng Int ervi ew she st at ed thatthe ab use began a ppr oxi m at el yt hr ee y ear s pr i ort o herM ar ch 2000 in ter v iew s a n d c laim e d th a t sh e d id n o t allo w h e r f a th e r to h a v e s e x w ith h e r, i n c o n tr a s t to la te r c la im s o f o n -g o in g ra p e .31 T he B I A concl uded that“[b] ecaus e w e have found thatthe re sp o n d e n t’s te stim o n yc a n n o t b e a c c e p ted a s c re d ib le, it fol l ow s t hatt he r es pondenthas fai l ed t o s at i s fyherbur den of p ro o f a n d p e rs u a s io n .” F urther, t he B IA held that M s. F i adjoe’ s cl ai m s m ust be deni ed forfai l ur e t o es t abl i s h t hatthe governm entof G h an a w as e ith er u n w il li n g o r un ab le t o co n tr o l her f athe r’s ritu a l ab u se . In su p p o rt o f th is c o n c lu sio n th e B IA n o ted i) M s. F iad jo e d id n o t se e k h e lp o f th e G h a n ian a u th o rities ; ii ) t he gr andmot herw hen r epor t i ng the fa t her ’ s abus e t o t he pol i ce di d notm ent i on t he s exual as pectof the abus e; i i i ) the g o v e rn m e n t o u tlaw e d T ro k o si p ra c tice s a n d ritu a l b o n d a g e in 1 9 9 8 a n d a n o n -g o v e rn m e n tal o rg a n iza tio n h a d su c c e ss in l i ber at i ng, couns el i ng, and r ehabi l i t at i ng pas tvi ct i m s of s uch bondage. T he B I A found thatM s . Fi adj oe i m pl i ci t l yadmi t t ed t hats he coul d es cape herfather ’ s abus e bym ovi ng t o an urban ar ea, ci t i ng as s uppor t ; i ) M s . Fi adj oe’ s es cape w hen s he fl ed t o N i ger i a; i i ) herm ove i nt o an apa r t m ent ; and i i i ) her unconvi nci ng t es t i m onyaboutbei ng i m pel l ed t o r eturn t o t he fa ther’s h o m e a fter the ab o rt ive f li g h t t o N igeria. T h e B IA concl uded “the r es pondent ’ s fai l ur e t o pur s ue i nt ernal r el ocat i on w oul d l i kel ybe a ne gat i ve di s cr et i onaryfac t oreven i f w e had f

ound t hats he had s uffe r ed pas tper s ecut i on on a c c o u n t o f

a p ro te c te d g ro u n d .” B eca us e the B I A had found thatM s . Fi adj oe had not t es t i fi ed cr edi bl yand thats he had f ai l ed t o demonstr at e that th e g o v e rn m e n t o f

G h a n a w o u ld b e u n w ill in g o r u n a b le to prot ecther, i tdid not r each the i ssue of w hetherbo nd age as a T r okos i s l ave w oul d m eetthe def i ni t i on of per s ecut i on on acc ountof m ember s hi p i n a part i cul ars oci al gr oup orthe i s s ue w hetherM s . Fi adj oe, even i f cr edi bl e, had es t abl i s hed t hats he w as , i n fac t , a Trokos i s l ave. Fi ndi ng t hatM s . Fi adj oe had f ai l ed t o es t abl i s h t he l ow erbur den of pr oof r equi r ed foras y l um , the B I A hel d t hat s he had f ai l ed t o m eetthe hi ghers t andar d forw i t hhol di ng of32 rem o v al an d that sh e h ad fa il ed to es tablish tha t i t w as m o re lik e lyth a n n o t th a t sh e w o u ld b e to rtu re d u p o n h e r re tu rn to G hana, t hus r equi r i ng thatherr eques tforr el i ef unde rthe C A T be deni ed. W ith o n e m em b er, Jua n P

. O su n a, dissen ti n g , the B IA d ism iss e d th e a p p e a l o n Ju n e 6 , 2 0 0 3 . M s. F iad jo e f iled in th is c o u rt a tim e ly p e titio n f o r r e v ie w o f

th e B IA ’s d e c is io n . M s. F iadjo e a lso m o v ed fo r reco n side rati o n o f th e B IA ’s deci s i on. O ne of the gr ounds forthe mot i on t o r econs i der w as t he fa i l ur e of the B I A t o cons i dercert ai n evi dence w hi ch w a s n o t b e f

o re th e IJ b u t w h ich M s. F iad jo e su b m itt e d in s uppor tof herappea l

. I n par t i cul ars he s ubm i t t ed an O ct ober 31, 2002 l et t erof M s . J ans en w hi ch expl ai ned w hycert ai n of t he s t at ement s m ade i n herear l i erl ett eron w hi ch the I J r el i ed t o find t hat M s. F i adjoe l acked credi bil i t ycon st i tuted M s. J ans en’ s m i s t akes orm i s under s t andi ng. M s . J ans en’ s O ct ober 31, 2002 l et t eral s o s pel l ed outi n cons i der abl e det ai l the natur e and c ons equenc e of the s t r es s fr om w hi ch M s . Fi adj oe s uffe r ed fr om herfather ’ s abus e and the ef fec tthi s s t r es s had w i t h r es pectt o M s . Fi adj oe’ s r es pons es t o ques t i ons conce r ni ng s exual abus e mat t er s . T he fol l ow i ng ar e a f ew of M s. Jan sen ’s ob serv ati o n s co n ce rnin g M s. F iadjo e’s emot i onal s t at e:

It is m yp ro f

e ss io n a l o p in io n th a t P o sttra u m a tic S t res s D i sorder , M s. F i adjoe’ s ow n m ann eri sm s, and t he Im m i grat i on Judg e’s l ack o f aw areness o f G h an ian c u ltu re c o n tr ibu ted to M s. F iadjo e’s r es pons es t o ques t i oni ng byoppos i ng couns el a n d , in p a rticu lar , to th e Ju d g e . It i s e x t r a o r d i n a r i l yd i f

f i c u l tf o rs e x u a l a b u s e v i c t i ms to d is c u s s s p e c if

ic s o f th e ira b u s e e x p e ri e n c e s . G i ven t he ex t rem e sham e t hat s urr ou nd s these i s s ues i n gener al theyar e di ffi cul tforboth m en and w om en t o di s cus s . W i t h t he addi t i on of the cu ltu ral fac tors su rrou n d ing M s. F iadjo e’s exper i ence s i n par t i cul ar , i ts houl d be of no33 su rp rise a t all th a t sh e w o u ld b e re lu c tan t to dis cuss these i ssues w i t h an y on e, m ost s peci fi cal l yw i t h a mal e ori n t he pr es ence of s ever al m al es . I ti s verytypi cal of vi ct i m s of se x u a l ab u se to n o t b e a b le to a c c u ra telyre c a ll dat es , ages , num berof abus e occ urr ence s and t i m e l i nes i n gener al

. I n addi t i on, I bel i eve cul tur al fac t or s pl ay ed a r ol e. I n m anycul tur es t he s peci fi cs of dat es , t i m e, and age s ar e not val ued as s i gni fi cant l yas theyar e i n w es t ern, i ndus t r i al i zed c ul tur es . T he combi nat i on of cul tur al fac t or s and tr aumat i c s t r es s r eac t i ons w oul d be expe ct ed t o i m pede one ’ s m emoryof dates , t i m es and a ges.



### ... I bel i eve I al s o comm uni cat ed i n m yi ni t i al l ett er t hatbeca us e of he rhi s t oryof s ever e abus e, u n d e r situ a tio n s o f

d u re ss sh e ten d s to d iss o c iate . T h is m e a n s th a t if s h e f e e ls t hr eat ened orendange r ed - phy s i cal l yor emot i onal l y- s he w i l l w i t hdr aw fr om the situ a tio n , b e c o m e c o n f

u se d , fr ig h ten e d , h e sita n t, and mayappea rt o have a bl ank l ook on her fac e. T hi s i s a natur al cons equenc e of the Postt r aumat i c Str es s D i s or derfr om w hi ch s he suffers.



### ... T he Im m i grat i on Judg e beli eved that M s. Fi adj oe w as fabr i cat i ng heracc ountof r ape by h e r f a th e r b e c a u s e h e f

o u n d in c o n s is te n c ie s . T hes e i ncons i s t enci es ar e notevi dence of34 d isho n estyin M s. F iadjo e’s c ase - th eyare evidence o f severe Po st t raum at i c S t res s Di s o r d e r . I ti s a l s o n o t e wo r t h yth a ta tth e t i me o f th is h e a rin g , M s. F iad

jo e w a s a p p ro x im a tely s e v e n m o n t h s p o s tp a r tu m a n d , b y h i s t o r y, s uffe r ed a s i gni fi cantboutof Postpar tum D epr es s i on forappr oxi m at el yni ne mont hs aft er t he bi r t h of herdaught er . T hi s condi t i on w oul d, as w el l , aff

ectboth herm emoryand her c o m m u n ica tio n sty le. S im ilarlyit d o e s n o t at a ll s u rp r i s e me th a tu p o n i n i t i a l q u e s t i o n i n g b yI NS agent s M s . Fi adj oe w oul d r efe r ence herfather at t empt i ng s exual abus e butdenythathe had h a d i n t e r c o u r s e wi t h h e r . F e a ra n d s h a me w o u ld m o re th a n e x p la in th a t c ir c u m s ta n c e . Pl eas e not e thats he di d di s cl os e the s exual a ss a u lts to h e r g ra n d m o th e r w h o im m e d iate ly t old her i tw as sham eful for her t o d i scuss tho se m at t er s . A l t hough the gr andmot herw as w i l l i ng t o r eportthe phy s i cal abus e t o t he pol i ce, s he ref u sed to rep o rto r pe rm itM s. F iadjo e to re p o rt the s ex u al vio lenc e. I can v eh em en tl yaf firm t hatonce a s ens e of s afe t yand a t ent at i ve w orki ng rel at i on shi p w as est abli shed w i t h M s. Fi adj oe s he cons i s t ent l yand cl ear l ydi s cl os ed m ul t i pl e i nci dent s of vi ol entr ape byherfather du ri ng ou r counseli ng sess i on s. Iti s al so i m por t antt o not e thatM s . Fi adj oe’ s r ecount i ng of herexper i ence s i n herfather ’ s cus t odynever w aver ed dur i ng ourw or k t ogether

. A s an experti n as s es s i ng tr aumat i c s t r es s , and an exper i ence d pr ovi derof s ervi ces t o vi ct i m s of s exual vi ol ence I nevers aw anyi ndi cat i on that M s . Fi adj oe w as l es s than truthful w i t h m e or t hat s he w as fabri cat i ng anyof h er experi ences.35 I n addi t i on t o des cr i bi ng M s . Fi adj oe’ s emot i onal s t at e, M s. Ja n se n to o k re sp o n sib ili tyf o r c re a tin g w h a t ap p e a re d to be i ncons i s t enci es betw een s t at ement s cont ai ned i n her ori ginal l et t er, w hich w as i n ev i den ce bef ore the IJ, and M s. F i adjoe’ s t est i m on y . M s. Jansen ex plai ned her fai l ure t o u se t he t erm T r okos i i n herr epor t , l i m i t i ng herdes cr i pt i on of the father ’ s behavi oras bei ng a “f et i s h”: O ne o f t he sho rt com i ng s of m yw ork w i t h M s. Fi adj oe fa l l s t o m yl ack of under s t andi ng atthat t i m e aboutthe Trokos i r el i gi on and the defi ni t i on of a f

et i s h pr i es t

. She s poke oft en of herfather ’ s fet i s h pr act i ces and i nt erpr et i ng her w o rd s a n d th e irm e a n in g w a s v e ry d if f ic u lt. She di d s t at e on manyocca s i ons thatherfather w oul d be i nt oxi cat ed j us tpr i ort o hi m r api ng her , and bas ed on myow n cul tur al backgr ound I con nected the term “fet i sh” t o h er father’ s abuse of al cohol

. I di d notatthatt i m e i nves t i gat e the r el i gi ous pr act i ces of fe t i s h pr i es t s and w as u n a w a re o f

th e s p e c if

ic s o f th e T ro k o s i r e lig io n . Si nce thatt i m e, I have l earned more aboutthat re lig io n a n d its p ra c tice s a n d it fits p re c ise ly w ith th e e x p e ri e n c e s s h e w a s re la tin g to m e . A gai n, m yfocus w as on heri m m edi at e phy s i cal a n d p sy c h o lo g ica l w e ll b e in g a n d I f a iled to i n v e s t i g a t e th e c u l tu r a l i m p l i c a t i o n s f u l l y. A dd res si ng t he st at em ent i n h er or i ginal l et t er that M s. Fi adj oe had i nform ed A hm ed of the fa t her ’ s s exual abus e, M s . J ans en w r ot e:

T here w as som e con t rovers yov er w hetherM s. Fi adj oe di s cus s ed thes e mat t er s w i t h herfi ancé , A hm ed. I n r evi ew i ng m ynot es , I m ake r efe r ence t o t he fa ctthatA hm ed w as “aw ar e of t h e a b u s e b yh e rf

a t h e r ”

. W h e n c o n s u l t i n g my not es t o pr epar e the i ni t i al l ett er , I i nt erpr et ed36 t hem t o m ean both t he phy s i cal and s exual a b u se . I ca n n o t n o w in d e p e n d e n tlyre c a ll w hetherI s peci fi cal l yr efe rr ed t o t he phy s i cal and s exual abus e w hen di s cus s i ng thi s m att er w i t h M s. F i adjoe. Itw ou l d n ot atal l surpr i se m e thats he w oul d have t ol d hi m aboutthe phy s i cal abus e butnotthe s exual abus e. I ndeed, not i ng t he cul tur al t aboos and s hame i nvol ved, i ti s veryl i kel ythats he w oul d nott el l A hm ed of t he mul t i pl e vi ol entr apes s he endur ed atthe h an d s o f h er f

athe r. A d d ressing the s u b

ject of the m an n er o f A h m ed ’s death, M s . J ans en expl ai ns thats he mer el yi nferr ed thathe had bee n s hotand does notr eca l l thatM s . Fi adj oe i nform ed h e r th a t h e h a d b e e n sh o t:

T here app eared t o b e add i t i on al con t rovers y overM s . Fi adj oe’ s know l edge of the mannerof A hm ed’s deat h. A gain, i n revi ew i ng m yno t es, I d o c u me n t e d th a twh i l e i n th e “ s h o we rr o o m” M s . Fi adj oe hea r d a “l oud noi s e” a nd upon ent er i ng herbedr oom , found A hm ed dy i ng on t he fl oor . I bel i eve thati tw as m yi nt erpr et at i on o f e v e n ts th a t A h m e d h a d b e e n s h o t. I apol ogi ze f

orthe conf

us i on thati nt erpr et at i on caus ed. I have no i ndepende ntr ecol l ect i on of M s . Fi adj oe s peci fi cal l ys t at i ng the mannerof d e a t h

. Re c a l l , p l e a s e , th a tth e p u rp o s e o f my s ervi ces w as notan i nves t i gat i ve one. W hen I b e g a n se e in g M s. F iad

jo e sh e w a s n o t ab le to eatpr oper l y , w as nots l eepi ng cons i s t ent l y , w as exper i enci ng s ever e fl as hbacks and di s t r es s i ng ni ght m ar es , and w as at t empt i ng t o adj us tt o an e x t r e me l yf

o r e i g n e n v i r o n me n t

. I twa s my p u rp o se to a llev iate th e im m e d iate psy cho l og i cal pain and sufferi ng and t o assi st37 heri n adj us t i ng t o hernew envi r onm ent

. T he exac tm annerof herfi ancé ’ s m ur derw as i ncons equent i al t o t he cr i t i cal t as k athand. A p a rt f ro m th e f a ilu re o f th e B IA to c o n sid e r th is addi t i onal evi dence , M s . Fi adj oe adva nced f ourot hergr ounds fo r reco n side rati o n ; i ) th e B IA ’s reli an ce u p o n M s. F iadjo e’s stat em en ts t o an IN S o ff icer u p o n arrival as a b asis fo r a negat i ve cr edi bi l i t yfi ndi ng; i i ) i t s fi ndi ng thatM s . Fi adj oe had fa i l ed t o carr yherbur den thatthe governm entof G hana w as unab l e or unw i l l i ng t o assi sther; i i i ) i t s fi nd i ng that M s. Fi adj oe coul d have r el ocat ed t o anotherpartof G hana; and i v) t he B I A ’ s fai l ur e t o cons i derM s . Fi adj oe’ s per s ecut i on on acc ountof herr el i gi on as a C hr i s t i an oppos ed t o T r okos i and herfemi ni s tpol i t i cal opi ni on thatw om en s houl d be educ at ed and nots ubj ugat ed t o m en. T he B I A deni ed the mot i on forr econs i der at i on s t at i ng t hatM s . Fi adj oe had noti dent i fi ed anychange of l aw , new l egal ar gum entorerr ori n t he B I A ’ s pr evi ous anal y s i s that w oul d m ove i tt o r econs i deri t s deci s i on. I tnot ed thatthe i ncons i s t ents t at ement s t o an i m m i gr at i on offi cerupon w hi ch i tr el i ed t o s uppor ti t s cr edi bi l i t yfi ndi ng w er e notm ade a tthe ai rpor ti m m edi at el yaft erl andi ng butw er e made s om e w eeks l at erdur i ng a fa i rand thought ful i nt ervi ew , thus r ender i ng M s . Fi adj oe’ s r el i ance upon t he ca s es ci t ed i n s uppor tof the m ot i on m i s pl ace d. M s . Fi adj oe fi l ed i n t hi s C our ta pet i t i on forr evi ew of t he deni al of the mot i on forr econs i der at i on. T hatpet i t i on has b e e n c o n s o l i d a t e d wi th th e o r i g i n a l p e t i t i o n f o rr e v i e w. V I . D i s cus s i on A

. J ur i s di ct i on and St andar d of R evi ew : W e have j ur i s di ct i on t o r evi ew fi nal or der s of the B I A under§242( a) ( 1) of the I m m i gr at i on and N at i onal i t yA ct , 8 U

. S. C

. §1252( a) ( 1) (1 9 9 9 ). B o th th e IJ a n d th e B IA m a d e a n a d v e rse c re d ib ili ty det erm i nat i on. T he fi nal or derthatw e r evi ew i s the dec i s i on38 o f t h e BI A, a n d n o r ma l l ywe r e v i e w th e d e c i s i o n o f th e BI A, n o t th e IJ, G ao v . A sh cro ft, 2 9 9 F

. 3 d 2 6 6 , 2 7 1 (3d C ir

. 2 0 0 2 ); A b d u lai v . A sh cro ft, 2 3 9 F

. 3 d 5 4 2 5 4 5 (3d C ir

. 2 0 0 1 ). T h ere a r e e x c e p t i o n s t o t h i s ru l e . I f , f o ri n s t a n c e , th e BI A a f

f i r ms t he I J ’ s deci s i on fort he r eas ons s etfor t h i n t hatdeci s i on, the I J ’ s o p i n i o n e f

f e c t i v e l y b e c o m e s th e B I A ’ s , a n d , a c c o r d i n g l y, a c o u rt m u st re v iew th e IJ’ s d e c isio n . K o ry tn yu k v . A sh c ro f t, 3 9 6 F

. 3 d 2 7 2 , 2 8 6 (3d C ir

. 2 0 0 5 ). In th e p re se n t ca se th e B IA sta ted a t th e o u tse t th a t it a g re e d w ith th e IJ ’s f

in d in g th a t M s . F ia d

jo e w a s n o t c re d ib le

. It th e n se t f

o rth a sin g le p a ra g ra p h d e v o ted to th e c re d ib ili ty i s s ue, l i s t i ng t w o of the i ncons i s t enci es upon w hi ch the I J had reli ed

. T h u s, as in X ie v. A sh cro ft, 3 5 9 F

. 3 d 2 3 9 (3d C ir

. 2 0 0 4 ), w e a d d re ss th e c irc u m sta n c e in w h ich “ th e B IA b o th adopt ed the I J ’ s adver s e cr edi bi l i t ydet erm i nat i on and di s cus s ed s om e, butnotal l , of the under l y i ng bas es forthe I J ’ s adver s e cr edi bi l i t ydet erm i nat i on. ” I d. , at242. I n t he pr es entcas e, i n l i ghtof i t s expr es s i on of agr eementw i t h t he IJ’ s c re d ib ili tyf

in d in g a n d its o w n sk e tch yc re d ib ili ty analy si s, t he B IA m usthav e rel i ed u po n the adv ers e c re d ib ili tyf

in d in g o f th e IJ. W e th u s h a v e ju risd ictio n to r evi ew bot h t he B I A ’ s and I J ’ s opi ni ons . I d. , at242; s ee a l s o, M i ah v. A s hcr oft , 346 F. 3d 434 ( 3d C i r . 2003) ; Senathi r aj ah v. I N S, 157 F. 3d 210 ( 3d C i r . 1998)

. T her e i s an addi t i onal r eas on t o r evi ew t he I N S deci s i on and the hea r i ng fr om w hi ch t he dec i s i on der i ved. A nyadver s e cr edi bi l i t ydet erm i nat i ons b a se d o n th e tes tim o n ym u st b e v iew e d w ith g re a t ca u tio n in vi ew of the abus i ve natur e of the hea r i ng. A dver s e cr edi bi l i t ydet erm i nat i ons ar e r evi ew ed under t he s ubs t ant i al evi dence s t andar d. U nderthi s s t andar d, the B I A ’ s adver s e cr edi bi l i t ydet erm i nat i on m us tbe uphel d on r evi ew unl es s anyr eas onabl e adj udi cat orw oul d be compel l ed t o concl ude t o t he contr ary . M i nori ncons i s t enci es do not p ro v id e a n a d e q u a te b a s is f o r a n a d v e rs e c re d ib ility f in d in g . X i e, 359 F. 3d at243. A par tfr om i t s adver s e cr edi bi l i t ydet erm i nat i on, theThe BIA did not reach the issues of i) whether bondag e as 3 a Trokosi slave would mee t the definition of per secution on ac count of me mbers hipin a

pa rtic ula r s ocialgro up ; ii ) whe ther i f M s. F ia djo e ’s te sti mony were c re dib le sh e had “e sta bli sh e d that sh ewa s, in fac t , a T ro k osi slave;” and iii) whe ther Ms. F iadjoe could e scape perse cution by

locatingelsewhere in Gha na. Significa

ntly , o n th i s appeal the g overnment made no 4 attempt to defend the cre dibility deter minations of either the IJor the BIA. 39 B I A found thatM s . Fi adj oe fa i l ed t o es t abl i s h t hatthe g o v e rn m e n t o f

G h a n a w a s e ith e r u n a b le o r u n w ill in g to c o n tro l h e r f

a th e r’s ritu a l se x u a l ab u se . W e m u st u p h o ld th is 3 f a c tu a l f in d in g if it i s “ su p p o rte d b yre a so n a b le, s u b sta n tial, and pr obat i ve evi dence on t he r ecor d cons i der ed as a w hol e. ” IN S v . E lias -Z a c a ria s, 5 0 2 U .S . 4 7 8 , 4 8 1 (1 9 9 2 ). W e sh o u ld fi nd s ubs t ant i al evi dence l acki ng onl yw her e the evi dence

“ w a s s o c o m p e lli n g th a t n o re a so n a b le f a c t f in d e r c o u ld f

a il t o fi nd t he requ i si t e fear of p ers ecuti on . ” Id. at48 3-84; s ee al so 8 U

. S. C

. §1252( b) ( 4) ( B ) ; A bdi l l e v. A s hcr oft , 242 F. 3d 477, 4 8 3 -84 (3d C ir

. 2 0 0 1 ). B . T h e IJ H e a rin g a n d C re d ib ili tyF in d in g : P rio r to 4 t he comm ence m entof t es t i m onybefor e the I J on A pr i l 30, 2002 t he I J i dent i fi ed the r ecor d i n hi s pos s es s i on. I ti ncl uded M s . Fi adj oe’ s J ul y5, 2001 as y l um aff i davi t( For m I

- 589) w hi ch r eci t ed i n ful l det ai l the ci r cumst ance s thatl ed t o her fl i ght- t he comm ence m entof herfather ’ s s exual abus e atage s even, t he r es um pt i on of herl i fe a s a Trokos i s l ave a tage ei ght een a nd t he cont i nui ng beat i ngs and per i odi c r ape comm i t t ed byherfather

. I tr eci t ed herat t empt s t o es cape fr om herfather ’ s hous e, herfl i ghtt o N i ger i a, herr eturn, her f a th e r’s m u rd e r o f

th e m a n w h o m sh e lo v e d a n d h o p e d to m a rry , an d h e r se c o n d f lig h t an d in a b ili tyto f

in d so m e o n e in A ccr a w ho w oul d t ake he ri n. A l so i n the r ecord w hich the IJ possess ed w as M s.40 J ans en’ s J une 22, 2000 l ett erdes cr i bi ng herther apys es s i ons w i t h M s. F i adjoe and M s. F i adjoe’ s em oti on al st at e. M s. J ans en r ecount ed how M s . Fi adj oe’ s emot i onal condi t i on i m pr oved mar kedl yaft ers es s i ons of couns el i ng and that al t hough “[h] ercomm uni cat i on abi l i t i es have i m pr oved, ” s he nevert hel es s “cont i nues t o occa s i onal l ydi s s oci at e w hen di s cus s i ng emot i onal l ypai nful event s . ” I tw as , of cour s e, nece s s aryt o t es t i fyaboutemot i onal l ypai nful event s atthe A pr i l 30, 2002 hear i ng. T he I N S G ui del i nes ent i t l ed “Consi der at i on for A s y l um O ffi cer s A dj udi cat i ng A s y l um C l ai m s fr om W om en” des cr i be i n gener al t erm s the phenomena thatM s . J ans en o b se rv e d in M s. F iad

jo e . T h e G u id e lin e s a re a s a p p lica b le to an I J cr edi bi l i t ydet erm i nat i on as theyar e t o an A s y l um O f f ic e r’ s c re d ib ility d e te rm in a tio n , e .g .,:

W om en w ho hav e been raped o r otherw i se s exual l yabus ed maybe s er i ous l ys t i gm at i zed and ost raci zed in theirsoci et i es. T heym ayal so be s ubj ectt o addi t i onal vi ol ence , abus e or di s cr i m i nat i on beca us e theyar e vi ew ed as havi ng br oughts hame and di s honoron th e m se lv e s, th e ir f

a m ili e s, a n d th e ir com m un i t i es.



### ... W om en w ho have be en s ubj ectt o dom es t i c or se x u a l ab u se m a yb e p sy c h o lo g ica lly t r aumat i zed. T r auma can be s uffe r ed byany appl i cant , r egar dl es s , of gende r , and mayhave a s i gni fi canti m pacton t he abi l i t yt o pr es ent t e s t i m o n y. T he demeanorof tr aumat i zed a ppl i cant s can vary . T heym ayappea rnum b ors how41 e m o tio n a l p a ss iv ityw h e n re c o u n tin g p a st e v e n ts of m i s t r eatm ent

. Som e appl i cant s m aygi ve m at t er - of- fac tr eci t at i ons of s er i ous i ns t ance s of m istrea tm en t. T rau m a m ayalso ca u se m em o ry l os s ordi s t or t i on, and maycaus e other appl i cant s t o bl ock ce r t ai n exper i ence s fr om t hei rm i nds i n or dernott o r el i ve thei rhorr orby t he r et el l i ng. In A n g lo-A m erican cu ltu res, pe o p le w h o av ert t hei rgaze w hen ans w er i ng a ques t i on, ors eem nervous , ar e per cei ved as untruthful

. I n other cul tur es , how ever , bodyl anguage does not conveyt he s ame m es s age. I n cert ai n A s i an c u ltu re s, f

o r e x a m p le, p e o p le w ill a v e rt th e ir ey es w hen speaking to an au t ho ri t yfi gu re as a s i gn of r es pect

. T hi s i s a pr oductof cul tur e, not n e c e s s a r i l y o f

c r e d i b i l i t y. I tbear s r ei t er at i on thatthe for egoi ng c o n sid e ra tio n s o f

d e m e a n o r c a n b e th e p ro d u c ts of tr auma orcul tur e, notcr edi bi l i t y . Poor i nt ervi ew t echni ques / cr os s - cul tur al s ki l l s m ay cause fau l t yneg at i ve credibi l i t yfi nd i ng s. F rom the o u tseto f th e A p ri l 30 , 2 0 0 2 h ea ri n g the IJ t ook overm uch of the ques t i oni ng of M s . Fi adj oe, both on di r ectand on cr os s - exami nat i on bythe governm ent

. H i s t one w as h o sti le an d at t im es b ec am e e x tr ao rdin aril yab u sive

. If notbydes i gn, i n eff

ect , he pr oduced the veryatm os pher e that M s. Jansen an d the I N S G uidel i nes anti ci pated w ou l d cau se m emoryl os s , bl ocki ng, di s s oci at i ng and br eakdow n. E xami ni ng M s . Fi adj oe conc erni ng the hi ghl ys ens i t i ve su b ject of h er f athe r’s sex u al ab u se a t age sev en , the IJ’s q u e stio n in g re d u c e d h e r to tea rs ( se e tra n sc rip t ex c e rp t at. p p . 1 4 -16 , su p ra).42 A tt hatpoi nti n the pr ocee di ngs M s . Fi adj oe bega n h a v in g d if

f icu ltyre sp o n d in g to th e IJ. S h e h a d b e e n b o rn in 1971. I n r es pons e t o herat t orney ’ s ques t i ons s he t es t i fi ed that s he w entt o l i ve w i t h herA untD el a i n A ccr a w hen s he w as s even, i

. e. , i n 1978, t hus br i ngi ng the s exual abus e t o a tem p o ra ryh a lt. S h e f

u rth e r te stif

ied th a t sh e re m a in e d w ith A untD el a el even y ear s and w as 18 y ear s of age w hen s he re tu rn e d to h e r f

a th e r’ s h o m e u p o n th e d e a th o f A u n t D e la . A r athers i m pl e ca l cul at i on w oul d have pl ace d t hi s i n t he y ear 1989, butundert he I J ’ s har s h ques t i oni ng M s . Fi adj oe w as u n a b le to re c a ll th e y e a r a n d w a s re d u c e d to a n in a b ili tyto resp o n d (see tr an script ex ce rpt at pp 1 6 -17 , su p ra). T he bul l y i ng natur e of the I J ’ s ques t i oni ng w as fur t her evi denti n hi s i nt err ogat i on of M s . Fi adj oe abouther know l edge thatherfatherkepti dol s i n t he r oom i n w hi ch he w or s hi ped w hen s he t es t i fi ed thats he had ne verbeen i n t he r oom . I gnor i ng t he obvi ous poi ntthatM s . Fi adj oe made, that sh e c o u ld se e into the ro o m w ith o u t entering it , the IJ cont i nued t o badgerher( s ee tr ans cr i ptexce rptatp. 17- 18 su p ra). D eal i ng w i t h a s ubj ectthatcan onl yhave be en extr emel ypai nful t o M s . Fi adj oe, herfather ’ s m ur derof her fi ancé A hm ed, t he I J pur s ued an a ppar enti ncons i s t ency b etw ee n M s. F iadjo e’s testi m o n yan d M s. Jan sen ’s rep o rt conce r ni ng w hetherM s . Fi adj oe had t ol d A hm ed aboutthe s exual as pectof the abus e s he had s uffe r ed. T he I J r educe d M s . Fi adj oe t o an i nabi l i t yt o r es pond t o hi s ques t i ons ( s ee tr an script ex ce rpt at pp 1 8 -19 su p ra). T h ese are ex am p les o f th e m an n er in w h ich th e IJ t r eat ed M s . Fi adj oe thr oughoutthe hea r i ng. A n exami nat i on o f t h e e n t i r e t r a n s c r i p td i s c l o s e s o t h e ri n s t a n c e s o f h i s e x t r e me in se n sitiv ityto w a rd s th e w itn e ss a n d h is f a ilu re to tak e in to a c c o u n t th e a b u s e s to w h ic h s h e h a d b e e n s u b je c te d in G h a n a . T h e IJ’ s o w n c o n c lu d in g q u e stio n s a n d re m a rk s d e m o n stra te t hathe had r educe d hert o t he emot i onal s t at e aga i ns tw hi ch M s . J ans en and the I N S G ui del i nes had w arned:43 J UDGE T O M S

. F I ADJ OE

Q : M s . Fi adj oe, y ou’ ve hea r d m ydeci s i on, y ou’ ve hea r d w hatI ’ ve j us ts ai d? A : (N o au d ible resp o n se). Q : O h , y o u w e re sle e p in g th e re , y o u f e ll as l eep di dn’ ty ou? A : (N o au d ible resp o n se). Q : Y ou fel l as l eep dur i ng m ydeci s i on? A : N o, I ’ m fee l i ng heada che. Q : D i d y ou hearw hatI s ai d orw er e y ou as l eep? A : I w as n’ tas l eep. Q : D i d y ou hearw hatI s ai d? A : I thoughtthaty ou ( i ndi s cerni bl e) , s o I d id n ’t. Q : O kay , al l ri gh t , w el l , w hat I sai d w as, t hatfi r s tof al l , I don’ tbel i eve y our t es t i m ony , I thi nk thaty ou w er e maki ng up y ourt es t i m onyas y ou w er e goi ng al ong. Y ourt es t i m onyi s contr adi ct ed by , m uch of i ti s contr adi ct ed byy our ow n w i t nes s , M s . J ans en, her , her , the l ett erthats he w r ot e, y ourt es t i m ony gener al l ydoes n’ tm ake s ens e. I fur t her fou nd , and I deni ed it , basi cal l ybecau se44 of that , I fur t herfound thati f I had found that y o u w ere cre d ible, that y o u w ere tel li n g m e the tru th, I d o n o t fi n d that - - ( OF F T HE RE CO RD ) A s t he I N S G ui del i nes s t at ed, “[p] oori nt ervi ew t echni ques / cr os s - cul tur al s ki l l s m aycaus e fa ul t ynegat i ve cr edi bi l i t yfi ndi ngs ”. T heym os tcert ai nl ydi d s o i n t hi s cas e. T he conduc tof the I J byi t s el f w oul d r equi r e a r ej ect i on of hi s cr edi bi l i t yfi ndi ng. A par tfr om that cons i der at i on, t he form al r eas ons he gave forfi ndi ng “thatthe r es pondenti s m aki ng up hert es t i m onyas s he i s goi ng al ong, s he’ s m aki ng up t hes e s cena r i os and s he i s fabr i cat i ng her t es t i m onyt o t he C our t ” do notw i t hs t and exa m i nat i on. F irst, th e IJ r e lied u p o n M s. F iad jo e ’s in a b ili tyto sta te the y ea r w h en sh e re turn ed fro m A u n t D ela to h er f athe r’s hous e. I ti s t rue thatM s . Fi adj oe, aft erbei ng s ubj ect ed t o t he IJ ’s b ro w b e a tin g , c o u ld n o t r e c a ll th e y e a r o f h e r r e tu rn . H ow ever , s he t es t i fi ed thats he w as born i n 1971, l eftforA unt D el a’ s hom e w hen s he w as s even ( 1978) and r eturned af t er el even y ear s w hen s he w as ei ght een y ear s of age

. T he i nabi l i t yt o r eca l l dur i ng the s t r es s of the hea r i ng thatthe y ear o f r e tu r n w a s 1 9 8 9 d o e s n o ta f f e c tc r e d i b i l i t y. T he I J found thatM s . Fi adj oe’ s t es t i m onythather fatherkepti dol s i n t he s hr i ne r oom i n hi s hom e w as i ncons i s t entw i t h hert es t i m onythats he neve rent er ed the r oom . I n s pi t e of the badge r i ng natur e of the I J ’ s ques t i oni ng, M s. F iad jo e f u llye x p lain e d th a t w ith o u t en ter in g sh e c o u ld s e e i n t o t h e r o o m, t h a ti d o l s we r e a l s o k e p to u t s i d e th e r o o m, and thats he obs erved otherT r okos i adher ent s ent erthe r oom t o br i ng food t o t he i dol s and l at erl eave . T her e w as no i n c o n s i s t e n c y i n h e rt e s t i m o n y. R ef erring to M s. F iadjo e’s testi m o n yab o u t her retu rn t o herfather ’ s hom e af

t erherand A hm ed’ s abor t i ve att empt t o est abli sh a res i den ce i n N i geri a, the IJ att ri bu t es t o M s.45 F iad jo e th e sta tem e n t th a t “s h e re tu rn e d th e re sin c e sh e d id n o t w a n t h e r f

a th e r to b e a n g e re d b yth e f a c t th a t sh e w a s w ith A h m e d .” T h e IJ f

o u n d th a t “[ t]h is a b so lu telyis to tally i m pl aus i bl e and t ot al l ynons ens i cal t o t he C our t , i ns ofaras the r es pondentw as r etur ni ng t o a s i tuat i on w her e s he knew s he w as goi ng t o be r aped a nd beat en. ” The I J ’ s s ubs equent obs ervat i ons m ake no s ens e: “A nd I don’ tbel i eve thats he w o u ld h a v e a n yf

e a r th a t h e r f

a th e r w o u ld b e a n g e re d a n d if s he di d have a fea r , t hatfea rw oul d be a l es s erfea rthan the r ape a nd t he bea t i ngs thats he knew aw ai t ed her

. A s i tturned out , w hen the r es pondentdi d r eturn, herfathernotonl ybeat h er b u t po u red h o t w ater o n h er a s a f o rm o f p u n ishm en t. ” In t he fir stplace the IJ does no tgive an accu rat e reci t al of M s. Fi adj oe’ s t es t i m ony . She di d notw antherfathert o att ack A hm ed butt he r eas on s he gave forr eturni ng t o herfatherw as t hat“I don’ t , m yfather , I don’ thave a nybodyt o go t o, ” a f act that, as w il l be d iscu ssed in co n n ec ti o n w ith the B IA ’s cr edi bi l i t yfi ndi ng, i s ful l ys upport ed bythe r ecor d. N e x t, th e IJ f

o u n d M s. F iad

jo e lac k e d c re d ib ili ty beca us e “M s . J ans en’ s l ett err efl ect s nothi ng t o t he ef fec tthat r es pondent ’ s fatherw as a mem berof the Trokos i cul t , northat t he r es pondenther s el f w as a Trokos i s l ave. T he r es pondent w as notabl e t o expl ai n w hyw hats he t ol d t he C our t , w as not t ol d t o t he s oci al w or ker

. ” The I J ’ s pr emi s e thatM s . Fi adj oe di d nott el l M s . J ans en aboutthe Trokos i s ecti s t ot al l yw r ong, ev en if ref

ere n ce is m ad e o n lyto the let ter i n ev iden ce b ef o re t he IJ. R epeatedl yt hroug ho ut the asy l um proceed i ng s M s. F iad jo e re f e rre d to h e r f

a th e r’s T ro k o si p ra c tice s a s h is “fet i sh. ” In her June 22 , 20 00 l et t er M s. Jansen w ri t es, “M s. Fi adj oe des cr i bes herfatheras havi ng a r el i gi ous “fe t i s h. ” M s . J ans en att hatt i m e di d notunder s t and w hatM s . Fi adj oe w as t el l i ng her , a mi s under s t andi ng w hi ch s he l at erover came, as expl ai ned i n herO ct ober31, 2002 l ett er , w hi ch w i l l be d isc u ss e d f

u rth e r in c o n n e c tio n w ith th e B IA ’s c re d ib ili ty det erm i nat i on. I n anyevent , the I J w as s i m pl yi n err orw hen he s t at ed thatM s . J ans en’ s l ett err efl ect s nothi ng t o t he ef fec t46 th a t M s. F iad

jo e ’s f a th e r w a s a m e m b e r o f

th e T ro k o si c u lt. T he I J per cei ved tw o otheri ncons i s t enci es betw een M s. F iadjo e’s testi m o n yan d w h at ap p ea red in M s. Jan sen ’s June 2 2, 20 00 l et t er. H e assum ed M s. F i adjoe t old M s. J ans en w hatw as s t at ed i n t he l ett er . Fi r s t , M s . Fi adj oe tes tifie d th a t sh e n e v e r to ld A h m e d a b o u t th e se x u a l as sa u lts upon her , w her eas t he l ett ers t at es A hm ed “w as aw ar e of the s exual as s aul t s byherfather , butw as pow er l es s t o s t op them. ” Second, M s . Fi adj oe t es t i fi ed that , nothavi ng s een he rfather ki l l A hm ed, s he di d notknow how he w as ki l l ed, w her eas the l et t ers t at es “[w ] hen s he emer ged, s he found he rboy fr i end ly in g sh o t o n th e f

lo o r.” ( e m p h a sis a d d e d ). A s d isc lo se d in M s. Jan sen ’s O ctob er 2 1 , 2 0 0 2 let ter (w h ich w as n o t bef o re the IJ), th ese inco n sist en cies res u lt ed fro m M s. Jan sen ’s err on eou s ass um pti on s, no tfrom m i sst at em ents of M s. F iadjo e. E v en if th ere w ere su ch inco n sist en cies (w h ich th ere w er e not ) , t heyw er e mi nori n natur e. I n t he ent i r e fl ow of event s t hataff

l i ct ed M s . Fi adj oe fr om age s even unt i l s he fl ed fr om G hana, i tw as i m m at er i al w hetherA hm ed knew of the s exual abus e as w el l as the otherform s of abus e perpetr at ed byt he fa t herand w hetherthe fa t hers hotors t abbed A hm ed, t h e o n l yl i k e l yo t h e rme a n s o f k i l l i n g h i m. T h e IJ r e lied u p o n sta tem e n ts th a t M s. F iad jo e m a d e to I m m i gr at i on offi cer s upon herarr i val i n t he U ni t ed St at es and upon t he occ as i on of herA s y l um Pr e- s cr eeni ng I nt ervi ew on M ar ch 30, 2000, w hi ch ar e i ncons i s t entw i t h heras y l um aff i davi t , t he i nform at i on s he pr ovi ded M s . J ans en and he r t es t i m ony . Forr eas ons thatw i l l be s etfor t h i n t he di s cus s i on of the B I A ’ s cr edi bi l i tydet erm i nat i on, thes e s t at ement s do not cons t i tut e s ubs t ant i al evi dence thatw oul d perm i ta fi ndi ng t h a tM s . F i a d

j o e l a c k e d c r e d i b i l i t y. A s t he I J expr es s ed i t , “[t ] he cr edi bi l i t yof the resp o n d en t i s o f e x tr em e im p o rt an ce in as sess ing resp o n d en t’ s c l a i m. ” No a d v e r s e c r e d i b i l i t ya s s e s s me n td e r i v e d f r o m a hear i ng conduct ed underthe ci r cumst ance s and i n the manner t hatt he I J conduct ed the A pr i l 30, 2002 hear i ng coul d s ur vi ve47 r evi ew . Fur t her , even i f the hea r i ng w er e conduc t ed i n an e v e n -h a n d e d , fa ir m a n n e r, th e re a so n s th a t th e IJ g a v e f o r h is fi ndi ng of l ack of

cr edi bi l i t yar e nots uppor t ed bys ubs t ant i al evi dence

. C

. T he B I A ’ s C r edi bi l i t yFi ndi ng: O f nec es s i t ythe B I A had bef

or e i tt he tr ans cr i ptof the I J hear i ng and the document aryr ecor d. M s . Fi adj oe’ s as y l um appl i cat i on, her r eci t al of eve nt s dur i ng hercouns el i ng w i t h M s . J ans en and hert es t i m onyatt he hea r i ng w er e cons i s t enti n thei rdet ai l ed des cr i pt i on of the ext ended s er i es of horr i fy i ng event s that occurr ed i n herl i fe f

r om age s even unt i l herfl i ghtfr om G h an a a fter the m u rde r of A h m ed

. D esp it e the IJ’s concl us i on t hat“[s he w as ] m aki ng up hert es t i m onyas [s he w a s] g o in g a lo n g ,” it is h ig h lyim p ro b a b le th a t an y o n e c o u ld con si st entl yrecoun tt hese ev ents i n d et ai l on each o f t hese th re e o c c a s io n s . T h e B IA , ap art fro m it s g en era l agre em en t w ith the IJ’s adver s e cr edi bi l i t ydet erm i nat i on, r el i ed upon tw o gr ounds for i t s ow n adver s e cr edi bi l i t ydet erm i nat i on: i ) a purpor t ed i ncons i s t encyi n M s . Fi adj oe’ s t es t i m onyconce r ni ng the natur e of the s exual abus e thatherfatherperpetr at ed upon her at ag e se v en , an d ii ) th e inc o n sist en cies in h er sw o rn sta tem e n t b e f

o re a n A sy lu m O f

f ice r g iv e n a p p ro x im a tely n in e te e n d a y s a f

te r s h e w a s ta k e n in to c u s to d ya t th e a irp o rt

. D espi t e t he cri t i cal natur e of the i ssue and the ex t ensi ven ess o f th e re c o rd , the B IA d e v o ted a m e re tw e lv e lin e s o f its opi ni on t o s etfor t h t he r eas ons fori t s cr edi bi l i t yfi ndi ng. A s t o t he s exual abus e atage 7, the B I A deci s i on s t at ed: She cl ai m ed i n herw r i t t en as y l um appl i cat i on

an d d u ri n g h er testi m o n yin im m igrati o n co u rt t hatherfatherbegan t o abus e hers exual l yand a ttem p ted to ra p e h e r w h e n sh e w a s 7 y e a rs o ld ( E xh. 6- 2 at2; T r . at25)

. Shor t l yther eaf t er , s he m odi fi ed hert es t i m onys om ew hatand cl ai m ed t hatherfatherhad i n fac tr aped he rw hen s he48 w as 7 (T r. at 32 ). I n heras y l um appl i cat i on ( E xh. 6- 2 at2) M s . Fi adj oe s t a t e d , “ [ a ] f

t e rmyp a r e n t ’ s [ s i c ] s e p a r a t i o n , I l i v e d wi t h my fatherand he be gan t o s exual l yabus e me. T hi s s t art ed w hen I w as 7 y ear s ol d. ” A therhear i ng ( T r . at25) M s . Fi adj oe t es t i fi ed, “[a ] tt he age of s even, he’ s tr i ed t o r ape me and a b u se m e a n d b e a t m e u p a n d w a n t m e to b e p a rt o f T ro k o si, T r okos i

. ” A tt he poi nti n t he hea r i ng w hen the I J had r educe d M s . Fi adj oe t o t ear s and ber at ed herforcry i ng and “be at i ng ar ound bus h” he a s ked herhow l ong herfatherbeatorr aped h e r (T r. at 3 2 ), to w h ich sh e re sp o n d e d b e f o re d iss o lv in g in to t ear s “[f ] or , t i l l I w as s even, I know m yfatherw as r api ng m e .” T h e re is n o n e c e s s a ry in c o n s is te n c yin th e s e s ta te m e n ts

. S e x u a l ab u se d u rin g a th re e m o n th s’ p e rio d c o u ld p lau sib ly in c lu d e b o th a ttem p ted ra p e a n d ra p e . M o re o v e r, itis unr eas onabl e t o expec ta per s on t o r emem berw hetherthe r epea t ed s exual abus e s he s uffe r ed atage s even c ons t i tut ed at t empt ed r ape oractual r ape. I n t he pr es entcas e, i n l i ghtof w h a t f o llo w e d in th e e n su in g y e a rs, a n yim p re c isio n in th is re g a rd c a n n o t ra tio n a llyb e a b a sis f o r a n a d v e rse c re d ib ili ty fi ndi ng. A s t o t he i ncons i s t enci es i n t he s t at ementbefor e the A s y l um O ffi cer , t he B I A deci s i on s t at ed:

H o w ev er, th e re sp o n d en t st ated in a s w o rn s t at ementbefor e an a s y l um offi cerw i t h t he I m m i gr at i on and N atur al i zat i on Ser vi ce ( now t he D e pa r t mentof

H omel a nd Se c ur i t y , D H S) t hatt he abus e bega n appr oxi m at el y3 y ear s pr i or t o heri nt ervi ew i n 2000 ( E xh. 6- 9 at4) , w hen s he w oul d have be en 26 or27. I n fac t , s he cl ai m ed i n t hati nt ervi ew thats he neve ral l ow ed h er f athe r t o h av e se x w ith h er (id.) , in stark co n tr ast t o h er later claim s o f o n -go ing rap e (T r. at 27 -28 , 7 6 , 7 8 -79 ).49 O n M ar ch 30, 2000 A s y l um O ffi cerJ ames L. R eave s conduct ed an A s y l um Pr e- Scr eeni ng I nt ervi ew . T her e ca n be no cr i t i ci s m of the manneri n w hi ch he c onduct ed the in ter v iew . H e e n su re d th a t M s. F iad jo e h a d a n in ter p re ter in the T w i l an g u ag e. H is qu esti o n s w ere co n cise. T h ere is ev ery r e a s o n t o b e l i e v e t h a th e , u n l i k e th e I J , f o l l o we d th e I NS M em o ran d u m o n C o n side rati o n s fo r A sy lum O ff icers A dj udi cat i ng A s y l um C l ai m s fr om W om en, dat ed M ay6, 1995. W ith o n e e x c e p tio n , the a n sw e rs M s. F iad jo e g a v e to hi m w er e ful l ycons i s t entw i t h hers ubs equentas y l um appl i cat i on, hers t at ement s t o M s . J ans en and he rhear i ng t es t i m ony . T heyi ncl uded i nform at i on aboutherfami l y , her father ’ s beat i ngs , herfl i ghtfr om hom e, the murde rof her fi ancé , and heri nabi l i t yther eaf t ert o fi nd r efuge w i t h A unt D e la’ s h u sb a n d , h e r m o th e r a n d ste p f a th e r a n d th e f

rie n d in A ccr a. M s . Fi adj oe’ s s t at ementbefor e O ffi cerR eave s depart ed fr om heras y l um appl i cat i on, the i nform at i on s he gave t o M s . J ans en and he rhear i ng t es t i m onyi n t he fol l ow i ng re sp e c t: Q : H ave y ou everbeen ha r m ed i n y our

countr ybyany one? A : Y es, bym yfa ther. Q : W hatdi d y ourfatherdo t o y ou? A : H e abus ed me bybeat i ng m e. Q : W hen di d t hi s happen? A : H e s t art ed doi ng thi s about3 y ear s ago. Q : D i d y ou l i ve w i t h hi m atthatt i m e? A : Y es , I w as s t ay i ng athom e. Q : H ow l ong di d t hi s cont i nue? A : T hi s cont i nued for3 y ear s , s om et i m es he t r i ed t o have s ex w i t h m e. Q : D id y o u ev er h av e se x w ith y o u r fa ther? A : N o , I n e v e r a llo w e d it. Q : W hen di d t hi s happen? A : I thappene d m anyt i m es dur i ng the thr ee50 y ears . W hen som eon e cam e t o the hou se t o ma r r yme h e wo u l d r e j e c tth e m. Q : W hen di d t hi s end? A : I tneverended unt i l I r an aw ayfr om h o m e . H e w a n ted m e to m a rrya n o ld m an, I t ol d hi m no. A fr i end ca m e over t o m yhous e. I w entt o t ake a s how erand w h e n I r e tu rn e d th e f

ri e n d w a s d e a d . I t h i n k myf

a t h e rk i l l e d myb o y f

r i e n d

. He w as 33 y ear s ol d. Q : D i d y ourfatherki l l thi s y oung m an? A: I wa s i n th e s h o we r , wh e n I c a me o u tmy f a th e r w a s c o m in g o u t o f m yro o m . I d o n ’ tk n o w wh a th e u s e d t o k i l l h i m. T o det erm i ne w hetherthi s di s cr epanc ycons t i tut es subst anti al evidence to supp ortthe IJ’ s and the B IA ’s adv ers e cr edi bi l i t ydet erm i nat i ons , i ti s nece s s aryt o exami ne the c irc u m sta n c e s in w h ich th e sta tem e n t w a s g iv e n . O n ly ni net een da y s pr evi ous l y , M ar ch 11, 2000, M s . Fi adj oe had arr i ved i n t hi s countr ytr aumat i zed byy ear s of s exual o p p re ss io n , the M a rc h 5 m u rd e r o f h e r f ian c é a n d a d e sp e ra te b u tf u t i l e e f f o r tt o f i n d r e f u g e f r o m h e rf

a t h e ri n Ac c r a . On herarr i val att he ai rpor ts he w as ques t i oned byan I N S O ffi cer and gave nons ens i cal ans w er s . Forexampl e, w hen as ked w hy s he l eftherhom e countr ys he r es ponded “I w antt o l ook aft er m ym o th e r.” I ti s es t abl i s hed i n t hi s C i r cui tthati ncons i s t enci es b etw ee n an airpo rtstat em en t and an asy lum see k er’s tes tim o n yb e f

o re a n IJ is n o t su f

f icie n t, stan d in g a lo n e , to s u p p o rt a B IA f

in d in g th a t th e p e titio n e r w a s n o t c re d ib le

. B a la s u b ra m a n ri m v . IN S , 1 4 3 F .3 d 1 5 7 , 1 6 4 (3 d C ir . 1 9 9 8 ).51 Such an i nt ervi ew i s l i kel yt o be hurr i ed; l anguage di ffi cul t i es ar i s e; t he r es ul t s m aybe i nacc ur at el yr ecor ded, and an arriving ali en w h o h as su ff ere d ab u se in h is ho m e c o u n try m aybe rel uctantt o reveal ful l i nfo rm at i on i n h i s or herfi rs t m e e tin g w ith th e g o v e rn m e n t. Id ., a t 1 6 2 -3 . A s w e sta ted in Senathi r aj ah v. I N S, 157 F. 3d 210, 218:

B yp lacing too m u ch reli an ce o n an airpo rt i nt ervi ew underthe ci r cumst ance s her e, and i gnor i ng m or e det ai l ed ac count s i n For m 1- 589 as w el l as t es t i m onyatan as y l um hear i ng, the I N S se r i ous l yunderm i ned the r el i abi l i t yof the adm i nis t rat i ve p rocess . T he A s y l um O ffi cer ’ s i nt ervi ew of M s . Fi adj oe w as notconduct ed att he ai rpor ts hor t l yaft erherarr i val ; i tw as c o n d u c t e d o n M a r c h 3 0 , 2 0 0 2 , a p p r o x i m a t e l y n i n e t e e n d a ys l at er , att he Y or k C ountyPr i s on. Y etcondi t i ons s i m i l art o, and i n m anyw ay s w or s e than, thos e atan ai rpor ti nt ervi ew pr evai l ed. M s . Fi adj oe w as s t i l l i n a s t at e of s hock r es ul t i ng from t he d evast at i ng exp eri ences p ri or t o M arch 11

. M s. J ans en des cr i bed M s . Fi adj oe’ s emot i onal s t at e w hi ch exi s t ed att he t i m e of the A s y l um O ffi cer ’ s i nt ervi ew and ther eaf t er unt i l s he had unde r gone couns el i ng w i t h M s . J ans en:

In the af t erm at h o f her fi ancee ’s m urder, M s. F iad jo e w a s in a sta te o f

sh o c k . S h e re p o rts s ym pt om s thatar e t extbook acut e ps y chol ogi cal t r a u ma . W i t h o u ts i g n i f i c a n ttr a i n i n g i n tr a u ma p sy c h o lo g y , sh e w o u ld b e v e ryu n lik e lyto fal sel yreporttho se sym ptom s m uch l ess des cr i be them i n t he det ai l s as s he and I have d i s c u s s e d th e m. Fi ndi ng her s el f i n a s t r ange pl ace befor e a mal e off i cer it i s n o t su rp risin g th a t M s. F iad jo e w o u ld b e u n a b le to d is c u s s th e s h a m e f

u l a n d ta b o o in c id e n ts o f in c e s tu o u s ra p e . In b o th h er lett ers M s. Jan sen d esc ri b ed M s. F iadjo e’s52 e m o tio n a l sta te w h e n sh e f irst sa w h e r a n d re c o u n ted th a t it w as notunt i l M s . Fi adj oe had e ngaged i n a numberof ther apy sess ion s tha t she w as a b le t o d iscu ss f u ll y , ev en w ith h er, se x u a l ab u se s w h ich h e r f a th e r h a d c o m m itt e d . C o m p lete ly cons i s t entw i t h t he I N S M emora ndum conce r ni ng cons i der at i ons foradj udi cat i ng cl ai m s of w om en, M s . J ans en w rote in h er O ctob er 3 1 , 2 0 0 2 let ter:

Iti s ext raor dinar i l ydiffi cultfor sexual abuse vict i m s t o d i scuss s pecifi cs of t heirabu se exper i ence s . G i ven the extr eme sha m e that su rrou n d s the se issu es in g en era l th eyare d if f ic u lt f o r b o th m e n a n d w o m e n to d is c u s s . W ith the a d d it ion o f th e c u ltu ral fac tors su rro u n d in g M s. F iad

jo e ’s e x p e rie n c e s in par t i cul ar , i ts houl d be of no s urpr i s e atal l that s he w oul d be r el uct antt o di s cus s thes e i s s ues w ith a n y o n e , m o st s p e c if ica llyw ith a m a le o r in t he p res ence o f several m al es. A s ked on cr os s exami nat i on w hys he had noti nform ed t he I N S O ffi ceraboutw hathad happe ned, M s . Fi adj oe re sp o n d e d , “A b o u t se x u a l as p e c ts, m yf a th e r sle e p in g w ith m e, I do n ’tfe el co m fo rt ab le t ell ing p eo p le .

. . . ” T h e B IA cons i der ed none of

t hes e fa ct or s w hen r ender i ng i t s deci s i on. A s d iscu ssed ab o v e, th e inc o n sist en cyin M s. F iadjo e’s sta tem e n t to th e A sy lu m O f f ice r is a ll th a t is lef

t th a t re f lec ts on M s . Fi adj oe’ s cr edi bi l i t y . N one of the otherr eas ons gi ven b ye ith e r th e IJ o r th e B IA su p p o rt a n a d v e rse c re d ib ili ty det erm i nat i on. B ypl aci ng r el i ance on t hi s i nt ervi ew under the c ir cu m stan ce s in w h ich it w as tak en an d “ign o ri n g m o re det ai l ed ac count s i n For m 1- 589 as w el l as t es t i m onyatan a sy lu m h e a rin g , the IN S se rio u slyu n d e rm in e d th e re liab ili ty o f th e a d m in is tr a tiv e p ro c e s s .” S e n a th ir a ja h , 1 5 7 F .3 d a t 2 1 8

. N e ith e r th e IJ’ s n o r th e B IA ’s a d v e rse c re d ib ili ty det erm i nat i on i s s uppor t ed bys ubs t ant i al evi dence

. D. Go v e r n me n tP r o t e c t i o n : Un d e r8 U. S

. C.53 §1158( b) ( 1) , t he A t t or neyG ener al m aygr antas y l um t o an a l i e n wh o i s a “ r e f

u g e e ” wi t h i n th e me a n i n g o f 8 U. S

. C. §1101( a) ( 42)

. G ener al l ys peaki ng, an appl i cantm us ts how t hathe ors he: is u n a b le o r u n w ill in g to re tu rn to , an d is u n a b le

orunw i l l i ng t o avai l hi m s el f orher s el f of the p rotec ti o n o f [ the c o u n tryo f su ch p erso n ’s nati on al i t yor i n w hich such a p ers on l ast h ab itu all yreside d ], b ec au se o f p erse cu ti o n o r a w el l

- founded f

earof per s ecut i on on acc ountof r ace , r el i gi on, nat i onal i t y , m ember s hi p i n a p a rt ic u la r s o c ia l g ro u p , o r p o litic a l o p in io n . . . 8 U

. S. C

. §1101( a) ( 42) ( A )

. A s how i ng of pas tper s ecut i on gi ves r i s e t o a r ebut t abl e pr es um pt i on of a w el l

- founded f ear o f f u ture p erse cu ti o n . 8 C

. F

. R

. § 1 2 0 8

. 1 3 (b)(1 ). T o es t abl i s h per s ecut i on, an al i en musts how pas tor pot ent i al harm r i s i ng t o t he l evel of per s ecut i on on acc ountof a s t atut or i l yenumer at ed gr ound t hati s comm i t t ed bythe governm entorbyfor ces the governm enti s unabl e or unw i l l i ng t o contr ol

. See G ao v. A s hcr oft , 299 F. 3d 266, 272 (3d C ir

. 2 0 0 2 ). T he B I A found thatM s . Fi adj oe’ s cl ai m foras y l um m us tbe deni ed forfai l ur e t o es t abl i s h t hatthe governm entof G h an a w as e ith er u n ab le or u n w il li n g to co n tr o l her f athe r’s ritu a l se x u a l ab u se . T h e B IA ’s e v id e n tial su p p o rt f o r th is f in d in g is s e t f

o rth in its e n tiretyin a b a re six lin e s o f its deci s i on: T he r es pondentnevers oughtthe hel p of the

author i t i es i n G hana ( T r . at66)

. T he r es pondent cl ai m ed thathergr andmot hert ol d t he pol i ce of t he r es pondent ’ s bei ng beat en butthats he decl i ned t o t el l the author i t i es aboutthe r i tual s ex abus e due t o s hame ( T r . at29. T he r es pondents ubm i t t ed evi dence thatthe governm entof G hana out l aw ed Trokos i pr act i ceTh edis sentingop inion conclud e s th at w eha vefaile d to 5 acc ord prope r d eferenc e to the B IA’s findingon the issue of g overnment protection in Ghana . The l en gthy quotation from the State Depa

rtment’s 2000 Country

Report on Human Ri ghts Practices in Ghana to whic h the dissent ref ers doe s in fact se t f

o rtheff orts of theg ov e rnme nt a

nd human rights org anizations to en d th eTrokos i p ra ctice, but the c oncludingportion of the quotation re cites how ine ff e c tiv e the g ov e rnme nt ef

fo rt s hav e be e n de sp itelim ite d s uc c e ss 54 and r i tual bondage i n 1998 and thata nong o v e rn m e n tal o rg a n iza tio n h a s h a d su c c e ss in l i berat i ng , cou nsel i ng , and rehabi l i t at i ng past v ict im s o f su ch b o n d ag e. (E x h

. 6 -5). In the co ntextof the recor d v i ew ed in i t s ent i rety , these t w o s ni ppet s of i nform at i on, both of them i nadequa t el ys t at ed, d o n o t con sti tute su b stan ti al ev iden ce to su p p o rtthe B IA ’s fi ndi ng t hatM s . Fi adj oe has fai l ed t o es t abl i s h t hatthe g o v e rn m e n t o f

G h a n a w a s e ith e r u n a b le o r u n w ill in g to c o n tro l h e r f

a th e r’s ritu a l se x u a l ab u se . T h e B IA to tally i gnor ed the evi dence i n t he r ecor d t hates t abl i s hes the dee p hol d t hatt he Trokos i r el i gi on has upon s ubs t ant i al el ement s of t he G hani an peopl e. Forexampl e:

A ppal l ed bythe pr act i ce, s om e G hani ans have br oken the fe ar ful s i l ence w hi ch s urr ounds T r okos i

. B utthei rcal l s fori tt o be banne d have had l i t t l e i m pacton t he ce ntur i es ol d t r adi t i on w hich has t he b l essi ng of som e of G han a’s m ost p o w erf u l m an . JerryR aw li n g s, the c o u n try ’s char i s m at i c i f notexac t l ydemocr at i c, pr es i dent

- hi m s el f an Ew e - has s poken of Tr okos i as an i m por t antpartof G hana’ s cul tur al her i t age. B ooker , Sl ave of

t he Fet i s h, the I ndepende nt- L ondon ( J une 16, 1996) ( R

. 363)

. 5by NG Os : The Gover nment has not prosecuted any p ra cti tioners of Trokosi and in August 1999, a pre sid e nti a l aide criti c ize d a nti -Tro ko si activists for beinginsensitive t o indigenous c ult ura l and “ re lig iou s”be lie fs and

pra c tic e s. A local group, calling itself th e “Troxovi Ins tit uti on a l Co un c il” (Tro xovi is an altern ate spelling for Trokosi) dec lare d that Trokosi, as de fine d by CH RA J and oth e r human ri ghts groups to be a f

orm o f ritual servitude, doe s not exi s t in the country . The group claimed that the pra ctice of

“Troxovi” d oes exist but neither enslaves n o r exploit s anyone. The Coun c ila ls o li s te d

2 3 ‘ g e nu in eT ro xovi shri nes’ in Gha

na, desc ribingthem as educational institutions and as par t of the

“ Af rika nia re lig ion .” Th ec laims werewi de ly re fute d b y

c hie fs , th epre ss, and

NG Os

. AR:343-44 (empha sis added)

55 N o r i s it e a s yto e s c a p e f ro m T ro k o s i s la v e ry. S p e a k in g o f

h is s lav e s, o n e T ro k o si p rie st s tate d , “T h e ir fami l i es w oul dn’ tt ake them back. T hey ’ r e t oo afr ai d of a n g e ri n g th e f

e tis h .” T he B I A w as i ncorr ectw hen i ts t at ed that“[t ] he r es pondentnevers oughtthe hel p of the author i t i es i n G hana. ” M s . Fi adj oe di d s eek s uch hel p t hr ough hergr andmot herw ho tw ice so u g h t assist an ce fro m the p o li ce . Itis true , as th e B IA s t at es , t hatt he gr andmot herw as t oo as hamed t o m ent i on the se x u a l as p e c t o f

th e a b u se , b u t th e re c o rd is re p lete w ith evi dence t hatt he pol i ce w oul d have done nothi ng even i f theyThe dissent finds F iadj o e’ s hearing te stimony vague 6 concerning what her grandmother told the police. When evaluating Ms. Fiad j o e’s testim ony

it should be kept in mind that it was g iven duringa hea

ringat which the I Jtreated Ms. Fiadjoewith total insensitivity

through out, c a

u s ing h er tobrea k down, bec ome conf

used and ultimately

to become reduce d to silence. TheBIA majority took no acc ount of this factor.

56 had been i nfo rm ed o f t hat as pect of t he ab use . 6 T he mostr ece ntSt at e D epart m entR epor tcover i ng G h a n a s h o w s h o w f

u tile re s o rt to th e p o lic e w o u ld h a v e b e e n . M ul t i pl e page s ar e devot ed t o t he brut al i t yand corrupt i on of t he pol i ce a nd t hei rr efus al t o pr os ecut e s ens i t i ve cr i m e, as T r okos i s exual pr act i ces cert ai nl yw er e, part i cul ar l yi n a vi l l age i nhabi t ed bybel i ever s i n t he s ect

. T he R epor tnot es th a t “[ v ]io len c e a g a in st w o m e n , inc lu d in g ra p e a n d d o m e stic vi ol ence r emai ns a s i gni fi cantpr obl em. A 1998 s tudy r evea l ed thatpar t i cul ar l yi n l ow - i ncome, hi gh- dens i t ys ect i ons of gr eat erA ccr a, atl eas t54 per centof w om en have been a s s a u l t e d i n r e c e n ty e a r s . A t o t a l o f 9 5 p e r c e n to f

th e v i c t i ms of dom es t i c vi ol ence ar e w om en ac cor di ng t o dat a gather ed byt he FI D A

. T hes e abus es gener al l ygo unr epor t ed and se ld o m c o m e b e f

o re th e c o u rts. T h e p o lice ten d n o t to in te rv e n e in d o m e s tic d is p u te s .” M s. F iadjo e’s o w n ex p erien ce s d em o n str ate tha t w h ere a Trokos i s l ave i s i nvol ved the pol i ce w i l l noti nt ervene. She h ad to f lee to a n o ther c o u n tryto es ca p e f rom h er f

athe r, w her e, unfor tunat el ys he w as unabl e t o s t ay . W hen s he obt ai ned herow n r oom fr om a l andl or d i n hernei ghborhood, h e r f a th e r s o te rr o ri z e d th e la n d lo rd th a t h e tu rn e d h e r o u t. Sur el yi f the l andl or d had thoughthe coul d have obt ai ned a p p ro p ria te p ro tec tio n f o r h im se lf

a n d h is te n a n t h e w o u ld hav e turned to t he p ub l i c authori t i es. S i m i l arl y , w hen M s. Fi adj oe fl ed t o A ccr a af t erA hm ed’ s m ur der , herow n m other di d notdar e t o t ake he ri n, nordi d herA untD el a’ s hus band,Th e sefac ts, a longwi th m uc h other ev idenc e , to tally ne g ate 7 the B IA’s statement that “re spondent i mp l i citly admitted that she c ould e sc a

peher f ather’ s a bu seby mov ing to an urb an a

re a .”It is unnece ssary

to rule at this time that this finding also is not supporte d by substantial evid en ce beca use the B IA only

advanc ed it in a hy po thetic a l c onte xt. 57 nordi d an ol d fr i end. T he ol d fr i end w as s o fr i ght ened that th e f a th e r w o u ld su sp e c t th a t M s. F iad jo e h a d c o m e to h im t hathe r emoved hert o a gi r l fr i end’ s hous e, of w hi ch the fatherw as pr es um abl yunaw ar e, and as s i s t ed heri n obt ai ni ng a fa l s e pas s por tforfl i ghtoutof the countr y . I f the author i t i es w e re w ill in g o r a b le to p ro tec t th is T ro k o si s lav e n o n e o f th is fli g h t and fe ar w o u ld h av e b ee n n ec essa ry . 7 T h e B IA se lec ted tw o f a c ts s e t f o rth in th e S tate D epart m entR epor t : i ) “the governm entof G hana out l aw ed T r okos i pr act i ce a nd r i tual bondage i n 1998" a nd i i ) “a nongovernm ent al or gani zat i on has had s ucce s s i n l i ber at i ng, couns el i ng, and r ehabi l i t at i ng pas tvi ct i m s of s uch bondage

. ” ( emphasi s added)

. T hi s s el ect i ve us e of the St at e D epart m ent R epor ti s m i s l eadi ng and does notcons t i tut e s ubs t ant i al evi dence

. I n t he fi r s tpl ace , the B I A i gnor ed otherevi dence i n t he r ecor d demonstr at i ng cont i nuat i on of Trokos i s l averyand the g o v e rn m e n t’s u n w ill in g n e ss a n d in a b ili tyto e n d it. T h e S tate D e p a rtm e n t R e p o rt itse lf c o n f irm s th is c o n tin u a tio n d e sp ite t he 1998 l egi s l at i on t hatbanned “ ‘ cus t om arys ervi tude’ ( know n as T r okos i ) ”. Th e Gh a n i a n Co n s t i tu t i o n h a d f o ra l o n g t i me p ro h ib ited su c h p ra c tice s. “ E v e ryp e rso n h a s a rig h t to p e rso n a l li b e rty .” A rt. 1 4 . “N o p e rso n sh a ll b e h e ld in s l averyand s ervi tude orbe r equi r ed t o per form for ced l abor

. ” A rt

. 16

. T hese prov i si on s had h ad n o eff ecton the T rokosi cul t

. Si m i l ar l yt he 1998 l egi s l at i on out l aw i ng T r okos i has not s ucce eded i n el i m i nat i ng T r okos i s l avery . W hi l e i ti s true that58 cert ai n or gani zat i ons have s ucce eded i n l i ber at i ng and re tra in in g a p p ro x im a tely2 ,8 0 0 T ro k o si s lav e s, th e 2 0 0 1 S tate D ep artm en t R ep o rtco n firm s tha t th e p rac ti ce rem ains v ery m uch al i ve: T r okos i , a tr adi t i onal pr act i ce f ound among t he E w e e th n ic g ro u p a n d in p a rt o f th e V o lta R e g io n , is a n e sp e c iallyse v e re h u m a n rig h ts abus e and a n extr emel ys er i ous vi ol at i on of c h ild re n ’s a n d w o m e n ’s r ig h ts. It is a sy ste m in w hi ch a y oung gi r l , s om et i m es underthe age of 10, i s m ade a s l ave t o a fe t i s h s hr i ne for offe ns es al l egedl ycomm i t t ed bya mem berof the g ir l’ s fa m il y . In ra re instan ce s, b o y s are offe r ed. T he bel i ef i s that , i f s om eone i n t hat fami l yhas comm i t t ed a c r i m e, s uch as s t eal i ng, m ember s of the fa m i l ym aybegi n t o di e i n l ar ge num ber s unl es s a y oung gi r l i s gi ven t o t he l ocal fe ti sh sh ri n e to a ton e f

o r th e o ff

en se. T h e g ir l beco m es the p ropertyof the fet i sh pri est , m ust w or k on the pr i es t ’ s farm , and per form ot her l abor s forhi m . B eca us e theyar e the s exual pr oper t yof the pr i es t s , m os tT r okos i s l aves have chil dren bythe p ri est s. A l t ho ug h the gi rl s’ fami l i es m us tpr ovi de forthei rneeds s uch as food, m os tar e unabl e t o do s o. T her e ar e at l eas t2, 200 gi r l s and w om en bound t o var i ous s hr i nes i n t he Trokos i s y s t em, a fi gur e thatdoes noti ncl ude the s l aves ’ chi l dr en. E ven w hen fr eed byherfet i s h pr i es tfr om the more oner ous as pect s of herbondage, w hethervol unt ar i l yor as a r esul tof int ervent i on byact i vis t s, a T rokosi w om an gene r al l yhas few m arket abl e s ki l l s and l i t t l e hope of

m arr i age a nd typi cal l yr emai ns bound t o the s hr i ne forl i fe byps y chol ogi cal and s oci al pr es s ur e ar i s i ng fr om a tr adi t i onal bel i ef that m isfo rtu n e m ayb ef all a T rok o si w o m an ’sIn li ght of th e di sp os iti on of thec a seit i s unn e c e ssa

ry to 8 co n s ider Ms. F iadjoe’s pe tition s eekingreview of the B IA’s order denying her motion to reconsider its June 6, 2003 opinion. 59 fami l yorvi l l age i f s he aba ndons herobl i gat i ons t o t he s hr i ne. W hen a f et i s h s l ave di es , her fami l yi s expec t ed t o r epl ace herw i t h another y oung gi r l , thus perpetuat i ng the bondage t o t he fet i s h s hr i ne fr om gener at i on t o gener at i on. H u m a n rig h ts o rg a n iza tio n a re h o p e f u l th a t u lti m a tely T r okos i pr act i ces can be s t amped out , buttheyper s i s t , and M s . Fi adj oe has t o l i ve i n t he pr es ent , noti n a more hopeful futur e. Per t i nentt o t he fa ctthats he ca n expec tno hel p fr om t he governm entauthor i t i es i s the fol l ow i ng obs ervat i on cont ai ned i n t he St at e D epart m entR epor tbutnotaddr es s ed byt he B I A : “The G overnm enthas notpr os ecut ed any pr act i t i oner s of Trokos i , and i n A ugus t1999, a pr es i dent i al a id e c riticiz e d a n ti-T ro k o si a c tiv ists f o r b e in g in se n sitiv e to in d ig e n o u s c u ltu ra l a n d ‘r e lig io u s ’ b e lie f s a n d p ra c tic e s .” I n l i ghtof M s . Fi adj oe’ s ow n exper i ence s and the document aryevi dence i n t he r ecor d, w e conc l ude thatthe B I A ’ s fi ndi ng t hatM s . Fi adj oe fa i l ed t o es t abl i s h t hatthe g o v e rn m e n t o f

G h a n a w a s e ith e r u n w ill in g o r u n a b le to contr ol herfather ’ s s exual abus e i s nots uppor t ed by s ubs t ant i al evi dence

. 8 I V . C oncl usi on T he adve r s e cr edi bi l i t ydet erm i nat i ons of the I J and of t he B I A ar e nots uppor t ed bys ubs t ant i al evi dence , nori s the B I A ’ s fi ndi ng t hatM s . Fi adj oe fa i l ed t o es t abl i s h t hatthe g o v e rn m e n t o f

G h a n a w a s e ith e r u n w ill in g o r u n a b le to contr ol herfather ’ s s exual abus e s uppor t ed bys ubs t ant i al evi dence

. W e w i l l gr antthe pet i t i on forr evi ew and r emand t he cas e t o t he B I A forfur t herr emand t o a di ffe r entI J fora new60 hear i ng atw hi ch ther e maybe r ece i ved i n evi dence the document s t hatacc om pani ed M s . Fi adj oe’ s m ot i on befor e the B I A forr econs i der at i on of i t s J une 6, 2003 deci s i on and evi dence , i f ava i l abl e, of cont i nui ng T r okos i pr act i ces and governm ent al at t empt s t o er adi cat e them and t o pr ot ect T rokosi vict i m s.61 Fiad joe v . A sh cro

ft, N os . 03- 1971, 04- 1544 S M IT H , C i r cui tJudge , di s s ent i ng: W h il e I w o u ld li k e to c o n clud e o therw ise, the m ajority ’s appr oach t o i t s r evi ew of the B IA ’s fi ndi ngs conce r ni ng governm entpr ot ect i on i n G h an a is , i n m yvi ew , i ncons i s t ent w i t h the deferenti al app roach w e are re q u ire d to t ake in these c a se s. A c c o rd in g ly , I m u st d iss e n t. M s . Fi aj doe’ s i s a tr agi c s t ory . She does notpr es entt he t ypi cal cl ai m foras y l um , i n w hi ch a r efuge e s eeks pr ot ect i on fr om hernat i ve governm entorfr om for ces act i ng on the governm ent ’ s behal f. I ns t ead, s he re count s a hi s t oryof phy s i cal a n d se x u a l ab u se su f

f e re d a t th e h a n d s o f

h e r fa th e r, a lleg e d lyin c o n n e c tio n w ith h e r f

a th e r’s a c tiv iti e s a s a tra d iti o n a l “T ro k o si” pr i es t

. T hough t he gr antof as y l um has t r adi t i onal l y been us ed t o p r o t e c ti mm i g r a n t s f

l e e i n g g o v e r n me n t p e r s e c u t i o n , o u rl a ws a r e s e n s i t i v e t o t h e p l i g h to f i n d i v i d u a l s s u c h a s M s . F i a d j o e . As t he maj or i t yexpl ai ns , a pri vat e i nci dent t hatr i s es t o t he l evel of p e rse c u tio n c a n c re a te e lig ib ili tyf o r a sy lu m w h e n it i s comm i t t ed “byfor ces the g o v ernm enti s ei t herunabl e or unw i l l i ng t o contr ol

. ” G ao v. A shcro ft , 2 99 F. 3d 266, 272 ( 3d C ir . 2 0 0 2 ). M y d if

f ic u lty w ith th is c a s e is th a t, tr ya s I m ig h t, I cannot s ay - as t he l aw r equi r es us t o s ay i f w e ar e t o r ever s e theShortly before oral argument the g overnment filed a motion 9 indicatingthat Fiadjoehad lef t the United S tates and g one to C anada , and re quested that her appeal be dismiss ed on the basis of the fug itive disentitlement doctrine. Se e Aran a v. I NS, 673 F.2d 75, 77 ( 3d Cir. 1982) ( per curiam ). L ett er b ri e fs fi le d a ft e r o ral argument indic ate that, while Fiadjoe apparently remains in Canada, she infor med DHS through c ouns e l th at sh e ha s “ se lf -depo rt e d, ” and

in re sp on seto t

his information the g ov ernm ent withdrewits mot ion to dism iss the appeal. 62 B IA - th a t “a n yre a so n a b le a d ju d ica to r w o u ld b e c o m p e lled to concl ude” thatt he G hanai an governm enti s unabl e orunw i l l i ng to c o n tro l h e r f

a th e r. I c a n n o t sa yth a t h e re b e c a u se th e re is w hat I cons i der t o be am pl e evi dence i n the r ecor d t o s uppor tt he B I A ’ s concl us i on t hat , i f t he governm enthad bee n i nform ed of w hatFi adj oe cl ai m s herfatherdi d, i tw ould h ave been w i l l i ng a n d a b le to c o n tro l h im

. T h e m a jo ritysid e ste p s th is e v id e n c e in favorof otheri nform at i on thatm aycas t doubt on t he ef fi cac yof G hana’ s ant i

- T r okos i eff or t s , and hol ds thatthe pr es ence of s uch evi dence compel s an oppos i t e conc l us i on t han thatr eac hed by th e B IA . It i s s im p lyn o t o u r c h a rg e to d o th a t. 9

T o est abli sh el i gibi l i t yfor asy l um on t he b a sis of p ast per s e c u t i o n , a n a p p l i c a n t mus t s h o w: “ ( 1 ) a n i n c i d e n t , or i nci dent s , t hatr i s e t o the l evel of per s ecut i on; (2) that i s ‘ on a c c o u n t o f ’ o n e o f

th e sta tu to rilyp ro tec ted g ro u n d s; a n d (3 ) is co m m itted bythe g o v ern m en t orf or ces the gover nm ent

is ei ther

‘ unabl e or u n w il li ng’t o contr ol

. ” G a o v . A sh c ro ft , 299 F. 3d 266, 2 7 2 ( 3 d Ci r . 2 0 0 2 ) ( e mph a s i s a d d e d )

. W h e t h e r an63 appl i canthas demonstr at ed pas t per s ecut i on or a w el l

- founded fea rof futur e per s ecut i on i s a fa ctual det erm i nat i on r evi ew ed u n d e r t h e s u b s ta n tia l e v id e n c e s ta n d a rd

. See i d. W her e an appl i cant s eeks as y l um bas ed on pr i vat e vi ol ence , w hether t he appl i cant ’ s nat i ve gover nm ent i s w i l l i ng and abl e t o contr ol the al l eged pe r s ecut or s i s a componen t o f t he br oaderper s ecut i on i nqui r y . T hus , w e m us t r evi ew t he B I A ’ s fi ndi ng t hat F iadj oe fai l ed t o show t hatt he governm entof G hana w as unabl e or u n w ill in g to c o n tro l h e r f a th e r’s a b u se in o r d e r to d e ter m in e if t hatfi ndi ng i s s uppor t ed bys ubs t ant i al evi dence

. I n D ia v . A sh c ro

ft , 3 5 3 F

. 3 d 2 2 8 (3d C ir

. 2 0 0 3 ) ( en banc ) , w e el ab o rat ed on the natur e of s ubs t ant i al evi dence r e v i e w o f

a n a s y l u m c l a i m: T h us , t he ques t i on w hetheran age ncy det erm i nat i on i s s upport ed bys ubs t an ti al ev iden ce is th e sam e a s the q u esti o n w h ethe r a r eas onabl e fa ct f

inde rcoul d m ake s uch a det erm i nat i on bas ed upon the admi ni s t r at i ve r ecor d. I f a r eas onabl e fa ctfi ndercoul d m ake a par t i cul arfi n d ing on the admi ni s t r at i ve r ecor d, t h e n t h e f

i n d i n g i s s u p p o r t e d b ys u b s t a n t i al evi dence

. C onver s el y , i f no re as onabl e fa ctfi nder coul d m ake thatfi ndi ng on t he adm i ni s t r at i ve r ecor d, t he fi ndi ng i s not s uppor t ed bys ubs t ant i al evi dence

.64 D ia , 353 F. 3d at249. W e emphasi zed t hatourdefe r ence t o the agenc y ’ s fi ndi ngs i s condi t i oned upon s uppor ti n the r ecor d, and w e i ndi cat ed thati f the age ncy ’ s concl us i on “i s notbas ed on a s peci fi c, co gentr eas on, buti ns t ead, i s bas ed on s pecul at i on, c o n j e c t u r e , o ra n o t h e r wi s e u n s u p p o r t e d p e r s o n a l o p i n i o n , we w i l l notuphol d i tbeca us e i tw i ll nothave be en s uppor t ed by s uch r el evantevi dence as a r eas onabl e mi nd w oul d fi nd adequa t e. In o t herw or ds , i tw i l l nothave be en s uppor t ed by s ubs t ant i al evi dence

. ” I d. a t 2 4 9 -5 0

. T he l aw r equi r es appl i cant s s uch as M s . Fi adj oe t o bear t h e b u r d e n o f

p r oo f o f e s t a b l i s h i n g h e re l i g i b i l i t yf o ra s y l u m. See G ao , 2 9 9 F .3 d a t 2 7 2 ; A b d ill e v . A sh c ro ft , 242 F. 3d 477, 482 (3d C ir

. 2 0 0 1 ). T h e B IA fo u n d that M s. F iadjo e f ail ed to ca rry t h i s b u r d e n wi t h r e s p e c tt o a c r i t i c a l e l e me n to f h e rc l a i m, namel y , t hats he had e xper i en ce d p er s ecut i on byfor ces the g o v e rn m e n t o f

G h a n a w a s e ith e r u n w ill in g o r u n a b le to c o n tro l. O u r ta sk in re v iew in g th e B IA ’s f in d in g is n o t to det erm i ne w hetherw e w oul d have r eac hed t he s ame concl us i on i n t he fi r s t i ns t ance . T o t he contr ary , “the s ubs t ant i al evi dence s t andar d of r evi ew i s extr emel y defe r ent i al , s ett i ng a ‘hi gh hur dl e byperm i t t i ng t he r ever s al of fac tual fi ndi ngs onl yw hen th e re c o rd e v id e n c e w o u ld ‘c o m p e l’ a re a so n a b le f a c tf in d e r to m ake a contr arydet erm i nat i on. ’ ” C h e n v . A sh c ro ft , 376 F. 3d 2 1 5 , 2 2 3 (3d C ir

. 2 0 0 4 ). W e h av e f u rth er e x p lai n ed that fo r a pet i t i onert o pr evai l on a chal l enge t o t he B I A ’ s fac tual fi ndi ngs undert he I m m i gr at i on and N at i onal i t yA ct( “I N A ”) , “the65 evi dence [on the i s s ue i n ques t i on] m us tbe s o s t r ong i n [the pet i t i oner ’ s ] favort hati n a c i vi l tr i al [the pet i t i oner ] w oul d be ent i t l e d t o j u d g me n t o n t h e . . . i s s u e a s a ma t t e r o f l aw . ” See C h en , 376 F. 3d at222 ( ci t i ng I N S v. E l i as - Zacar i as , 5 0 2 U

. S. 4 7 8 , 4 8 1 n .1 (1 9 9 2 ))

. U nder t hi s s t andar d, I bel i eve t hat t he maj or i t yhas fai l ed t o acc or d pr operdefe r ence t o t he B I A ’ s fi ndi ngs on t he i s s ue of governm entpr ot ect i on i n G hana. I n c o ncl udi ng t hatFi adj oe had notm etherbur den of pr oof, the B I A s t at ed: T he r esp o ndentnevers oughtt he hel p of the author i t i es i n G hana. T he r es pondentcl ai m ed t hathergr andmot hert ol d t he pol i ce of the re sp o n d e n t’s b e in g b e a ten b u t th a t s h e d e c lin e d to t el l t he au t ho ri t i es abou tt he ri tual s exu al abu se du e to s h am e. T h e re sp o n d en t sub m itted e v ide nce t hat the g ov ernm ent of G han a ou t l aw ed T rokosi p r a c tic e a n d ritu a l b o n d a g e in 1 9 9 8 a n d th a t a n o n -g o v e rn m e n tal o r g a n iz a ti o n h a s h a d s u c c e ss in liberat i ng , cou nsel i ng , and rehabi l i t at i ng past vi ct i m s of s uch bondage

. T h ere fore , the r es pondent has nots how n thatthe governm entof G hana w oul d be unw i l l i ng orunabl e to pr ot ect h er.

A R 74. T he maj or i t ydi s agr ees w i t h t he B I A ’ s concl us i ons , but66 i n s o doi ng i tfai l s ade quat el yt o addr es s t he r ecor d evi dence su p p o rtin g th e B IA ’s f in d in g s a n d p lac e s d isp ro p o rtio n a te emphasi s on anec dot al s t at ement s cul l ed fr om var i ous por t i ons o f th e re c o rd

. T he maj or i t y quot es t he desc r i pt i on of Trokos i pr act i ces cont ai ned i n t he St at e D epart m ent ’ s 2000 C o untr yR epor ton H um an R i ght s Pr act i ces i n G hana, w hi ch w as al s o par tof the r ecor d befor e the B I A

. T he p ara g r aph i m m edi at el yfol l ow i ng t he ex cerpt qu oted b y t he m aj ori t y detai l s G han a’s anti -Troko si effo rt s: I n 1998 Par l i ament pas s ed l egi s l at i on t hatbanned t he pr act i ce of

T rokos i i n compre hens i ve l e gi s l a t i on t o p rot ectw om en an d ch i l dren’s ri gh t s. H um an r i ght s act i vi s t s bel i eve th at the goal of e radicat i ng the T ro k o si p ra c tice is a c h iev a b le w ith t he new l aw . N G O ’s such as Int ernat i on al N eeds, and governm entagenc ies l i ke the C H R A J , have been c ampai gni ng ag ai ns tT r okos i fors ever al y ear s and ar e fa m i l i arw i t h t he l ocat i ons o f t he fet i s h shr i nes and the number s of w om en and c h ild re n e n sla v e d . A c tiv ists k n o w th e c o m m u n ity lea d e rs a n d f

e tish p ri e s ts a n d , thu s, k n o w w ith w hom t o negot i at e. T h e C H R A J and In ter n a tio n a l N e e d s h a v e h a d so m e su c c e ss in a p p ro a c h in g v ill a g e a u th o rities a n d f e tish p rie sts atov er 316 o f t he m aj or and m i no r s hri nes, w in n in g th e re lea se o f 2 ,8 0 0 T ro k o si s lav e s to67 dat e and r etr ai ni ng t hem fornew pr ofes s i ons . T he or gani zat i ons cont i nue t o w or k foraddi t i onal r el eas es . T he G overnm enthas not pr os ecut ed any p ra c titio n e rs o f

T ro k o s i a n d in A u g u s t 1 9 9 9 , a p re sid e n tial a id e c riticiz e d a n ti-T ro k o si a c tiv ists forbei ng i ns ens i t i ve t o i ndi genous c u ltur al and “r el i gi ous ” bel i efs and pr act i ces . A l ocal gr oup, c a ll i ng i t sel f t he “T roxov i Inst i tuti on al C ou ncil ” (T ro x o v i i s a n a ltern a te s p e lli n g f o r T ro k o si) decl ar ed that T r okos i , as defi ned by C H R A J and ot h er hum an r i ght s gr oups t o be a f or m of r i tual s ervi tude, does notexi s t in the countr y . T he gr oup cl ai m ed t hat t he pra ct i ce of “Tr oxovi ” does exi s tbutnei t herens l aves norexpl oi t s any one. T he C ounci l al s o l i s t ed 23 ‘ genui ne Troxovi s hr i nes ’ i n G hana, des cr i bi ng them as e ducat i onal in s titu tio n s a n d a s p a rt o f the “ A f ri k a n ia re lig io n .” T hes e c l a i ms wer e wi d e l y r e f u t e d b y c h i e f

s , t he press , and N G O s. A R : 343- 44. I n l i ghtof thi s di s cus sion , it i s uncl eart o m e how t he m aj or i t ycan hol d t hat no r eas onabl e fac t fi nder coul d concl ude th a t th e g o v e rn m e n t o f

G h a n a w o u ld b e w ill in g a n d a b le to h e lp Fi adj oe. T he fa ctt hatthe Par l i amentpassed compre hens i ve l egi s l at i on t o pr ot ect w om en and chi l dr en’ s r i ght s , and thatthe pr act i ce of

T r okos i w as banned pur s uantt o t his l egi s l at i on, cert ai nl ypr ovi des evi dence t hat t he G hanai an author i t i es r ecogni zed the exi s t ence and natur e of T r okos i and w er e w i l l i ng68 t o t ake s t eps t o combati t

. T he r epor t ’ s s t at em ent that“human ri gh t s organi zat i on s bel i eve that t he goal of eradi cat i ng T rokosi i s achi evabl e w i t h t he new l aw ” al s o prov ides suppor tfort he B I A ’ s concl us i on t hati nvoki ng t he ai d of G hanai an author i t i es w o u ld n o t h a v e b e e n f

u til e . T h e re is n o b a sis in th e re c o rd to bel i eve thatt hes e hum an r i ght s or gani zat i ons w er e off er i ng a n yth in g les s th a n a n h o n e st a ss e ss m e n t o f th e situ a tio n , an d if as of 2000 theyr eas onabl ybel i e v ed Trokos i coul d be er adi cat ed, t hen i ti s notfort hi s C ourt to su g g estt hatt he B I A act ed un reas on ablyi n g i ving w ei gh tt o thei r vi ew s. T he St at e D epart m ent r epor tal s o r ecount s empi r i cal ev iden ce in su p p o rt o f th e v iew that the G h an aian g o v ern m en t’ s anti -Troko si e ff

ort s w e r e ha vi ng s i gn i fi cant s uccess. Speci fi cal l y , G hana’ s C om m i s s i on forH um an R i ght s and A dm i ni s t r at i ve J us t i ce ( “C H R A J ”) , w or ki ng w i t h an N G O , had s ecur ed the r el eas e of a ppr oxi m at el y2, 800 T r okos i s l av es and re t rai ned t hem for new professi on s. A ccordi ng t o the S tate D epart m entr epor t , t he C H R A J i s an aut onom ous go v ern m ent comm i s s i on es t abl i s hed purs uant t o t he G hanai an cons t i tut i on. T hus , contr aryt o t he im p li cat i ons of the maj or i t yopi ni on, t he S t at e D epartm ent r epo rtindicat es that G han a’s anti -Troko si eff or t s w er e bei ng i m pl ement ed bya governm entagenc yact i ng in p a rtn e rsh ip w ith v a rio u s N G O s. A c c o rd in g to th a t re p o rt, th is col l abor at i ve ef

for t r el i ed heavi l y upon negot i at i on r atherthan dir ectcon front at i on as a m eans of ai ding t he v i ct i m s of T rokosi p ra c tice s . B yig n o rin g th e C H R A J in iti a tiv e , the m a jo rity dis m i sses t he B IA ’s fi nd i ng s conce rni ng G han a’s anti -Troko si69 eff or t s , a n d w r ongl yequat es the abs ence of cr i m i nal pr os ecut i on w i t h an absen ce of

eff ect i ve ai d forw om en thr eat ened by T rokosi pract i ces. T h e m a jo rity a lso c h a llen g e s the sig n if ica n c e o f th e S tate D epart m ent ’ s des cr ipt i on of G hana’ s ant i

- T r okos i eff or t s by quot i ng a por t i on of t he r epor tt hataddr es s es i n a more gener al s ens e the pr obl em of vi ol ence agai ns tw om en in G hana. H ow ever , t he conc l udi ng s ent ence s of t he par agr aph quot ed by t he maj or i t ypr ovi de furt hers uppor tforthe B IA ’ s concl us i on t hatFi adj oe ha d n o t show n t hatthe governm entof G hana w as unw i l l i ng orunab le to pr ot ecther

. T he r epor ts t at es that1998 leg isla tio n d o u b led th e m a n d a to ryse n ten c e f o r ra p e , an d th a t in l at e 1998

t he pol i ce a dm i ni s t r at i on es t abl i s hed a ‘ w om en and j uveni l e uni t ’ t o handl e ca s es i nvol vi ng d o m e stic v io len c e , ch ild a b u se , an d ju v e n ile o f f e n se s. L o c a ted in A c c ra a n d K u m a si, th e u n it w or k s cl os el yw i t h the D epart m entof Soci al W el far e, FI D A , and the Legal A i d B oar d. D ur i ng t he y ear , t he A cc ra B r anch of t hi s uni tr ecor ded ov er 530 c ases, i ncludi ng 18 1 d efi l em ent cas es, 35 rapes, 6 cases of incest , 17 i nd ecent ass ualt s, 8 6 in s ta n c e s o f a s s a u lt a n d w if e b a tte ry, 6 abd ucti on s, and 20 0 n eglectcases.In assessingthe B IA’s finding s, the majority chas t i s es the 10 B IA f o r f a i l i n gt o a d dr e s s a

Jun e1 9 9 6 L o n d o nn e w s p a p e r art ic le entitled “Slave of

the Fetish.” This article was submi tted by Fiadjoe ’s counsel during the procee dings be low, and wa s part of the administrative record before the BIA. However, this articlepredates by several year s Ghana ’s anti-Trokosi effor ts describe d in the 2000 State Depa

rtment repor

t discussed above, and it consists primarily of ambiguous statements that shed little light on wheth er Fiadjoe had m et h er burden of showingthat the Ghanaian authorities were unwilling or una

ble to protec t her.

70 A R : 341- 42. T he maj or i t ydoes not r eci t e thi s evi dence , al t hough i tw as par t of t he r ecor d befor e t he B I A

. I tr ei nfor ces m yvi ew that u n d er the d ef ere n ti al su b stan ti al ev iden ce s t andar d, the rec or d as a w hol e cont ai ns adequa t e s uppor tforthe B IA ’s f in d in g s c o n c e rn in g th e iss u e o f g o v e rn m e n t p r o tec tio n in G hana. 10

T he m aj or i t y al s o ar gues t hat Fi adj oe’ s o w n t es t i m ony s how s t hatt he governm entof G hana w oul d have been unw i l l i ng orunabl e t o hel p Fi adj oe. I do notbel i eve Fi adj oe’ s t es t i m ony c o n c e rn in g h e r g ra n d m o th e r c a n b e a r th e w e ig h t th e m a jo rity pl ace s upon i t

. Fi adj oe’ s af fi davi tand t es t i m onyar e vague conce r ni ng w hatFi adj oe’ s gr andmot her t ol d t he pol i ce, and the det ai l s t hatw er e al l egedl ypr ovi ded coul d hav e le ftt he pol i ce b e liev in g th a t F iad

jo e ’s s itu a tio n in v o lv e d a f a m ilyd isp u te c o n c e rn in g e x c e s s iv e c o rp o ra l p u n is h m e n t. F iajd o e ’s h e a rin g tes tim o n yre g a rd in g th is iss u e c o n sis ts71 of the fol l ow i ng excha nge: Q

. O k a y , d id y o u e v e r tryto g o to th e p o lice y o u rse lf t o t el l t hem w hatw as happeni ng t o y ou? A

. N o. Q

. W h yn o t? A. Be c a u s e o f

h o w th e ywe r e t e l l i n g my g ran d m o ther. J udge t o M s . Fi adj oe Q. Be c a u s e o f

wh a t , ma ’ a m? A

. B eca us e theyal w ay s tel l m ygr andmot hert hat he’ s di s ci pl i ne and mygr andmot her , I fu ll of sh a m e to tell a n yb o d ym yf a th e r is s lee p in g w ith m e. A R : 251. Fi adj oe’ s aff

i davi t s ubm i t t ed i n s uppor t of heras y l um a p p lica tio n c o n tain s s lig h tlym o re d e tail: 14

. M ygrandm othert old the p oli c e a bo ut these beat i ngs . M ygr andmot her told m e the pol i ce o n lysa id th a t ‘y o u r f a th e r is ju st try in g to d is c ip lin e y o u .’ 15. I n 1997 m y gr andmot her w entt o t he pol i ce a ft er m yfatherhad pour ed boi l i ng w at er o n m e w hen I re f u se d to tak e h is a b u se . A g a in , the p o lice sa id t hi s w as a fa t her ’ s r i ght t o di s ci pl i ne hi s chi l dr en.72 1 6

. M y [ g r a n d ] mo t h e r d i d n o t t e l l t h e p o l i c e t h a tmy f a t h e r wa s s e x u a l l ya b u s i n g me . I two u l d s h a me o u r f a m ilya n d sh e c o u ld n o t d o th a t. A R :3 1 7 -1 8

. I n m yvi ew , par t i cul ar l yi n l i ghtof the r ecor d evi dence of G hana’ s ant i

- T r okos i eff or t s , the l i m i t ed i nform at i on cont ai ned in F iad jo e ’s a f f id a v it a n d h e a rin g tes tim o n yc a n n o t re a so n a b ly be r el i ed upon as det erm i nat i ve of w hatt he G hanai an author i t i es w o u ld h av e d o n e h ad theyb ee n inf o rm ed o f F iadjo e’s f

athe r’s Tr o k o s i

- r e l a t e d a b u s e . Th e ma j o r i t y a c k n o wl e d g e s t h a tt he G hanai an author i t i es w er e neve ri nform ed of “the s exual as pect o f th e a b u se ,” b u t f

a ils to a c k n o w led g e th e sig n if ica n c e o f th is f a c t. T h e m o st th a t ca n b e e x tra c ted f ro m F iad jo e ’s a f f id a v it and t es t i m onyi s t hatt he l ocal pol i ce f ai l ed t o i nves t i gat e w hen hergr andmot h er t w i ce t ol d them t hatFi adj oe w as bei ng phy s i cal l yabus ed byherfat h er. H ow ever , Fi adj oe has not s oughtas y l um s i m pl ybeca us e s he w as a vi ct i m of chi l d abus e. F i a d j o e ’ s b r i e f

, c o n s i s t e n twi t h t h e r e q u i r e me n t s o f t h e I NA, a rg u e s th a t sh e w a s p e rse c u ted “ o n a c c o u n t o f ” h e r m e m b e rsh ip i n a part i cul ars oci al gr o u p , w h ic h s he def i nes as “G hanai an w om en fr om t he Ew e tr i be i n t he V ol t a R egi on w ho have be en subjected t o o r face bei ng subject ed to the p ract i ce of T rokosi and w ho oppos e thi s pr act i ce. ” See 8 U

. S

. C

. § 1 1 0 1 (a)(42 )(A ). T hus , i ti s s p e c i f

i c a l l yt h e s e x u a l a s p e c to f h e rf a t h e r ’ s a b u s e, combi ned w i t h i t s os t ens i bl y“r el i gi ous” m o ti vat i on, t hathas perm i t t ed F iadj oe t o s eek a s y l um as one w ho has s uffe r ed p e r s e c u t i o n “ o n a c c o u n to f ” a p r o t e c t e d g r o u n d

. I ts e e ms an o m al ous t o hol d, as t he maj or i t ydoes , t hatFi adj oe’ s nat i ve governm entw oul d notpr ot ectherfr om per s ecu t i o n i n f l i c t e d“on acc ountof” he rs oci al g rou p, w hen the G hanai an governm ent w as not i nform ed of Fi adj oe’ s m ember s hi p i n t hi s s oci al gr oupIs harethe majority ’s conc ern w ith what appea rs from the 11 tr an s c rip tt o h av e b e e nth eunn e c e s s ari l y h o s t i l ed e m e an o r

o f th eIJ duringMs. F ia djo e ’s he aring . H ow e ver, the re c ord a s a wh ole supports the BIA’s dec ision to accord limited weight to Fi adjoe’s acc ount concerningthe intera ction between her grandmother and the Ghanaian police. Ms. F iadjoe’s aff idavit, prepared in advanc e of the hear in g w iththea ssi sta nc eof c ouns e l, c ontains littlede tail concerning the s pecif

ic information g iven by

her grandmother

to the Ghanaian police, a

nd the af fidavit ac knowledg es that the policewere never informed of

the alleg ed ritual sexual a buse that is thebasis of Fiadjoe ’s claim for

asylum. The majority

also rec ounts Fiadjoe ’s testimony concerning 12 her u ns uc c e ssf ul e ff or ts t o re loc ate awa

y from he r father, and

a ssert s that “Ms

. Fi adjoe’ s own experience s demonstrate that wherea Trokosi slave is involved the police will not intervene .” Maj. Op. 52. Thi s s t at ement on its fac e seems to me inconsistent with the majority ’s own acknowledgment that the Ghanaian authorities were never informed that F iadjoe wa s a “Trokosi slave.” 73 orof the natur e and ext ent of the abus e thathas gi ven r i s e t o her c l a i m f o ra s y l u m. 11

N o tw ith stan d ing an ysh o rt co m ing s in F iadjo e’s t es t i m ony , I am w i l l i ng t o assum e ar guendo th a t a r e a so n a b le fact fi nd er coul d rel yon t his t est i m on yt o co nclu d e th a tM s. Fi adj oe had s how n t hatt he gover nm ent of G hana w as unw i l l i ng o r u n a b l e t o prot ect her. T he m aj ori t y , ho w ever, ho l ds t ha t a r eas onabl e fa ct fi nderw oul d be com pel l ed t o t ake t hi s appr oach. B a se d o n a ll o f

th e re c o rd e v id e n c e d isc u ss e d a b o v e , I sim p ly cannotagr ee, and thus I bel i eve i ti s i nappr o pr i at e t o i nvoke F iadjo e’s t esti m o n y as th e ba sis fo r d isplacin g th e B IA ’s j udgm entw i t h ourow n. 12

M s. F i adjoe’ s accou nt r i gh t full yevo kes ou r s ym pathi es,74 a n d I w o u ld b e les s c o n c e rn e d w ith th e m a jo rity ’s a p p ro a c h if we h a d t h e l u x u r y o f d e c i d i n g e a c h c a s e b a s e d s o l e l yo n o u ro wn a s s e s s me n to f

t h e fa c t s u n d e r l y i n g a p e t i t i o n e r ’ s c l a i m. H ow ever , t hati s not an appr oach w e ar e perm i t t ed t o t ake a s an appel l at e courtr evi ew i ng agenc yact i on, and I am concerned by the im p li ca ti o n s o f th e m ajorit y ’s ap p roa ch fo r fu ture im m ig ra tio n a p p e a ls. O u r C o u rt h a s littl e p re c e d e n tial a u th o rity eval uat i ng as y l u m c l a i ms b a s e dup o n a l l e ged pr i vat e per s ecut i on th a t a f o re ig n g o v e rn m e n t is p u rp o rte d lyu n w ill in g o r u n a b le to contr ol

. I fea r t he m aj or i t y ’ s appr oach s et s us dow n t he w r ong p a th f o r re v iew in g th e se d if

f icu lt i ss u e s. B ye m p h a siz in g o n ly w hati tfi nds i n t he r ecor d t o cas tdoubton t he ef fec t i venes s of G hana’ s ant i

- T r okos i eff or t s , the m aj or i t yover l ooks or di s count s t he r ecor d evi dence t o the contr ary . T hi s appr oach risk s a d e lu g e o f c laim s fr o m a p p lica n ts w h o h a v e f a c e d p riv a te vi ol ence and w ho can ar gue t hat a l ack of r es our ces cons t r ai ns t he ef fec t i venes s of l aw enfor cem enteff or t s i n thei rnat i ve countr i es . I t al s o r ai s es t he tr oubl i ng s pect erof fr equentj udi ci al pr onouncement s condemni ng t he l aw enfor cementpr act i ces of fo reign g o v ern m en ts, an o u tcom e o u r h ig h ly d e f e re n tia l s ta n d a rd o f re v ie w is d e s ig n e d to a v o id

. I n m yvi ew , t he m aj or i t y ’ s appr oach i s eff ect i vel yone of de novo r evi ew . T he l aw forbi ds us fr om s ubs t i tut i ng our j udgm entfort hatof the B I A , an d i tpr ovi des no exce pt i on for case s w her e the B I A has had t o addr es s w hethera for ei gn g o v e r n me n two u l d b e wi l l i n g a n d a b l e t o p r o t e c to n e o f i t s o wn c itiz e n s . I r e s p e c tf

u lly d is s e n t.75