2008 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 2-7-2008 

# Sy l vi an a v . Atty Ge n U SA P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 06-4126

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_2008

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 2008 D e c i sion s b y an authori z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

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

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " Sy lvi an a v . Atty Ge n U SA" (2008). 2008 D e cisio n s . P ape r 1634. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008/1634NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT

____________ N o. 06- 4126

____________ YANT I S YL VI ANA; DANI AL HANDO KO,

P e titio n e rs , v. ATTO RN EY G ENER AL O F THE UN I TED STATES

__________ O n R evi ew of a D eci s i on of the B o a rd o f Im m ig ra tio n A p p e a ls ( A gencyN o. A 96- 259- 784) Im m ig ra tio n Ju d g e : H o n o ra b le M iriam K . M ill s Subm i t t ed U nderT hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

D ece m ber11, 2007 B e f o re : M c K E E , C H A G A R E S a n d H A R D IM A N , C irc u it Judg es.

____________ ( Fi l ed: February7, 2008)

____________ OPI NI ON O F THE COURT

____________C H A G A R E S, C i r cui tJ udge.

Y ant i Sy l vi ana, on behal f of he r s el f and he rhus band, D ani al H andoko, pet i t i ons f o r r e v ie w o f

a f in a l o rd e r o f

re m o v a l is s u e d b yth e B o a rd o f Im m ig ra tio n A p p e a ls (B IA ). A s ex p lai n ed b elow , w e lac k juri sd ict ion to rev iew S y lvian a’s c lai m that ex tr ao rdin ary ci r cumst ance s excus ed the l at e fi l i ng of heras y l um appl i cat i on. I n addi t i on, s ubs t ant i al evi dence s uppor t s the B I A ’ s deni al of w i thhol di ng of r emoval and r el i ef unde rthe C onvent i on A gai ns tT or tur e ( C A T ) . A ccor di ngl y , w e w i l l di s m i s s the pet i t i on forr evi ew in p a rt , a n d d e n yit in p a rt . I. A s w e w r i t e mai nl yforthe part i es , w e onl ybr i efl yr eci t e the fa ct s . Sy l vi ana a nd H a n d o k o a re e th n ic C h in e se C h ristia n s f ro m In d o n e sia . T h e yc laim th a t th e yw o u ld s u f f e rh a r m up o n r e tu rn t o I n d o n e s i a b e c a u s e o f th e i re th n i c i tya n d r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f s . To s uppor tthi s bel i ef, Sy l vi ana poi nt s t o the bombi ng of a M arr i ot thot el and an a t t empt ed bom bi ng of the A m er i can Em bas s yi n I ndones i a— both s i nce he rarr i val i n the U ni t ed S tate s. A d d iti o n a lly , S y lv ian a a lleg e s tw o in c id e n ts o f p e rse c u tio n sh e w itn e ss e d w h ile in I n d o n e s i a . Th e f

i r s twa s d u r i n g th e 1 9 9 8 r i o t s , wh e r e S y l v i a n a wi tn e s s e d s o me des truct i on and s aw s om e of the “ba d thi ngs on t el evi s i on and r ead a boutthem i n the new s paper s . ” A ppendi x ( A pp. ) 47- 48. T he s econd w as i n D ece m ber2000, w hen Sy l vi ana c l ai m s t o have w i tnes s ed the bombi ng of an e thni c C hi nes e chur ch. N ei thers he, n o r h e r h u s b a n d , w e re in ju re d d u ri n g th e s e in c id e n ts .

II .A s a pr el i m i narym att er , w e have cons i s t ent l yexpl ai ned thatthi s C our tl acks

ju risd ictio n to re v iew d isc re tio n a rya n d f a c tu a l as y lu m d e ter m in a tio n s p re se n ted in p eti ti o n s fo r rev iew . S ee Jarb o u g h v . A tt o rne yG en era l, 4 8 3 F . 3 d 1 8 4 , 1 8 8 -90 (3d C ir . 2007) ; Sukw anputr a v. G onzal es , 434 F. 3d 627, 634 ( 3d C i r . 2006) . Sy l vi ana’ s cl ai m t hat extr aordi naryci rcum st ances ex cused the l at e fi l i ng of h er as y l um app l i cat i on chall eng es a fi ndi ng of fa ct . A ccor di ngl y , w e l ack j ur i s di ct i on and w e w i l l di s m i s s Sy l vi a’ s as y l um c la im . W e do, how ever , have j ur i s di ct i on t o r evi ew the deni al of w i thhol di ng of r emoval and r el i ef unde rthe C A T . See G abuni y a v. A t t orneyG ener al , 463 F. 3d 316, 321 n. 4 ( 3d Ci r . 2 0 0 6 ) ( a c k n o wl e d g i n g j u r i s d i c t i o n o v e rp e t i t i o n e r ’ s wi th h o l d i n g a n d CAT c l a i ms des pi t e l acki ng j ur i s di ct i on overhi s cl ai m thatextr aor di naryci r cumst ance s excus ed the la te f ilin g o f h is a s y lu m a p p lic a tio n ). III . T he A t t orneyG ener al m us tgr antw i thhol di ng of r emoval i f he “ deci des thatthe al i en’ s l i fe orfr eedom w oul d be thr eat ened” i n the countryof r emoval “bec aus e of the al i en’ s r ace , r el i gi on, nat i onal i ty , m ember s hi p i n a part i cul ars oci al gr oup, orpol i t i cal o p in io n .” 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 3 1 (b )(3 )(A ). A f in d in g o f “ p a st p e rse c u tio n ra ise s a re b u ttab le pr es um pt i on ‘ thatthe appl i cant ’ s l i fe orfr eedom w oul d be thr eat ened i n the futur e. . . . ’ ” J arbough, 483 F. 3d at191 ( ci t i ng G abuni y a, 463 F. 3d at321) . A l t ernat i vel y , “[i ] f the appl i cant ’ s fea rof futur e thr eatt o l i fe orfr eedom i s unr el at ed t o the pas tper s ecut i on, t he appl i cantbear s the bur den of e s t abl i s hi ng thati ti s m or e l i kel ythan notthathe ors he w oul d s uffe rs uch harm . ” 8 C . F. R § 208. 16( b) ( 1) ( i i i ) . W e r evi ew the r el evantfi ndi ngs4

b yth e Im m ig ra tio n Ju d g e (IJ ) u n d e r th e su b sta n tial e v id e n c e sta n d a rd , G a o v . A sh c ro f t, 299 F. 3d 266, 272 ( 3d C i r . 2002) , and maydecl i ne t o uphol d them “onl yi f the evi dence c o m p e ls a c o n tra ryc o n c lu sio n .” J a rb o u g h , 4 8 3 F .3 d a t 1 9 1 (q u o tin g A h m e d v . A sh c ro f t, 3 4 1 F .3 d 2 1 4 , 2 1 6 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 3 )) . T o begi n w i th, Sy l vi ana f ai l s t o pr oduce e vi dence thatw oul d compel a fi ndi ng of pas tper s ecut i on. Sy l vi ana r el i es on tw o s peci fi c eve nt s : r i ot s thatoccurr ed w hi l e s he w as in In d o n e sia in 1 9 9 8 , an d th e b o m b in g o f a C h ristia n c h u rc h in 2 0 0 0 . A s to th e f irst, Sy l vi ana w as nota di r ectw i tnes s t o the r i ot s , exper i enci ng them m ai nl ythr ough the l ocal m edi a out l et s . A s t o t he s econd, al though Sy l vi ana c l ai m s t o have w i tnes s ed the att ack, nei thers he norherhus band w er e i nj ur ed, nordi d s he pr ovi de anyevi dence thats he had b e e n tra u m a tize d . T h e se iso late d in c id e n ts, m u c h lik e th o se d e sc rib e d in L ie v . A sh c ro f t, 3 9 6 F . 3 d 5 3 0 , 5 3 2 - 3 3 ( 3 d C i r . 2 0 0 5 ) , w h e r e th e a l i e n - p e t i t i o n e rd i d s u f f e ra c tu a l i n

j u ry, do notm eetthe narr ow l yci r cumscr i bed conc eptof per s ecut i on. See al s o Fat i n v. I N S, 12 F .3 d 1 2 3 3 , 1 2 4 0 (3 d C ir . 1 9 9 3 ) ( “ If p e rs e c u tio n w e re d e f

in e d . . . e x p a n s iv e ly, a sig n if ica n t p e rc e n tag e o f

th e w o rld ’s p o p u latio n w o u ld q u a lifyf o r a sy lu m in th is c o u n tr y— a n d it s e e m s m o s t u n lik e ly th a t C o n g re s s in te n d e d s u c h a re s u lt.” ). T h e s a m e in f

ir m ity b e f

a lls S y lv ia n a ’s c la im e d f e a r o f f u tu re p e rs e c u tio n a s w e ll. She poi nt s onl yt o t w o event s thatoccurr ed s i nce s he l eftI ndones i a— the bombi ng of an I n d o n e s i a n h o t e l a n d a th wa r t e d a t t a c k o n th e Un i t e d S t a t e s E mb a s s yi n I n d o n e s i a . As5

nei theri ns t ance i ndi cat es thatC hi nes e C hr i s t i ans ar e bei ng t ar get ed, nordo theys how th a t th e In d o n e sia n g o v e rn m e n t w a s re sp o n sib le f o r e ith e r in c id e n t, S y lv ian a is u n a b le to s h o w th a t s h e w o u ld b e p e rs e c u te d o n a c c o u n t o f a p ro te c te d g ro u n d . S e e 8 C .F .R . § 208. 16( b) ( 2) . A ccor di ngl y , the deni al of Sy l vi ana’ s appl i cat i on forw i thhol di ng of re m o v a l is s u p p o rt e d b ys u b s ta n tia l e v id e n c e . T he i ns uffi ci encyof thes e fa ct s al s o demonstr at es Sy l vi ana’ s i nabi l i tyt o carryher bur den underthe C A T . U nderthe C A T ’ s i m pl ement i ng r egul at i ons “the bur den of pr oof i s on the appl i cantt o es t abl i s h t hati ti s m or e l i kel ythan notthathe ors he w oul d be t or tur ed i f r emoved t o t he pr opos ed countryof r emoval . ” Tar r aw al l y , 338 F. 3d 180, 187- 88 ( 3d C i r . 2003) ( quot i ng 8 C . F. R . §208. 16 ( c) ( 2) ) . M or eover , the t or tur e mustbe in f licte d “ b yo r a t th e in stig a tio n o f o r w ith th e c o n se n t o r a c q u ies c e n c e o f a p u b lic o f f i c i a l o ro th e rp e r s o n a c t i o n i n a n o f f i c i a l c a p a c i ty . ” 8 C. F . R. § 2 0 8 . 1 8 ( a ) ( 1 ) . As ex p lai n ed ab o v e, S y lvian a p rese n ts no ev iden ce that the in cide n ts she all eg es w ere u n d e rt a k e n b y , o r w ith th e a c q u ie s c e n c e o f , p e o p le in a n yo f

f ic ia l c a p a c ity. M o re o v e r, the I J found thatthe St at e D epart m ent ’ s C ountryR eporton I ndones i a i ndi cat es that C h in e se C h ristia n s h a v e n o t b e e n su b jec t to p e rse c u tio n b yth e In d o n e sia n g o v e rn m e n t, thatther e w as no patt ern orpr act i ce of w i des pr ead vi ol ence i n I ndones i a, and thatany vi ol ence t ow ar d C hi nes e C hr i s t i ans i n I ndones i a i s on the dec l i ne. Farfr om “compel [l i ng] a contr aryconcl us i on, ” the evi dence Sy l vi ana pr es ent s cl ear l yfai l s t o m eet6

the bur den r equi r ed underthe C A T . J arbough, 483 F. 3d at191 ( quot i ng A hm ed v. A s h c ro f t, 3 4 1 F .3 d 2 1 4 , 2 1 6 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 3 )) . I V. Forthe for goi ng r eas ons , w e w i l l di s m i s s i n partand denyi n partthe pet i t i on for re v ie w .