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 11-12-2008 

# Ak um 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 . 07-4389

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 " Ak um v . Atty Ge n U SA" (2008). 2008 D e cisio n s . P ape r 240. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008/240NOT 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. 07- 4389

___________ C E L I N E A K U M, Pet i t i oner

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

R es pondent

____________________________________ O n Pet i t i on forR evi ew of an O r derof the B o a rd o f Im m ig ra tio n A p p e a ls ( A gencyN o. A 97- 533- 414) I m m i gr at i on J udge: H onor abl e M i r l ande Tadal

____________________________________ Subm i tt ed Pur s uantt o T hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

A ugus t6, 2008 B efor e: M cK E E , N Y G A A R D and R O T H , C i r cui tJ udges

( O pi ni on fi l ed : N ovember12, 2008)

___________ OP I NI ON

___________ P E R C UR I AM C el i ne A kum pet i t i ons forr evi ew of an or derof the B ur eau of I m m i gr at i on A p p e a ls (B IA ). F o r t h e re a s o n s b e lo w , w e w ill d e n yth e p e titio n f o r r e v ie w . A kum , a nat i ve of Cam er oon, att empt ed t o ent erthe U ni t ed St at es on February9,2

2 0 0 7 . O n M a rc h 7 , 2 0 0 7 , A k u m w a s c h a rg e d a s re m o v a b le a s a n im m ig ra n t n o t in pos s es s i on of val i d entr ydocument s and fors eeki ng t o pr ocur e admi s s i on byfr aud or m i s r epr es ent at i on. A kum conce ded r emovabi l i tyand appl i ed foras y l um , 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. She ar gued thats he w oul d be per s ecut ed i n C amer oon on t he bas i s of herm ember s hi p i n the Southern C amer oon N at i onal C ounci l ( SC N C ) . A kum t es t i fi ed thati n O ct ober2005, s he w as arr es t ed, det ai ned forei ghtday s , and bea t en bythe governm entbeca us e s he had t aken pa r ti n a demonstr at i on. She al l eged thats he s penttw o w eeks i n a cl i ni c r ecove r i ng fr om her in ju rie s. S h e p a rticip a ted in n o f u rth e r a c tiv iti e s a n d h a d n o f u rth e r p ro b lem s u n til J anuary2007 w hen the pol i ce a t t empt ed t o arr es ther . A ft eres capi ng t o N i ger i a, s he c a m e to th e U n ited S tate s. T h e Im m ig ra tio n Ju d g e (IJ ) m a d e a n a d v e rse c re d ib ili ty fin d ing an d also co n clud ed that A k u m h ad fa il ed to su stai n h er b u rde n o f p roo f. T h e B IA a d o p ted a n d a f

f irm e d th e IJ’ s d e c isio n a n d d ism iss e d th e a p p e a l. A k u m f iled a tim e ly p e t i t i o n f o rr e v i e w. W e have j ur i s di ct i on under8 U . S. C . § 1252. W e mayr ever s e the B I A ’ s deci s i on onl yi f the r ecor d perm i t s butone r eas onabl e conc l us i on w hi ch w as notthe one r eac hed bythe B oar d. I . N . S. v. E l i as - Z aca r i as , 502 U . S. 478, 481 ( 1992) . W e mustuphol d the a d v e rse c re d ib ili tyf

in d in g u n les s 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 c o n c lu d e to th e c o n tr a ry. F ia d jo e v . A tto rn e yG e n e ra l, 4 1 1 F .3 d 1 3 5 , 1 5 3 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 5 ). A k u m a rg u e s th a t h e r a irp o rt in ter v iew sh o u ld n o t h a v e b e e n re lied o n b yth e IJ in3

det erm i ni ng hercr edi bi l i ty . D ur i ng thi s i nt ervi ew , A kum s t at ed thats he w as a w i dow w i th s i x chi l dr en and ha d come t o t he U ni t ed St at es t o w or k t o s uppor therfami l y . W hen a sk e d if sh e w a s a f

ra id to re tu rn to C a m e ro o n , sh e sta ted sh e w a s a f ra id o f in d iv id u a ls in C am eroon to w ho m she ow ed m on ey . Jt . A pp . at32 2-36. Th e IJ con tras t ed these s ta te m e n ts w ith th e c la im s o f g o v e rn m e n t p e rs e c u tio n in h e r a s y lu m a p p lic a tio n . T hi s C our thas emphasi zed thati ti s “‘ gener al l ys kept i cal ’ of us i ng r eport s of as y l um i nt ervi ew s as the bas i s forfi ndi ng an appl i cantl acks cr edi bi l i tyw her e the cont ext f o r s u c h in te rv ie w s is u n c le a r.” K o rytn yu k v . A s h c ro f t, 3 9 6 F .3 d 2 7 2 , 2 8 9 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 5 ). I n K orytnyuk, ther e w as nothi ng i n the r ecor d r efl ect i ng thatthe as y l um i nt ervi ew had b ee n m em o ri ali ze d in w ri ti n g . In B alasu b ram an ri m v . IN S , 1 4 3 F . 3 d 1 5 7 , 1 6 2 (3d C ir . 1998) , w e conc l uded thata handw r i t t en r ecor d of an a i rpor ti nt ervi ew l acke d i ndi ci a of r el i abi l i ty . I n D i a v. A s hcr oft , 353 F. 3d 228, 257- 58 ( 3d C i r . 2003) ( en banc ) , w e not ed th a tth e i n f

o r ma t i o n i n th e I NS m e mo r a n d u m wa s n o tg i v e n u n d e ro a th a n d wa s f r o m a conver s at i on i n Fr ench – a l anguage i n w hi ch D i a w as onl ys om ew hatconver s ant . H er e, how ever , A kum w as underoath and i ni t i al ed ea ch page of the typed tr ans cr i pt i on of the i nt ervi ew . She s t at ed thats he w as comfort abl e ans w er i ng the ques t i ons i n E ngl i s h. She w a s e v a siv e a t th e h e a rin g w h e n a sk e d a b o u t h e r sta tem e n ts d u rin g th e in ter v iew . Jt. A pp. at120- 27. M or eover , w e not e thatthe B I A concl uded thateven i f the I J had not c o n sid e re d th e a irp o rt in ter v iew , the re w a s s u f f icie n t su p p o rt f

o r th e a d v e rse c re d ib ili ty fi ndi ng.B e c a u se A k u m f iled h e r a sy lu m a p p lica tio n a f ter th e e n a c tm e n t o f

th e R E A L ID A c t, 1 the i ncons i s t enci es , i nacc ur aci es , orfal s ehoods upon w hi ch the adve r s e cr edi bi l i tyfi ndi ng is ba sed n ee d n o t go to the h ea rto f h er c lai m . 8 U . S . C . § 1 1 5 8 (b)(1 )(B )(i ii ). H o w ev er, A kum ’ s chal l enge t o t he I J ’ s adver s e cr edi bi l i tyfi ndi ng w oul d al s o fai l underthe pr i or s t andar d. Feko s t at es thatr ecor ds s how thatA kum w as arr es t ed on O ct ober1, 2005, buthe does 2 notm ent i on how l ong s he w as det ai ned orhertw o- w eek hos pi t al i zat i on. Feko r efe r s t o a 4 A k u m arg u es th at th e c red ibil ityfin d ing w as n o t sup p o rt ed in the rec o rd. T h e IJ al s o bas ed the cr edi bi l i tyfi ndi ng on i ncons i s t enci es betw een A kum ’ s t es t i m onyand that of herw i tnes s , M r . T akw i , and i ncons i s t enci es i n herow n t es t i m onyconce rni ng the in c id e n t w h e n th e C a m e ro o n ia n p o lic e a lle g e d ly ca m e lo o k in g f o r h e r i n J a n u a ry 2 0 0 7 . T h e se in c o n sis ten c ies a re su p p o rte d b yth e tes tim o n yin th e re c o rd . W e c o n c lu d e th a t a r eas onabl e adj udi cat orw oul d notbe compel l ed t o fi nd A kum cr edi bl e. 1 I n addi t i on t o fi ndi ng A kum ’ s t es t i m onynotcr edi bl e, the I J al s o concl uded that sh e f ail ed to su stai n h er b u rde n o f p roo f o f e stab li sh ing p ast o r fu ture p erse cu ti o n . T h e IJ found thatther e w as no per s uas i ve t es t i m onyconce rni ng A kum ’ s m ember s hi p i n the SC N C . M or eover , the I J concl uded thatw hi l e hi gh- l evel SC N C m ember s ar e oft en arr es t ed and r el eas ed, ther e w as no evi dence t o s ugges tthata l ow - l evel m emberl i ke A kum w oul d be t ar get ed bythe governm ent . A kum ar gues thatthe I J fai l ed t o gi ve due co n side rati o n to the test im o n yo f M r. T ak w i and a lett er f rom V ince n t Fe k o , S ec retary G ener al of the SC N C . H ow ever , as not ed ea r l i er , the I J cons i der ed Takw i ’ s t es t i m ony an d fo u n d itto b e inc o n sist en t w ith A k u m ’s. T h e IJ d esc ri b ed F ek o ’s l ett er a s a f o rm l ett erand found i tcont ai ned embel l i s hm ent s . W e agr ee. 2“pr eci s e ac count ” of a February9, 2007, att empt ed arr es tfr om a nei ghborof A kum ’ s w ho

had nots een he rs i nce then. C . A . R . at256. H ow ever , on thatdat e, A kum w as det ai ned w hen s he att empt ed t o ent erthe U ni t ed St at es . Feko al s o s t at ed thathe conf i r m ed an O ct ober2001 arr es tof A kum . H ow ever , A kum di d notal l ege s uch an a rr es tand di d not become a mem berof the SC N C unt i l A ugus t2005. 5 A kum fur thercont ends thatthe expl anat i on s he gave forherl ack of corr obor at i ng d o c u m e n ts w a s re a so n a b le. W h e n a sk e d w h ysh e d id n o t p ro v id e h e r S C N C m e m b e rsh ip card, A ku m st at ed thatshe had no tsentfor i ti nit i al l ybu tthat i tw as on it s w ay . S he als o said sh e h ad ask ed fo r m ed ical reco rds b u t th eyh ad n o t arri v ed . A k u m d id n o t ask fo r a cont i nuance t o aw ai tthe arr i val of thes e s eemi ngl yi m por t antdocument s . W e not e that sh e w a s a b le to tim e lyo b tain a n d su b m it h e r n a tio n a l C a m e ro o n ian ID c a rd , h e r p a ss p o rt, h e r a n d h e r c h ild re n ’s b irth c e rtific a tes , h e r m a rria g e c e rtific a te, a n d h e r a c a d e m ic recor ds. A kum has now s ubm i t t ed herSC N C m ember s hi p car d, a medi cal r ecor d, and addi t i onal aff

i davi t s . H ow ever , thi s C our t ’ s r evi ew i s l i m i t ed t o the r ecor d befor e the B I A . 8 U . S. C . § 1252( b) ( 4) ( A ) ( “[T] he courtof appe al s s hal l deci de the pet i t i on onl yon th e a d m in istra tiv e re c o rd o n w h ich th e o rd e r o f re m o v a l is b a se d .”) M o re o v e r, w e n o te thatthe new aff

i davi t s al s o cont ai n i ncons i s t entdat es . I n the af fi davi tof C ather i ne F o rm a la, s h e sta tes th a t A k u m c a m e to h e r h o u se in 2 0 0 5 a f ter th e p o lice a ttem p ted to a rre st h e r. H o w e v e r, th e a ttem p ted a rre st w a s a lleg e d lyin Ja n u a ry2 0 0 7 . T h e a f f id a v it fr om M r . N i kang appe ar s t o s t at e thatA kum l eftforN i ger i a s hor t l yaft erherO ct ober 2 0 0 5 arrest an d h o sp it ali za ti o n . In th eir aff idav it s, A k u m ’s hu sb an d , d au g h ter, n eigh b o r,and brot her al l st at e t hat the att em pted arres toccu rr ed in January20 06 . T hu s, these

a f f i d a v i t s s e e m u n h e l p f

u l t o Ak u m. A k u m h as n o t sho w n that the re co rd c o m p els a f ind ing o f p ast p erse cu ti o n o r a w el l - founded f

earof futur e per s ecut i on on the bas i s of pol i t i cal opi ni on. N orhas s he s how n thatthe r ecor d compel s a fi ndi ng thatherl i fe w oul d be thr eat ened orthats he w oul d be t or tur ed i f r emoved t o C amer oon s o as t o ent i t l e hert o w i thhol di ng of r emoval o r re lief u n d e r th e C A T . T a rra w a llyv . A sh c ro f t, 33 8 F .3 d 1 8 0 , 1 8 6 (3 d C ir. 2 0 0 3 ); 8 C .F .R § 2 0 8 .1 6 (c )( 2 ). A c c o rd in g ly , w e w ill d e n yth e p e tit io n f o r re v iew . A k u m ’s m o tio n f o r le a v e to f

ile a s uppl ement al appendi x i s deni ed.

6