2009 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 3-18-2009 

# M unir 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 . 07-4174

F o l low thi s a nd a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi l l a nova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2009

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e a nd 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 l l a nova 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 2009 D e c i sion s b y a n author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i l l a nova 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 l l a nova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " M unir v . Atty Ge n U SA" (2009). 2009 D e cisio n s . P ape r 1731. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi l l a nova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2009/1731NOT 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- 4174

___________ NUR M UNI R, Pet i t i oner

v. ATTO RN EY G ENER AL O F THE UN I TED STATES

____________________________________ 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 76- 024- 012) Im m i grat i on Judg e: D on al d V i ncen tF erl i se

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

M ar ch 11, 2009 B efor e: B A R R Y , SM I T H and H A R D I M A N , C i r cui tJ udges

( O pi ni on fi l ed M ar ch 18, 2009)

___________ OP I NI ON

___________ P E R C UR I AM N urM uni r , a nat i ve and c i t i zen of I ndones i a, s eeks r evi ew of a f i nal or deri s s ued byt he B oar d of I m m i gr at i on A ppeal s ( “B I A ”) . Fort he r eas ons t hatfol l ow , w e w i l l deny t h e p e t i t i o n f

o rr e v i e w.2

I n February1999, M uni rw as char ged under8 U . S. C . § 1182( a) ( 6) ( A ) ( i ) as bei ng r e mo v a b l e a s a n a l i e n p r e s e n ti n t h e Un i t e d S t a t e s wi t h o u tb e i n g a d mi t t e d o rp a r o l e d . He conce ded r emovabi l i t yand s oughtas y l um , w i t hhol di ng of r emoval , and pr ot ect i on under t he C onvent i on A gai ns tT or tur e ( “C A T ”) . H e al s o r eques t ed vol unt arydepartur e, i n t he al t ernat i ve. T h e Im m ig ra tio n Ju d g e (“ IJ” ) h e ld a n e v id e n tiary he a rin g . In su m m a ry , M u n ir tes tifie d th a t 

### a ft e r

e arni ng auni ve r s i ty

de gr e e i n I ndone s i a , i n 1992, he tr ave l e d t o Ca i r o, Eg y pt, t o con tinu e his st

ud ie s at Al- Azhar Universi ty . He was an edit or of se vera l publ i c at i ons , and he wa s an a c t i ve m e m be r of s e ve r a ls t

ude nt organi z at i ons , i nc ludi ng PPMI , whi c h the I ndone s i an Em ba s s y c ons i de r e d t o be vi ol e nt . He t e s t i fi e d that the e m ba s s y i n Ca i ro e m

pl oye d hi m

wi th the i de athat

the job woul d t am e hi m . On May 10, 1 9 9 8 , th en -P resid ent o f

In d o n esia S o eh arto v isitedth e em b assy an dd eliv ereda sp eech . Al though the c omm

uni ty of I ndone s i an s t

ude nt s i n Ca i r o organi z e d aboyc ott of the event, Munir was re qu ir ed to atte ndas an em bass y em ployee . The em

bass y m ai ntained an audio recording of

So eharto’s re m ar

ks, in w hich he express ed a wil ling ness to st ep do wnfrom

po wer. Munir too k the re cording and , a few d ays l at er , s hare d it wit h o ther st ud ents and j ournal is ts , including a journal is t from Ko m pas, the l argest

daily newspaper i n I ndone s i a . Soe hart o’ s s t at e m e nt wa s publ i s he d i n Kom

pa s , s purri ng vi ol e nt

s t ude nt pr ot e s t s i n I ndone s i ac a l l i ng for Soe hart o’ s r e s i gnat i on. Ul t i m at e l y , Soe hart o r e s i gne d on May 21 , 199 8. Meanwh il e, Munir did no t r eport t o w ork, and h e r ec ei ved a le tt er3



### or de ri ng hi m

t o r eport t o the mi l i t ary

att a c he at

the e m ba s s y . Fe ar fulthat

he woul d be c onne c t e d t o the r e l e a s e of the r e c or de d s pe e c h t o the pr e s s , he bri e fl y we nt i nt o hi di ng an dth enf

ledC airo . L eavi ng hi s w i fe be hi nd i n E gypt , M uni rus ed an e ar l i er - acqui r ed entr yvi s a and a r r i ved i n t he U ni t ed St at es i n J une 1998. H i s w i fe a r r i ved i n t he U ni t ed S tate s in N o v e m b e r 1 9 9 8 o n h e r o w n v isa . M u n ir sta ted th a t h e is a f ra id to re tu rn to I ndones i a bec aus e manyof Soehart o’ s s uppor t er s ar e s t i l l i n pos i t i ons of pow er , and he f e a r s p e r s e c u t i o n f

o rh i s r o l e i n S o e h a r t o ’ s o v e r t h r o w. M uni r ’ s w i fe t es t i fi ed att he hea r i ng and corr obor at ed M uni r ’ s s t or y . She not ed that M u n ir ’s frien d s ca m e to th eir ho u se in C airo a n d inf o rm ed h er tha t th e m il it ary at t ache of the embas s yw as l ooki ng forhi m . Fear i ng forherhus band’ s s afe t y , s he s t ay ed a t a f rie n d ’s h o u se , the n w e n t to D a m a sc u s, S yria , w a n tin g to d ista n c e h e rse lf p h y sic a lly fr om t he mi l i t aryat t ache i n C ai r o. W hen s he j oi ned M uni ri n t he U ni t ed St at es , he app eared t o b e un der stres s, and she recoun t ed thathe leftho m e for t w o m on t hs. A n d re w S tein , a p ra c ticin g p sy c h o th e ra p ist, als o tes tifie d a t th e h e a rin g . S tein s t at ed thatw hen M uni rfi r s tcame t o s ee hi m i n M ay1999, M uni rw as extr emel yconfus ed a n d w a s e x h ib itin g b e h a v io ra l tic k s , w h ic h S te in a ttr ib u te d to e x tr e m e te rr o r a n d a n x ie ty. S t ei n tes t i fi ed thatM un i r’ s anxietyaffected his abil i t yt o m ake d eci si on s or acti n h i s best i nt er es t s . W hen the anxi etyw as cont ai ned, M uni rexpr es s ed s t r ong fea r s aboutt he c o n se q u e n c e s to h is f

a m ilyif th e yre tu rn e d to In d o n e sia . B a se d o n th e e ig h t an d -a -h a lf m o n ths o f treatm en t w ith M u n ir , S tei n ’s co n clus ion w as th at th e tri g g er f o r M u n ir ’s

### T h e B IAco n du cteda d e n o v o m erits d etermin atio nun d er th e reg u latio n s in 1 

### ef f ect at th e tim e o f

M un ir’s in itial ap p eal. Munir does notchal l enge the age ncy ’ s det erm i nat i ons r egar di ng hi s el i gi bi l i t yfor 2 wi t h h o l d i n g o rf

o rCAT r e l i e f

, s o we d e e m th o s e i s s u e s wa i v e d a n d wi l l n o ta d d r e s s t h e m.

4 a n x ietya n d ter ro r w a s th e e v e n t o f h a v in g b e in g su m m o n e d b yIn d o n e sia n o f f icia ls in C ai r o forr el eas i ng t he audi o t ape. A ft era hea r i ng, t he I J m ade a n adver s e cr edi bi l i t yfi ndi ng, deni ed al l r el i ef, and or der ed M uni rt o be r emoved fr om t he U ni t ed St at es . T he B I A aff i r m ed, di s m i s s i ng t he ap p ea l. T h e B o ard also d en ied a m o ti o n to rec o n side r. In N o v em b er 2 0 0 4 , o n M u n ir ’s pet i t i ons forr evi ew of both t he B I A ’ s or der s , t hi s C our tgr ant ed the governm ent ’ s m ot i on t o r e ma n d t h e ma t t e rb a c k t o t h e BI A f o rr e c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f

t h e c r e d i b i l i t yf

i n d i n g . On Sept ember28, 2007, on r emand, t he B oar d r e- eval uat ed the cr edi bi l i t ydet erm i nat i on and fo u n d that M u n irh ad test ifi ed cre d ibly . H o w ev er, th e B IA ag ain d ism issed M u n ir ’s ap p ea l, co n clud ing that h e h ad n o t m et his b u rde n o f p roo f to sh o w p ast p erse cu ti o n o r a w ell -fo u n d ed fe ar o f p erse cu ti o n fo r pu rpo ses o f o b tai n ing asy lum reli ef , that h e the ref

o re had notm ett he hi gherbur den of pr oof forobt ai ni ng w i t hhol di ng of r emoval r el i ef, and that h e h ad n o t sho w n that itis m o re li k elythan n o t th at he w o u ld b e su b ject t o tortu re w i t h t he I ndones i an governm ent ’ s acqui es cenc e. T hi s pet i t i on forr evi ew fol l ow ed. 1 W e have j ur i s di ct i on pur s uantt o 8 U . S. C . § 1252( a) . W hetheran appl i canthas demonst r at ed a w el l - founded f earof futur e per s ecut i on i s a fa ctual det erm i nat i on 2 r evi ew ed undert he s ubs t ant i al evi dence s t andar d. V oci v. G onzal es , 409 F. 3d 607, 6135

(3d C ir . 2 0 0 5 ). W e m u st aff irm “u n less the e v iden ce n o t on lysu p p o rt s a c o n tr ary concl us i on, butcompel s i t . ” Zubeda v. A s hcr oft , 333 F. 3d 463, 471 ( 3d C i r . 2003) ( ci t at i ons om i t t ed) . T o es t abl i s h a w el l - founded f earof futur e per s ecut i on, an appl i cant m us tdemonst r at e both s ubj ect i ve and obj ect i ve fe ar s of per s ecut i on. Sukw anputr a v. G onzal es , 434 F. 3d 627, 637 ( 3d C i r . 2006) . T he appl i cantm ayes t abl i s h t he s ubj ect i ve fea rpr ong t hr ough cr edi bl e t es t i m onyt hathi s fea ri s genui ne. I d. T o s how obj ect i ve fe ar o f p erse cu ti o n , the a p p li ca n t m u st sho w that “a rea so n ab le pe rson in the ali en ’s ci r cumst ance s w oul d fea rper s ecut i on i f r etur ned t o t he countr yi n ques t i on. ” I d. ( i nt ernal quot at i on and ci t at i on om i t t ed) . T he obj ect i ve pr ong i s s at i s fi ed i f the pet i t i onerei t her sh o w s h e w o u ld b e in d iv id u a llysin g led o u t f o r p e rse c u tio n o r d e m o n stra tes th a t “th e re is a patt ern orpr act i ce i n hi s orhercountr yof nat i onal i t y. . . of per s ecut i on of a gr oup of p e r s o n s s i m i l a r l y s i tu a t e d t o t h e a p p l i c a n to n a c c o u n to f r a c e , r e l i g i o n , n a t i o n a l i t y, me mb e r s h i p i n a p a r t i c u l a rs o c i a l g r o u p , o rp o l i t i c a l o p i n i o n . . . . ” I d . ( q u o t i n g 8 C. F . R. § 2 0 8 . 1 3 (b)(2 )(i ii )(A )). T h e re is re c o rd e v id e n c e th a t M u n ir’s s u b jec tiv e f e a r a n d a n x ietyo f

p e rse c u tio n is genui ne, and the governm entdoes notcont es tt hi s as s er t i on. H ow ever , t he fa ct orof s ubj ect i ve fe ardoes notcompel a fi ndi ng of obj ect i ve fe ar . M uni rs ur m i s es t hatt he em b assym il it aryatt ac h e su m m o n ed h im fo r pe rsec u toryrea so n s af ter he fa il ed to rep o rt t o w or k fol l ow i ng Soehar t o’ s s peec h, buthe does notes t abl i s h t hatt he att ache orany ot heroffi ci al s w er e eve n aw ar e of hi s i nvol vementi n di s cl os i ng t he audi o t ape t o t hep re ss . M u n ir p o in ts to n o th in g in th e re c o rd th a t sh o w s th a t o th e r stu d e n ts o r jo u rn a lists

i nvol ved i n publ i s hi ng Soehar t o’ s r emar ks have be en per s ecut ed orar e now t ar get s for per s ecut i on, and he poi nt s t o not hi ng t hates t abl i s hes t hathe w oul d be s i ngl ed outfor p e rse c u tio n f

o r h is a c tio n s. T h e re c o rd su p p o rts th e B IA ’s c o n c lu sio n th a t M u n ir f a iled to m eethi s bur den of pr oof. M uni rar gues t hatt he B I A vi ol at ed hi s due pr oces s r i ght s w hen i tci t ed J anus i ak v. IN S , 9 4 7 F .2 d 4 6 (3 d C ir. 1 9 9 1 ), an d c o n sid e re d th e c o n ten ts o f th e 2 0 0 6 S tate D e p a rtm e n t C o u n tryR e p o rt f o r In d o n e sia w ith o u t g iv in g h im n o tice o r o p p o rtu n ityto r ebutt he pot ent i al l ydi s pos i t i ve, admi ni s t r at i vel ynot i ced f act s . I n par t i cul ar , M uni rt akes i ssue w i t h the B IA ’s com m ent that the cu rr ent pol i t i cal env i ronm ent i s not host i l e t o those w ho contr i but ed t o Soehar t o’ s r es i gnat i on. W e fi nd M uni r ’ s ar gum entt o be u n p ersu asiv e. W ith o r w ith o u t th e n ew er v ersion o f th e c o u n tryrep o rt , itw as M u n ir ’s bur den t o demonst r at e thathi s fea rof per s ecut i on w as w el l - founded, and M uni ri dent i fi es no r ecor d bas i s fort he exi s t ence of an obj ect i ve fe ar . T he 2006 countr yr epor tdi d not a f f e c tt h e B I A ’ s d e c i s i o n i n a d i s p o s i t i v e w a y. We h a v e c o n s i d e r e d a l l o f Mu n i r ’ s a r g u m e n t s a n d f i n d t h e m t o b e u n a v a i l i n g . We wi l l d e n yt h e p e t i t i o n f

o rr e v i e w.



### 6