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

8-19-2005 

# L u singo 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 . 03-4418

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 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

" Lusin g o v . Atty Ge n U SA" (2005). 2005 D e cisio n s . P ape r 596. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005/596J udg e Ri c h a r d L. Ny g a a r d , Se n i o rCi r c u i tJ u d g e e f f e c t i ve 1 J ul y9, 2005. P RE CE DE NT I AL THE U NI 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. 03- 4418 F IK IR I L U S IN G O , Pet i t i oner

v . *A L B E R T O G O N Z A L E S, A tt orneyG ener al

of the U nit ed S t at es, R es pondent

* (A m en d ed p u rsua n t t o F

. R

. A

. P

. 4 3 (c)) O n Pet i t i on forR evi ew fr om the B o a rd o f Im m ig ra tio n A p p e a ls B I A N o. A 79- 239- 847 A r gued: M ar ch 8, 2005 B e f o re : N Y G A A R D , M c K E E a n d R E N D E L L , C irc u it 1 J udges ( O pi ni on fi l ed: A ugus t19, 2005)2 S teph en J. S p iege lhalter ( A r gue d) L atham & W atki ns 5 5 5 1 1 S tr e e t , N

. W.

th Sui t e 1000 W as hi ngt on, D

. C

. 20004 A t t or ney f

orP et i t i oner C hr i s t opherC

. Ful l er L ind a S

. W ern ery D o u g las E

. G insb u rg Jo h n M

. M cA d am s, Jr. L y le D . J e n tz e r, ( A r gue d) U ni t ed St at es D epart m entof J us t i ce O ffi ce of I m m i gr at i on L i t i gat i on P. O

. B ox 878 B en Fr ankl i n St at i on W as hi ngt on, D

. C

. 20044 A t t or neys f

orR es pondent

OP I NI ON M cK E E , C i r cui tJ udge Fi ki r i L us i ngo pet i t i ons forr evi ew of the dec i s i on of the B oar d of I m m i gr at i on A ppeal s aff i r m i ng the I m m i gr at i on J udge’ s deni al of as y l um . A l though the B I A di s agr eed w i th the I m m i gr at i on J udge’ s anal y s i s of m uch of the evi dence L us i ngo p re se n ted d u rin g h is re m o v a l h e a rin g , the B IA u lti m a telyT he B I A al s o rul ed thatL us i ngo fai l ed t o es t abl i s h thathe 2 was e l i g i b l e f

o r wi th h o l d i n g o f r e mov a l o r r e l i e f u n d e r t he United Nations Conventio n ag ain s t T o r

tu rea nd O ther Crue l, Inhuman or De gradingTre atment o r P un ishment (t h e“ CA T” ), but allo we d h im vo luntary depa rt ure . L us ing o h a s n ot p e tition e d f or review o f t

ho se ruling s and his claim for withholding of removal and re lief under the CAT is theref

ore not be foreus. 3 aff i r m ed the I J ’ s or derd eny i ng r el i ef. O n appea l , L us i ngo a rg u e s that the B IA ’s rul i ng den y i ng his asy l um cl ai m is

“ o bj e c t i v e l yu n r e a s o n a b l e . ” F o rth e r e a s o n s th a tf o l l o w , we 2 agr ee a nd w e w i l l gr antthe pet i t i on forr evi ew and r emand for addi t i onal pr ocee di ngs cons i s t entw i th thi s opi ni on. I . Backg r ound. L us i ngo i s a nat i ve and c i t i zen of T anza ni a. H e s peaks Sw ahi li , and veryl i t t l e Engl i s h. O n J ul y23, 2001, w hen L us i ngo was s i x t e e n y e a r s o l d , h e e n t e r e d th e Uni t e d St a t e s as a vi s i t orforpl eas ur e i n or dert o part i ci pat e i n the I nt ernat i onal B oyS cou tJam bo ree i n F reder i cksbu rg, V i rgi nia. H i s vi sa al l ow ed hi m t o r emai n i n the U ni t ed St at es unt i l J anuary23, 2 0 0 2 . P rio r to c o m in g to th e U n ited S tate s, L u sin g o liv e d w ith b o th p a re n ts a n d a tte n d e d s c h o o l. H ow ever , L us i ngo di d n o t r emai n atthe j ambore e. In ste a d , h e a n d tw o o th e r sc o u ts lef t th e jam b o re e a n d w e n t to th e h o m e o f

a re lativ e o f o n e o f th e b o y s. T h e y w e re e v e n tu a lly r eport ed mi s s i ng, and thei rdi s appea r ance r ece i ved ext ens i ve in te rn a tio n a l m e d ia c o v e ra g e .O n M ar ch 1, 2003, the I N S ceas ed t o ex ist as an a gency 3 w ith in th e D ep artm en t o f Jus ti ce an d it s fu n c tio n s w ere tr a n s f e r r e d t o th e D e p a r t m e n to f H o m e l a n d S e c u r i ty. See H o m e lan d S e c u rityA c t o f 2 0 0 2 , P u b .L

. N o . 1 0 7 -2 9 6 , 1 1 0 S tat. 2 1 3 5 (20 0 2 ). F o r th e sa k e o f c o n sist en cy , w e w il l u se th e term I N S t o r efe rboth t o the hi s t or i cal I N S a nd t o the D epart m entof H om elan d Secur i tyt o the ext entthati ti s curr ent l yful fi l l i ng du t i e s hi s t or i c a l l ype r fo r med b ythe I N S. 4 W hen Lusi ngo le arned of the ext ens i ve new s r eport s of hi s di s appea r ance , he beca m e fr i ght ened and r eport ed t o a pol i ce s t at i on i n M ary l and. T he pol i ce t r ans ferr ed hi m t o the cus t ody of th e I mmi g r a t i o n a n d Natu r a l i z a t i o n Se r v i c e . Dur i n g t he 3 e n su in g IN S in ter ro g a tio n , L u sin g o e x p re ss e d f e a r th a the w ou ld f a c e p e rse c u tio n if

re tu rn e d h o m e b e c a u se th e e x ten siv e m e d ia cover age of

hi s di s appea r ance w oul d no d o u b th a v e e mbarr as s ed the governm entof Tanzani a. L us i ngo h ad come t o the U ni t ed S t at es w i th h op e s of

c on ve r t i ng hi s vi s a i nt o a s tud e ntvi s a so th a th e c o u l d r e ma i n h e r e a n d r e c e i v e a n e d u c a t i o n . He th e re f o re h a d n o re a so n to f

e a r p e rse c u tio n u n til th e m e d ia b lit z occurr ed. T he ext ens i ve cover age of hi s di s appea r ance r es ul t ed i n the b roa d cas tof a s ubs t ant i al amount of unfl att er i ng i nform at i on about the T anza ni an governm ent

. T hi s inc l uded r eport s t hatL us i ngo fea red hi s governm entw oul d r et al i at e by im p riso n in g h im u p o n h is re tu rn h o m e , an d b ye c o n o m ic r et al i at i on agai ns thi s fa m il y . R eport s of the pos s i bi l i tyof L us i ngo’ s l i kel yi m pr i s onm entupon hi s r eturn m ent i oned that

“ it i s c o m m o n f

o r b o y s to b e se x u a llye x p lo ited w h ile in jail in T a n z a n ia .”5 L us i ngo pet i t i oned for as y l um bas ed upon hi s fea rthathe w oul d be per s ecut ed upon hi s r et urn hom e bec aus e the T anza ni an governm entper s ecut es peopl e w ho embar r as s i t

. T he t es t i m onyL us i ngo pr o d u c e dd u r i n g th e e ns ui ng r emoval hear i ng b ef o re the Im m igrati o n Ju d g e in clud ed the d ec larati o n o f D r. R a k e sh R a

jan i. D r. R a

jan i’s e x p e rtise o n h u m a n rig h ts in T a n z a n ia w a s n o t d isp u ted . H is d e c lar a tio n sta tes in p a rt: th e g o v e rn m e n t [ o f

T a n z a n ia] lo o k s u n f

a v o ra b ly on t ho s e who th e yp e r c e i v e t o h a v e e mba rr a s s ed the governm entorthats i m pl yr efl ectpoo rl yon the governm ent , es peci al l y in the ey es of the in ter n a tio n a l co m m u n ity

.. . [ L u sin g o ] ... p u b licly embar r as s ed the Tanzan ia n governm entby d is a p p e a ri n g f

ro m th e B o yS c o u t J a m b o re e . . . w hi ch l e d t o the i nv ol ve mentof the U

. S. a u th o rities a n d sp u rre d w id e sp re a d m e d ia c o v e ra g e b o th in th e U n ited S tate s a n d in T anza ni a. T he Tanzani an governm ent does not turn a bl i nd ey e t o s uch embarr as s i ng publ i ci ty , as itco u ld m ar the irrelati o n sh ip w ith W e s tern d o n o rs ... i f

se n t b a c k to T a n z a n ia, [ L u sin g o ] is lik e lyto b e a rre ste d a n d in ter ro g a ted u p o n a rriv a l, a s th e T a n z a n ian g o v e rn m e n t is c lea rlyq u ite in ter e ste d in h is c a se , a s is s h o w n f ro m its st at em ents t o the A m e ri can an d A fri can p res s. A ft er he i s arr est ed, he m ay be subj ectt o b eat i ng s, in d e f in ite d e te n tio n , a p ro lo n g e d tr ia l. D r . R aj ani al s o des cr i bed Tanzani an j ai l s and the type of t orture and treatm ent endu red bypri soners. A ccordi ng t o h isD r. R a k jan i a lso o f

f e re d h is ey e w itn e ss a c c o u n t o f a c h ild 4 thathe saw beat en by pol i ce. T he chi l d had bee n gi ven a book t o att end s chool , butthe pol i ce mi s t akenl ybel i eved he had s t ol en the book, and bega n beat i ng the chi l d. D r . R aj ani s t at ed th a t h e tried to in ter c e d e o n b e h a lf o f th e b o ya n d w a s h im se lf im p ri s o n e d

. 6 decl ar at i on, thi s i ncl u d es : co- m i ngl i ng of adul t s and chi l dr en and the cons equent s exual abus e of the chi l dr en, cel l s cover ed w i th u r i n e a n d f

e c e s , f o r c e d ma n u a l l a b o ri n c l u d i n g c a rry i ng b u ck ets o f h u m an ex cre m en t; an d lack o f d u e p ro ce ss. D r. R a j a n i a l s o e x p l a i n e d th a t , g i v e n th e u n f a v o r a b l e p u b l i c i ty, L us i ngo coul d be subj ect t o pr ol onged i m pr i s onm entunders uch c o n d i t i o n s wi th o u ta c tu a l l yb e i n g c h a r g e d wi th a n yc r i me . He r ecount ed an e venti n 2002 w her e 120 pr i s oner s w er e hel d i n a r oom des i gned t o hol d 30. M anyof thos e pr i s on ers d ied of s uf f o c a t i o n . Dr

. Ra

j a n i ’ s d e c l a r a t i o n e n d e d wi th th e f o l l o w i ng sta tem e n t: [Lusi ng o ] i s atr i s k of the af or ement i oned c o n d iti o n s a n d a b u se e v e n if h e is n o t u lti m a tely convi ct ed of a cr i m e. . . . Fi ki r i w oul d be hel d as a re m an d p ri so n er, w h ere . . . h e w o u ld en d u re appal l i ng condi t i ons and be vul ner abl e t o s exual m ol es t at i on and abus e byadul tpr ison er s or d e tai nees. T hu s, [he] i s l i kelyt o fac e abu se n o tw ith sta n d in g th e o u tco m e o f h is c a se if

h e is for ced t o r eturn t o T anza ni a and i s pr os ecut ed. 4 W hen as ked t o d esc r i be the att i tude of the Tanzani an7 governm entt ow ar d thos e be li eved t o be di s l oy al , D r . R aj ani re sp o n d e d : “th e g o v e r n m e n t tak e s a v e ryd im v iew o f p e o p le w h o a re d is lo y a l. I t h a s v e ry little to le ra n c e f ro m th e m ... di s s enti s s een a s unpatr i ot i c, i t is se en as tr eac her ous , and p e o p l e who a r e p e r c e i v e d t o h a v e b e e n d i s l o y a l t o t he g o v e r n me n ta r e tr e a t e d v e ryh a r s h l yb yth e g o v e rn me n t

. ” He al s o decl ar ed thatL usi ngo’ s departur e fr om the B oyScout Ja m b o re e h a d re c e iv e d “ q u ite a b it o f c o v e ra g e .” H e liv e d in T anzan i a atthe ti m e and recal l ed “v i vidl ythat there w as a str ong s ens e i n T anza ni a thatw hatthes e y oung peopl e have do ne w as, w as extr em el ydis l oy al and y ou go ta palpable s ense the governm entw as angryw i th thei ract i ons . ” D r . R aj ani opi ned thati tw as l i kel ythatthe Tanzani an governm entw oul d j ai l L u singo upon hi s r eturn and thathe w oul d be mi s tr eat ed i n m uch the s ame m annerthe governm ent tr eat s the st ree tchi l dr en w ho ar e al s o a s our ce of embar r as s m ent

. D r . R aj ani bel i eved thatthe Tanzani an go vernm e n t w as angry , “especial l ysi nce h i s si tuati on i s so u n u su a l f

o r g e n e ra tin g so m u c h m e d ia in ter e st in b o th countr i es . ” D r . R ajani concl uded thatL us i ngo had a

“ re a s o n a b le a n d le g itim a te f e a r o f re tu rn in g to T a n z a n ia ,” beca us e i tw as l i kel ythathe w oul d be “de t ai ned, i nt err ogat ed, and i n thatpr oces s w oul d be hel d i n pr i s on condi t i ons that w oul d be det r i m ent al t o hi s heal th and pr obabl yl i fe thr eat eni ng. ” D r . R aj ani ’ s t es t i m onyw as notr ebutt ed. L us i ngo al s o pr oduced a decl ar at i on fr om L or en Landau, Ph. D

. , a R es ear ch C oor di nat orof the W i tw at er s t and’ s For ced M igrati o n S tud ies P rog ram in Jo h an n esb u rg, S o u th A frica. D r. L a n d a u , h a d f

irs t- h a n d k n o w led g e o f p riso n c o n d iti o n s inT h e re w a s n o f in d in g o f a d v e rse c re d ib ili ty b y th e IJ w ith 5 r es pectt o L us i ngo ’s t es t i m onyatthe r emoval hear i ng. A cc o rdin g ly , w e p resu m e it s v era city . W h ere th e a li en ’s c re d ib ili tyis n o t d e ter m in e d b yth e B IA , “ w e m u st p ro c e e d a s if [ h i s /h e r] te s tim o n yw e re c re d ib le . . . ”

. Kayem be v. Ashcro ft , 3 3 4 F .3 d 2 3 1 , 3 2 5 (3 d C ir. 2 0 0 3 ). M o re o v e r, n o th in g o n th is r ecor d even s ugges t s that L us i ngo’ s t es t i m ony w as notcr edi bl e, and bot h the IJ and t he B I A found t hat he had a genui ne fe arof r eturni ng hom e. 8 T anza ni a. H e opi ned that L us i ngo had a “ l egi t i m at e and rea so n ab le f

ea r o f im p ri so n m en t if return ed to T an za n ia, w h ere h e w o u ld lik e lyb e c o m m in g led w ith a d u lts a n d w o u ld c e rta in ly fac e horr i fi c condi ti o ns . . . [bec aus e]

. . . the governm ent c o n tin u e s to a c t w ith d isp ro p o rtio n a te f o rc e a g a in st in d iv id u a ls orgr oups w ho oppos e th e g o v ernm entorembar r as s the g o v e rn m e n t in a n yw a y .” I n addi t i on, L us i ngo t es t i fi ed cr edi bl y abouthi s per s onal k n o wl e d g e o f p o l i c e mi s tr e a t me n t o f T a n z a n i a n c i t i z e n s . He 5 sai d thathe had seen pri soners ( i ncludi ng tho se w i th h and i caps) b e in g k ick e d a n d b e a ten w ith b a to n s. H e a lso tes tifie d th a t h is f rie n d w a s o n c e a r r e ste d f o r “ h a n g in g o u t” o n th e stre e t. H is fr i end r eturn e dhom e w i thouteverhavi ng been c har ged w i th any o f f e n se a n d to ld L u sin g o o f th e c o n d iti o n s h e h a d o b se rv e d in p r i s o n . L us i ngo l earned thatdet ai nees ar e phy s i cal l ym i s tr eat ed, deni ed food a nd m edi ci ne, an d oft en r aped byvi ol ent h o m o s e x u a l p ri s o n e rs . C hr i s t opherN ugent , D i r ect orof the C o m m i s s i on onA l though w e ar e r evi ew i ng the dec i s i on of t he B I A , notthe 6 Im m ig ra tio n Ju d g e , a re v iew o f th e IJ’ s re a so n in g is h e lp f u l to our anal y s i s of t he B I A ’ s deci s i on s i nce t he B I A part i al l yagr eed w i th t he I J ’ s r at i onal e. 9 I m m i gr at i on Pol i cy , Pr act i ce a nd Pr o B ono of the A m er i can Bar As s o c i a t i o n , a l s o t e s t i f i e d a tL u s i n g o ’ s r e mo v a l h e a r i n g . He expl ai ned that , w hi l e i nt ervi ew i ng L us i ngo, he had been “ s truck b yh o w f e a rf u l [ L u sin g o ] w a s o f

re tu rn in g to T a n z a n ia a f ter a ll o f th e p re s s re p o rt s .” D ocumen taryevi dence thatw as admi t t ed corr obor at ed L us i ngo’ s evi dence

. U

. S. St at e D epart m ent C ountryR eport s on H u m an R igh ts P rac ti ce s in T an za n ia d esc ri b ed th a t co u n try ’s jai ls a s bei ng among t he w or s ti n A fr i ca. J A

. 012- 013. T he R e p o rt a lso c o n f

irm e d th a t th e T a n z a n ian g o v e rn m e n t h a s littl e a p p e tit e f

o r d is s e n t. Id

. T h e h u m an ri g h ts r ec o rd w as “ p o o r” and i ncl udes arbi tr aryarr es t s , t or tur e, beat i ngs , and horr endous p ri s o n c o n d itio n s . I

d. A . The I m m i gr at i on J udge ’ s D e c i s i on. 6 T h e IJ f o u n d L u sin g o ’s f

e a r of re tu rn “ s u bjec tiv e ly genui ne. ” J A 012. T h e judge s um m ar i zed Lusi ngo’ s cl ai m as foll ow s: I ti s es s ent i al l y[Lusi ngo’ s ] cont ent i on thatonce the Tanzani an governm ent beca m e aw ar e thathe h a d d isa p p e a re d f

ro m th e sc o u tin g jam b o re e in V i r gi ni a and a t t empt ed t o r emai n i n the U ni t ed10 S tate s to a tten d sc h o o l, i t b e c a m e a n g ryw ith h im forcr eat i ng s uch a “ m edi a ci r cus. ” B eca us e of su c h g o v e rn m e n t em b a rra ss m e n t itw i l l targ e t h im f o rp e r s e c u t i o n u p o n h i s r e tu rn b a s e d on a pol i t i cal opi nion i m put ed t o hi m . I n thi s r egar d, [Lusi ngo] aver s that hi s deci s i on t o w alk a w ay fro m the j ambore e, an eve nthi s governm ent p e rm itt e d h im to a tten d , a n d h is d e ter m in a tio n to r emai n i n the U ni t ed St at es , w i l l be vi ew ed as an ad v e r s e i mpu t e d p o l i t i c a l o p i n i o n whi c h the g o v e rn m e n t h a s a h isto ryo f re sp o n d in g to b ya c ts c o n s titu tin g p e rs e c u tio n a n d /o r t o rt u re . J .A . 0 1 1

. H ow ever , the I J deni ed asy l um , w i thhol di ng of r emoval an d reli ef u n d er the U n it ed N ati o n s C o n v en ti o n A g ains t T o rtu re b a s e d l a r g e l y u p o n h i s i n t e rp r e t a t i o n o f D r . R a j a n i ’ s t e s t i m o n y. T he I J expl ai ned: A n im p o rt a n t a s p e c t o f

M r. R a ja n i’ s te s tim o n y. . i s thathe equa t ed re s pondent ’ s s i tuat i on t o the T an zani an governm ent ’ s handl i ng of s tr eet chi l dr en i n the ci t i es . . . . thes e ch i l dr en ar e an embar r as s m entt o the gov ernm ent , w hi ch s om et i m es fi l es cr i m i nal char ges agai ns tthem for vagr ancy , or r ounds them up and t rucks them off t o a rural a rea , w her e theyar e r el eas ed outof s i ghtof the publ i c. . . O f thos e j uveni l es w ho fi nd th e m se lv e s lo c k e d a w a yin p riso n a w a iti n g trial, theyar e s om et i m es j ai l ed w i th vi ol entcr i m i nal11 predat ors w ho rape and otherw i se sexuall yabu se them. [Lusi ngo] fe ared thatonce r eturned, [he] m a yw e ll fin d h im se lf im m e d iate lyd e tain e d w ith adul tpr i s oner s and thus w i l l fac e al l of the s hor t comi ngs of the pena l s y s t em of T anza ni a. J

. A

. 013. H ow ever , the I J conclud ed thatthe evi dence es t abl i s hed thatthe Tanzani an govern m enthad nott ar get ed chi ldr en f

o r a b u s e . I

d. H e conc l uded that , al though s tr eet ch il d ren m ay b e ha rasse d , ev en b ea ten an d jai led “ m ere ly[f o r] being po or and d est i tute,

. . . this i s not p er se p e rs e c u tio n . . . n o r i s it r e le v a n t to [ L u s in g o ’s ] c l a i m ”

. Id

. T he I J w as “unconvi nced that[Lusi ngo’ s ] cl ai m [had] an yr el evant re latio n s h ip w ith th e a lleg e d m istre a tm e n t o f stre e t ch ild re n in T anza ni a. ” Id ., J A 0 1 4

. T he I J not ed t hat he w as onl y abl e t o fi nd one new s paper art i cl e fr om T anza ni a r el at i ng to L us i ngo’ s cas e, and he ther efor e doubt ed D r . R aj ani ’ s t es t i m onyaboutthe s cope of m edi a cover age of

L us i ngo’ s di s appea r ance i n the Tanzani an a n d in te rn a tio n a l p re s s . Id

. T he I J al s o expr es s ed s kept i ci s m that L us i ngo’ s unauthor i zed pr es ence i n the U ni t ed S t at es underthe ci r cumst ance s pr es ent ed “w oul d r es ul t i n per s ecut i on, ” w hether o r n o t th e T a n z a n ia n g o v e rn m e n t w a s e m b a rr a s s e d b yit. Id

. , at 15. Fi nal l y , the I J not ed Lusi n g o ’s cl ai m of futur e per s ecut i on w as fur therunderm i ned bythe factthatthe Tanzani an governm enthad notr et al i at ed agai ns t hi s par ent s . B as ed upon a ll o f th e se c o n sid e ra tio n s, th e IJ d e n ied re lief b a se d u p o n h is concl us i on thatL us i ngo had not es t abl i s hed a w el l

- founded f ear o f f u tu re p e rs e c u tio n .12 B. The BIA’ s D e c i s i on. A l though the B I A ul t i m at el yaff i r m ed the I J ’ s deni al of reli ef , itd isag ree d w ith sev era l i m p o rt an t asp ec ts o f th e IJ’s a n a ly sis . T h e B o a rd h e ld th a t “th e Im m ig ra tio n Ju d g e e rre d in concl udi ng t hatther e w as a l ack of evi dence r el at i ng t o the T a n z a n ian g o v e rn m e n t’s s e n sitiv ityto a d v e rse p u b licity gener at ed by[Lusi ngo’ s ] departur e fr om the j ambore e. ” J A 005. O n the c o n tr ary , the B o ard fo u n d that L u sing o ’s d ep arture “r ece i ved ext ens i ve m edi a at t ent i on, i ncl udi ng m edi a cove r age i n T anza ni a. ” Id

. N everthel es s , the B I A aff i r m ed the deni al of re lief b a se d p rim a rilyu p o n its re jec tio n o f L u sin g o ’s a n a lo g yto hi s pl i ghtand thatof s tr eetchi l dr en i n T anza ni a. J A

. O 05. T he B I A r eas oned: “[Lusi ngo’ s ] e x p ert s do nothave a good anal ogyof [hi s ] s i tuat i on, i ns ofaras the mi s tr eatm entof stre e t c h ild re n in T a n z a n ia d o e s n o t h a v e m u c h re lev a n c e to [ h is] c laim . [L u sin g o ] c o m e s f ro m a sta b le f

a m ily , w ith b o th par ent s empl oy ed, and he a t t ended s chool unt i l he l eftT anza ni a. W hi l e s uch medi a att ent i on m ayhave e m b arr as s ed the T anza ni an G overnm ent , w e do notfi nd thati tgi ves r i s e t o a w el l

- founded f

earof per s ecut i on. ” J

. A

. 005. T h e B o ard also rea so n ed that the fa ct th a t L u sing o ’s par ent s had nei therbeen a rr est ed n o rharm ed eve n though L u sin g o h a d tes tifie d th a t th e y k n e w o f h is d e sire to re m a in in th e U n ited S tate s f

ro m th e o u tse t, un d e rm in e d L u sin g o ’s c laim of a w el l

- founded f

earof per s ecut i on upon hi s r eturn hom e. J

. A

. 006. T h e B o ard t hus deni ed r el i ef, and thi s Pet i t i on for R evi ew fol l ow ed.13 I I . DI S CU S S I ON W e h av e jurisdicti o n to rev iew fin al ord ers o f th e B IA pur s uantt o 8 U

. S. C

. § 1252. W e do notr evi ew the I m m i gr at i on J u d g e ’s ru lin g s u n le s s a d o p te d b yth e B IA

. Kayem be , 334 F. 3d at234. B ec au se the B I A ’ s deni al of r el i ef w as bas ed on a fac tual fi ndi ng, w e m u st a ff irm i ti f i ti s s uppor t ed by "subst anti al evidence. " B a la s u b r a man r i m, 143 F. 3d at161. “S u b stan ti al ev iden ce is m o re tha n a scinti ll a, an d m u st do m o re t han cr ea t e a s u s p i c i o n o f th e e x i s t e n c e o f

th e f a c tt o be e s tab lish e d . It m e a n s s u c h re lev a n t ev id e n c e a s a re a so n a b le m in d m ig h t a c c e p t a s a d e q u a te to s u p p o rt a c o n c lu s io n ...." N .L .R

. B . v . C o lu m b ia n E n a m e lin g& S ta m p in gC o ., 30 6 U. S. 2 9 2 , 3 0 0 (1 9 3 9 ) ( in te rn a l c ita tio n s o m itte d ). A s n o ted a b o v e, alth o u g h th e B IA af firm ed the IJ’s deni al of r el i ef, i tr ej ect ed s ever al of the I J ’ s fi ndi ngs and adj udi cat ed Lusi ngo’ s appea l bas ed upon i t s i ndepende nt asse ssm en t of

the re co rd. W e the ref o re rev iew th e B IA ’s deci s i on t o det erm i ne i f i t i s s uppor t ed bys ubs t ant i al evi dence in th e re c o rd

. U n d er th e Im m igrati o n an d N atura li za ti o n A ct (“IN A ”), the A t t orneyG ener al has di s cr et i on t o gr ant as y l um t o an al i en who q u a l i f

i e s a s a “ r efuge e. ” See 8 U. S

. C. § 1 1 5 8 ( b ) ( 1 )

. An al i en q uali fi es as a “r efug ee” byesta b l i shi ng ei ther past persecut i on or a w el l -foun ded fear of fu ture persecut i on becau se of “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 g rou p , o r p o li ti ca l o p inion , ” i f re turn ed to h is/h er p ri o r co u n tryT he I J r eas oned thatL us i ngo’ s cl ai m w as bas ed on the fa ct 7 thatthe Tanzani an governm en t w oul d r egar d hi m as bei ng cr i t i cal of the r egi m e base d upon hi s unfavor abl e comm ent s and th e a d v e rs e pu bli ci tytheygen erat ed. T he IJ treat ed thi s as a cl ai m forr efuge e s t atus b ased upon a n i m put ed pol i t i cal opi ni on, and the B I A di d notdi s agr ee. 14 o f re s id e n c e . Kayem be , 334 F. 3d at234. 7 T he inqui r yi nt o w hetheran al i en has es t abl i s hed the re q u isite w e ll-fo u n d e d f e a r o f f u tu re p e rse c u tio n is b o th s ubj ect i ve and obj ect i ve. T he subj ect i ve com ponenti s s at i s fi ed bypr oof thatth e p rof es s ed fe ari s genui ne. T he obj ect i ve compone n t is sat i s fi ed bypr oof thatthe al i en’ s s ubj ect i ve fe ar i s r e a s o n a b l e i n l i g h t o f a l l o f th e r e c o r d evi dence

. G uo v. A sh c ro ft , 3 8 6 F .3 d 5 5 6 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 4 ). L u sin g o p r o d u c e d a b u n d a n t ev id e n c e th a t h is f e a r is genui ne, and the s ubj ect i ve compone ntof hi s cl ai m i s not d isp u ted

. R a th e r, th e d isp u te f o c u se s o n w h e th e r th a t f e a r is obj ect i vel yrea s onabl e. A n al i en maydemonstr at e thathi s /her b eli ef is objecti v ely r ea so n ab le byd o cu m en taryo r ex p ert e v id e n c e a b o u t th e c o n d itio n s i n a g i v e n c o u n tr y . Lukw ago v. A sh c ro ft , 3 2 9 F

. 3 d 1 5 7 , 1 7 7 (3d

. C ir

. 2 0 0 3 ). W h en d o cu m en tary evi dence i s l acki ng, an “a ppli cant ’ s cr edi bl e, per s uas i ve, and s peci fi c t es t i m ony m ay s uffi ce” t o es t abl i s h an obj ect i ve fe arof p ro s e c u tio n . I

d. ci ti ng G om ezv. I

. N

. S. , 947 F. 2d 660, 663 ( 2d C ir

. 1 9 9 1 ). O n appea l t o the B I A , L us i ngo cl ai m ed t hat the I J appl i ed15 the w r ong l egal s t andar d fo ras y l um beca us e the I J s t at ed that L us i ngo had t o pr ove thathe “ w o u ld ” fa ce per s ecut i on. ” The B IA d isa g re e d b a se d u p o n its c o n c lu sio n th a t “ th e re c o rd in its ent i r etyr efl ect s that[the I J ] under s t ood and appl i ed the pr oper s t andar d,

. . . [and] cons i der ed w hether[Lusin g o ] had es t abl i sh ed .

. . ‘ a r eas onabl e pos s i bi l i ty ’ of s uffe r i ng p e rs e c u tio n in T a n z a n ia .” J A 0 0 5

. H o w e v e r, th e B IA d e ter m in e d th a t th e IJ h a d “ e rre d in c o n c l u d i n g th a t th e r e was a l a c k o f e v i d e n c e r e l a t i n g t o t he T a n z a n ian g o v e rn m e n t’s s e n sitiv ityto a d v e r se p u b licity gener at ed by[Lusi ngo’ s ] d ep artur e fr om the j ambore e. ” I d. R ather , t he B I A agr eed w i th L us i ngo that“hi s departur e fr om the boys cout s j ambore e r ece i ved ext en s i ve medi a att ent i on, i ncl udi ng m edi a cove r age i n T anza ni a. . . . ” Id

. N evertheles s, the B I A agr eed thatL us ing o’ s s ubj ect i ve fe arw as not obj ect i vel yr eas onabl e and thathe ther efor e coul d nots at i s fythe s e c o n d p a rt o f

th e a s y lu m in q u ir y . T he B I A ’ s concl us i on thatL us i ngo’ s clai m w as not o b jec tiv e lyre a so n a b le w a s b a se d p rim a rily u p o n th e a n a lo g yto s tr eetchi l dr en thatal s o tr oubl ed the I J

. T he B oar d expl ai ned: [L usi ng o’s] exp ert s do n ot have a g oo d a n a lo g yt o [h i s] situ a tio n , ins o f

a r a s th e m istre a tm e n t o f stre e t c h ild re n in Ta n z a n i a d o e s n o th a v e mu c h r e l e v a n c e t o [ Lu s i n g o ’ s ] c l a i m. [H e] com es fr om a s t abl e fa m i l y , w i th both par ent s empl oy ed, a n d h e a tten d e d sc h o o l u n til h e lef t T a n z a n ia. W h ile s u c h m e d ia a t t e n t i o n ma y h a v e e mb a rr a s s e d th e T a n z a n i a n Go v e rn me n t , we do notfi nd thati tgi ves r i s e t o a w el l f o u n d ed fe arof p e rse c u tio n . T h e re c o rd d o e s n o t es tab lish th a t th e m e d ia att ent i on . . . w i l l l ead t o [Lusi ngo’ s ] per s ecut i on.16 Id

. T he B I A ’ s expl anat i on i s puzzl i ng beca us e i tt ot al l ym i s s es the poi n t o f Lusi ngo’ s anal ogy . L us i ngo di d notcl ai m thathe w as p art of

th e s o cial gro u p o f stree t children , as th e B IA ’s a n a ly sis su g g e sts , o r th a t h e w a s s u b jec t to p e rse c u tio n u p o n h is r eturn beca us e the T anza ni an governm entper s ecut es chi l dr en. R ather , he m ere lyi ntr oduced e vi dence of the Tanzani an go vernm ent’ s repr essi ve at t i tud e t ow ard street chil dren be cause theyar e an e m barr as s m entt o the Ta n zani an governm ent , and becaus e the go v ern m en t’ s retali ati o n fo r th e e m b arrassm en t th ey caus e i s r el evantt o the r eas onabl enes s of Lusi ngo’ s fea rthathe w i l l be per s ecut ed upon hi s r eturn beca us e he al s o embar r as s ed th e g o v e rn m e n t. T h a t tes ti m o n y , if a c c e p ted , is c e rta in ly s uppor t ed bythe r ecor d, and coul d es t abl i s h L us i ngo’ s cl ai m of an o b jecti v elyrea s o n a b le an d w ell -fo u n d ed fe ar. T h u s, w e a re ata l os s t o understan d the B oar d’ s r ej ect i on of i tbas ed upon w h a t ita p p a re n tlyin ter p re ted a s a p o o rly c o n c e iv e d a ttem p t to s u g g e s t L u s in g o w a s a s tr e e t c h ild

. W e ar e al s o ata l os s t o under s t and the s i gni fi ca n ce the B oar d att ache d to t he fa ctthatthe Tanzani an governm enthad n otr et al i at ed aga i ns tL us i ngo’ s par ent s . T he B oar d r eas oned,

“ th e lac k o f

re p e rc u ss io n to h is f

a m ily ten d s to su g g e st th a t h is fami l yhas nothi ng t o fea rfr om the gove rnm en t

. W e t oo fi nd the r eas onabl enes s of [Lusi ngo’ s ] fea rof per s ecut i on i s r educe d in s o f a r a s h is f a m ily c o n tin u e s to re s id e u n h a rm e d in T a n z a n ia .” J A 006. H ow ever , as the B oar d cl ear l ynot es , D r. R aj ani t e s t i f i e d th a tL u s i n g o ’ s f

a m i l y w o u l d o n l y b e “ tr e a t e d h a r s h l y if the T an zanian go vernm ent tho ug h tthey w ere part y t o [ his ] un au tho r iz e d s tay i n the U ni t e d S tat es. ” I d. at

. J A 006. A lth o u g h L u sin g o tes tifie d th a t h is pa re n ts kn e w o f h is d e sire to r emai n her e t o s eek an educat i on, ther e i s nothi ng t o s ugges tthat17 the hi s par ent s knew he pl anned t o l eave the j ambore e and s t ay in th e U n it e d S tate s w h e n h e lef t T a n z a n ia, o r th a t th e m e d ia r eport s s ugges t ed t hey knew , or that the Tanzani an governm ent s us pect e d thei rcompl i ci ty . A ccor di ngl y , D r . R aj ani ’ s t es t i m ony d o e s n o t s u g g e st th a t th e g o v e rn m e n t’s f a ilu re to re talia te agai ns t Lusi ngo’ s par ent s s houl d underm i ne the obj ect i ve r eas onabl enes s of Lusi ngo’ s fea rof r et al i at i on abs entfur ther e x p la n a tio n f

o r r e a c h in g th a t c o n c lu s io n . T h e re is n o d is p u te th a t L u sin g o ’s f e a r o f re tu rn is genui ne. In addi t i on, the B I A acc ept ed the evi dence of the re p re ss iv e a n d re talia to ry n a tu re o f th e T a n z a n ian re g im e a s w e ll as the fa ctthatr eport s of Lusi ngo’ s departur e fr om the j ambore e re a c h e d T a n z a n ia a n d c a u se d th e g o v e rn m e n t em b a rra ss m e n t. M or eover , as not ed above, the B I A acc ept ed the I J ’ s anal y s i s of L us i ngo’ s as y l u m cl ai m as bei ng bas ed on i m put ed pol i t i cal o p in io n c riticiz in g th e g o v e rn m e n t. A c c o rd in g ly , it is d if f icu lt f o r u s to d e ter m in e o n th is re c o rd w h y L u sin g o is n o t en tit led to th e a s y lu m h e is s e e k in g . I n s i m i l ars i tuat i o n s, w e have gr ant ed pet i t i ons for r evi ew , an d r emanded the mat t erforaddi t i onal expl anat i on of the r at i onal e fordeny i ng r el i ef. I n Ka y e m b e , w e gr ant ed the pet i t i on forr evi ew and r emanded to the B I A beca us e “‘ the B IA ’s d e c isio n [ p ro v id e d ] u s w ith n o w a yto c o n d u c t o u r (a lb e it l i m it ed) r evi ew . ’ ” 334 F. 3d at238. Si m i l ar l y , i n D i a v. A sh c ro ft , 3 5 3 F

. 3 d 2 2 8 , 2 5 1 (3d C ir

. 2 0 0 3 ) ( en banc ), w e c o u ld notunder s t and the I J ’ s r at i onal e for deny i ng r el i ef. W e s t at ed: “we c a n n o t a f

f i r m th e I J ’ s f

i n d i n g s a n d c o n c l u s i o n s o n t he re c o rd p r e se n ted to u s, a s th e re a so n s s h e d o e s p ro v id e in s uppor tof herdeci s i on do not l ogi cal l yfl ow fr om the fa ct s s he18 cons i der ed. ” G i ven the B I A ’ s m i s i nt erpr et at i on of Lusi ngo’ s evi dence abouts tr eetchi l dr en, and t he unw arr ant ed w ei ghtatt ache d t o the fac tthathi s p are n t s w er e notper s ecut ed w hen the Tanzani an g o v ern m en t l ea rne d o f th e u n fa v o rab le re p o rt s o f h is de p arture f ro m th e jam b o re e , the re a so n s th e B IA g a v e in su p p o rt o f its d ec isi o n d o n o t l o g icall yflo w fro m the f ac ts i t co n side red h ere ei ther

. A ccor di ngl y , w e w i l l r emand t o the B IA forfur ther e x p lan a tio n o f th e b a sis f o r i ts de c isio n . “ W h e n d e f icie n c ies in th e B I A ’ s d e c isio n m a k e it i m p o ss ib le f o r u s to m e a n in g f

u lly revi ew i t s deci si on , w e m ustvacate that deci si on and rem and so that the B I A can fur ther expl ai n i t s r eas oni ng. ” Kayem be , 334. F. 3d at238. B efor e conc l udi ng, w e paus e t o comm ent on s om e of the ar gum ent s the A t t orneyG ener al m akes i n i t s br i ef a s theyr efl ect a probl em w hi ch i s i ncr eas i ngl y comm on i n the gr ow i ng num ber of ca s es comi ng befor e us . T he A t t orneyG ener al ar gues that the a b sen ce o f “ ev en o n e n ew s rep o rto r l ett er to the e d it o r” u n d e rm in e s L u sin g o ’s c laim s re g a rd in g th e m e d ia c o v e ra g e in T anza ni a. A ppel l ee’ s B r . at31. T hi s arg u m enti s ei ther di s i ngenuous orembar r as s i ngl ynai ve. G i ven the al l egat i ons on this recor d ab ou tthe T anzan i an g ov ernm ent’ s react i on t o those w ho embar r as s i t , no one can s er i ous l ys ugges tthatthe abs ence of “l ett er s t o the edi t or ” on a t opi c thatm ayembar r as s the reg im e h as an yp rob ati v e v alue w h atso ev er. W e a re the ref o re both confounde d and s om ew hatpuzzl ed bythe s ugges t i on that L us i ngo s houl d have i ntr oduced “ l ett er s t o the edi t or ” exc erpt ed f ro m th e T a n z a n ian p re ss to su p p o rt h is c laim th a t h isM or eover , abs ence of l ett er s t o the edi t orw oul d be of 8 ques t i onabl e p robat i ve val ue eve n i n the cont extof the fr ee, open and vi gor ous pr es s thatw e enj oyher e. I t cert ai nl y has no pr obat i ve val ue her e. 19 di s appea r ance r ece i ved publ i ci tyi n T anza ni a. 8 I n a l es s as t oni s hi ng b u t s i m i l ar l ym y opi c as s ert i on, the A t t orneyG ener al r el i es upon s t at emen t s attr i but ed t o the T a n z a n ia n A m b a ss a d o r to th e U n ited S tate s in its a ttem p t to s ugges tthatL us i ngo has nothi ng t o fea r . T he A t t orneyG ener al ar gues thats om e of the art i cl es thatD r . L andau i ntr oduced i ndi cat ed thatthe “Tanza ni an A m bas s adorw as aw ar e that L us i ngo . . . [w as ] hopi ng t o s t ayi n the U ni t ed St at es t o fur ther [hi s ] educa t i on, that the T anza ni an governm entw as cons ul t i ng w i th ourgovernm ent about the s i tuat i on, and thatthe Tanzani an g o v e rn m e n t h a d a s s u re d th e b o y s ’ f a m ilie s th a t th e yw e re s a f e .” A p p e llee ’s B r. A t 2 9 . T h e A tto rn e y G e n e ra l sh o u ld a p p re c iate th a t an a m b a ss a d o r o f

T a n z a n ia is ra th e r un lik e ly to m a k e p u b lic pr onouncement s thathi s /her governm ent per s ecut es i t s ci t i zens o rr e t a l i a t e s a g a i n s tth e m f o ru n f a v o r a b l e p u b l i c i tyi n t he i nt ernat i onal pr es s . T hus , i t s houl d come as no s urpr i s e thatthe T a n z a n ian A m b a s s a d o r m a n a g e d a d ip lo m a tic re sp o n se to i nqui r i es aboutL us i ngo. I ti s , how ever , s urpr i s i ng thatany one w oul d s ugges tthatthe ambas s ador ’ s r es pons e prove s anythi ng otherthan hi s di pl om at i c ac um en.

I I I CO NC L US I ON Forthe r eas ons s etfor th above, w e w i l l gr antthe pet i t i on20 forr evi ew and r emand t o the B I A forfurtherpr ocee di ngs cons i s t entw i th t hi s opi ni on.