Interim Decision #1324 

MA1-r R or CHOW 

In DEPORTATION Proceedings 

A-15863660 

Decided by Board February 84, 104 

Designation of country of deportation within step 3 of section 243(a), Immigration and Nationality Act, is solely within the discretion of the Attorney 

General and there are no limitations as to priority or preference because of 

the order named in the statute. 

CHARGE: 

order: Act of 1952—Section 241(a) (2) [8 U.S.O. 1251(a) (2)]--Remained 

longer—crewman 

The respondent appeals from an order of the special inquiry officer 

denying a motion to reopen the proceedings to permit a change in the 

alternate order of deportation from the Netherlands to Hong Kong. 

Counsel on appeal urges error in that the special inquiry officer has 

arbitrarily directed the respondent's deportation to Netherlands 

whereas the respondent is a Chinaman whose family resides in Hong 

Kong and he was last a resident of Hong 'Kong. 

The respondent has been found deportable as a nonimmigrant crewman who remained in the United States longer than permitted. An 

order entered by the special inquiry officer on November 4, 1963, 

granted the respondent the privilege of voluntary departure in lieu 

of deportation. The order also contained alternative orders of deportation to the Republic of China on Formosa, the Netherlands and 

Hong Kong in the event the respondent failed to depart when and 

as required. 

A notice requiring the respondent's departure by December 10, 1963, 

was forwarded to him on November 19, 1963. He failed to depart 

and a warrant for his deportation was issued on December 23, 1963. 

The District Director at New York was notified on November 6, 1963, 

that the respondent would not be accepted for deportation by the 

Republic of China on Formosa. The respondent has been advised 

that he will be deported to the Netherlands. 

469 
Interim Decision #1824 

Counsel maintains that since the respondent has travel documents 

which will permit him to enter both Hong Kong and the Netherlands 

then under such circumstances there should be proper standards for 

reaching a determination as to which country the alien will be deported. Counsel refers to the fact that this Board has designated certain standards to guide the special inquiry officer in reaching a determination as to whether the grant of voluntary departure is warranted. 

Matter of M—, 4 L & N. Dec. 626. Counsel maintains that although 

the statute (section. 243 (a) , Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 

1253 (a) ) permits the Attorney General a, certain amount of discretion 

as to what country an alien may be deported, there should be limitations 

on. this power, when there are factors present which indicate that the 

alien is more closely identified with one country than he is with another 

and both countries are willing to accept him. 

The standard for reaching a determination as to what country an 

alien may be deported is clearly set forth in the statute (section 243(a), 

supra). We see no need to supplement the plain language setting 

forth the authority granted the Attorney General. Under section 

243(a) an alien must be deported "to a. country promptly designated 

by the alien if that country is willing to accept him" unless the Attorney General "in his discretion" concludes that deportation to such 

country would be prejudicial to the best interests of the United States. 

(Emphasis supplied.) The alien is limited to "one such designation" 

and he may not designate a foreign contiguous territory or adjacent 

islands unless he is a native, national, or resident of such contiguous 

territory or adjacent island. 

Where the country designated by the alien or the country of his 

citizenship is unwilling to accept him, the statute provides the Attorney 

General with discretion to deport the alien to any of six different 

categories of countries or places with which the alien may have had 

some pridr association. Subparagraph (7) of section 243 (a) reads 

"if deportation to any of the foregoing places or countries is impracticable, inadvisable, or impossible, then to any country which is willing 

to accept such alien into its territory." The statute also provides, that 

when the Attorney General has to resort to ordering the alien's deportation. to any of the seven categories named in the statute, "then such 

deportation shall be directed by the Attorney General within his discretion and without necessarily giving any priority or preference 

because of their order . . ." as set forth in the statute. (Emphasis 

supplied.) 

The respondent in the instant case refused to make any designation 

of the country to which he desired to be returned in the event of an 

order of deportation. When it was determined that the country of 

his nationality and citizenship would not accept, him and upon the 

470 
Interim Decision #1324 

making of this motion, the Immigration Service offered to effect the 

respondent's deportation to Hong Kong. The offer was refused and 

the respondent elected to proceed with this motion. - 

Under the circumstances there is no substance to respondent's motion. 

The alternate country to which an alien may be deported is solely 

within the discretion of the Attorney General and there are no limitations as to the priority or preference because of the order named 

in the statute. The wide discretion given the Attorney General by 

subparagraph (7) of section 243(a) is obviously intended to 'avoid 

arbitrary restrictions on the places to which a deportable alien may 

be sent. Chan Mellen v. Esperdy, 285 F. 2d 353, 354 (C.A. 2, 1960). 

Counsel's argument that this Board should set up certain stmulards 

for the exercise of the authority granted the Attorney General by 

section 243(a) is not in accord with the intent and purpose of the 

statute. 

The respondent in the instant case did not avail himself of the 

opportunity granted him as a matter of right. He is in no position 

to ask for relief at this time. The appeal will be dismissed. 

ORDER: It is diieeted that the appeal be and the same is hereby 

dismissed. 

471