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 10-19-2005 

# P ol at 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 . 04-2519

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 author i 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 " P o l at v . Atty Ge n U SA" (2005). 2005 D e cisio n s . P ape r 387. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005/3871 NOT 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. 04- 2519 S A K IR P O L A T , 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 P eti ti o n fo r R ev iew fro m a F inal O rde r o f th e 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- 399- 963 Subm i t t ed U nderT hi r d C i r cui tL . A . R . 34. 1( a)

Sept ember30, 2005 B efor e: R E N D E L L , FU E N T E S, and W E I S, C i r cui tJ udges

( Fi l ed: O ct ober19, 2005)

____ OPI NI ON O F THE COURT FU E N T E S, C i r cui tJ udge Pet i t i onerSaki rPol at , a nat i ve and c i t i zen of T ur key , chal l enges a dec i s i on of the2

B oar d of I m m i gr at i on A ppeal s ( “B I A ”) uphol di ng the deni al byan I m m i gr at i on J udge (“ IJ” ) o f h is re q u e st f

o r p o lit ica l as y lu m , w ith h o ld in g o f re m o v a l an d re lief

u n d e r A rticle II I o f th e C o n v e n tio n A g a in s t T o rt u re . 

### Be c aus e the I J ’ s de c i s i on wa s s upport e d by s ub s t ant i a le v i d e n c e , w e w i l la f f i rm. BA CKGROUND I. M r. P o laten tered the U n it ed S tat es o n M ay1 , 2 0 0 0 w ith o u t a visa o r oth er e n try d o c u m e n ts, a n d f

iled f o r p o lit ica l as y lu m . A t th e m e rits h e a rin g o n M a rc h 3 , 2 0 0 3 a n d in hi s s t at ementi n s uppor tof hi s appl i cat i on foras y l um , M r . Pol att es t i fi ed t o t he fol l ow i ng f a c ts: M r . Pol atw as a mem berof the Fazi l etPart y , a pol i t i cal partyi n T ur keythat advoca t es a l es s eni ng of m i l i t arycontr ol of the Turki s h governm ent . A s a mem berof that par t y , M r . Pol atr ecrui t ed new m ember s and att ended meet i ngs . I n A ugus t1997, he w as arr es t ed w i t h a gr oup of otherpar t ym ember s dur i ng a demonstr at i on, and w as beat en on hi s fee tw i t h s t i cks . H e w as r el eas ed the nextdayaft erhi s br otherpai d a br i be t o t he pol i ce. I n M ay1999, M r . Pol atw as agai n arr es t ed ata Fazi l etPar t ydemonstr at i on, and w a s th re a ten e d a n d b e a ten . A f ter h is f a m ilya g a in b rib e d th e p o lice , h e w a s a llo w e d to “escape” f

rom pri son, abo ut tw o w eeks afterhe h ad b een arres t ed. A w arr ant for hi s arres t w as l at ers entt o hi s hom e bym ai l , ar ound A ugus t1999. M r . Pol ats ubm i t t ed thi s w arr ant to th e C o u rt w ith a tra n sla tio n (JA 3 4 3 ), w h ich re a d s, in p e rtin e n t p a rt:3

“To: B i r t h D epart m ent/Y ozgat/ T he per s on ehos e [s i c] i dent i t yi s gi ven bel ow , Saki rPol at (a c c u se d ) h a s b e e n w a n ted b yc iv il co u rt d e c isio n d a ted 9 8 /1 4 5 . If th a t p e rso n c o m e s to y ourdepart m ent , ki ndl yl etus know . /A l par s l an D ogan” A f ter h e re c e iv e d th is a rre st w a rra n t, M r. P o lat w e n t in to h id in g . W h e n h is d a u g h ter w a s b o rn , h e re tu rn e d h o m e a n d sta y e d th e re f o r a b o u t tw e n tyd a y s. M r P o lat is a f ra id to re tu rn to T u rk e yb e c a u se h e b e liev e s th a t h e w ill b e th ro w n in jail a n d th a t h is lif e w ill b e in d a n g e r. II. T he I J found M r . Pol atnotcr edi bl e and de ni ed hi s appl i cat i on. Fi r s t , the I J di d not bel i eve M r . Pol at ’ s cl ai m s t hathe had be en arr es t ed. She not ed thatM r . Pol atdi d not arr i ve i n t he U ni t ed St at es unt i l abouta y earaft erhi s s econd a r r es t , and thatal t hough he s t at ed thathe s pentt hatt i m e col l ect i ng m oneyforthe tr i p, he l eftand r eturned t o T ur key s e v e r a l t i me s d u r i n g t h e s a me p e r i o d o n tr i p s t o th e Ne t h e r l a n d s , S p a i n , a n d Ro ma n i a . He re c e iv e d e x it v isa s f

o r th e se trip s. T h e IJ a lso p o in ted o u t th a t in a n in ter v iew w ith author i t i es i n t he M i ami ai rpor taft erhi s arr i val i n t he U ni t ed St at es , and then a w eek l at er in a se c o n d in ter v iew , M r. P o lat s tate d th a t h e h a d n e v e r b e e n a rre ste d . A t th e m e rits hear i ng, M r . Pol atexpl ai ned thathe had be en as ked w hetherhe had e vercomm i t t ed c rim e s, a n d th a t h e h a d sa id n o (JA 1 7 6 ); h e late r sta ted th a t h e d id n ’t m e n tio n th e a rre sts b e c a u s e h e w a s n o t b ro u g h t to a c o u rt ro o m in th e c o u rs e o f th e a rr e s ts (J A 1 7 7 ). T he IJ al so fou nd no tcredi ble M r. P olat ’s cl ai m that he had recei ved an arr est4

w arr ant . She di d notbel i eve thata w arr antw oul d be mai l ed t o hi s hom e, and not ed that th e w a rr a n t r e f

e rr e d to a c iv il ju d g m e n t a n d w a s m a ile d to th e “ b ir th d e p a rt m e n t,” s heddi ng doubton i t s r el evanc e t o a cr i m i nal arr es t . M or eover , the I J r efe r r ed t o an inv esti g ati o n o f th e a rrest w arran t bythe Im m igrati o n an d N ati o n ali za ti o n S erv ice (IN S ). O n M ay7, 2002, t he I N S fi l ed w i t h the I J a mem or andum from t he C ons ul atthe U ni t ed St at es E m bas s yi n A nkar a, T ur key . ( J A 316- 18. ) T he mem o i ndi cat ed thatfol l ow i ng a r eques tfr om t he D epart m entof J us t i ce, the cons ul at e i nves t i gat ed the authent i ci t yof the a rre st w a rra n t su b m itt e d b yM r. P o lat a n d c o n tac ted A lp a rsla n D o g a n , w h o p u rp o rte d ly had s i gned the arr es tw arr ant . A ccor di ng t o t he mem o, C om m anderD ogan s t at ed thatt he w a rra n t w a s f

ra u d u len t, th a t h e w a s n o t th e C o m m a n d e r in 1 9 9 9 , the y e a r o f th e w a rra n t, and thatt he s i gnatur e w as nothi s . L as t l y , the mem o s t at ed thatther e w er e no out s t andi ng arr es tw arr ant s agai ns tM r . Pol ati n T ur key . B as ed on thi s i nform at i on, the I J found that M r . Pol athad an obl i gat i on t o demonstr at e thatthe documentw as r el i abl e, and thathe had notdone s o. T he I J di d notfi nd s uffi ci entevi dence thatM r . Pol athad comm i t t ed f ra u d b yf a b ri c a tin g th e w a rr a n t, h o w e v e r, a n d n o te d th a t th e m e m o w a s h e a rs a y . F in a lly , the IJ s tate d th a t sh e d id n o t b e liev e th a t M r. P o lat w o u ld b e in d a n g e r if he r etur ned t o T ur key , not i ng t hatM r . Pol at ’ s br otherand fa t herar e mem ber s of the F a z i l e tp a r t y a n d h a v e r e m a i n e d i n T u r k e y. S TANDA RD O F REVI EW W h ere , as h ere , the B IA af firm s the IJ’s de cisi o n w ith o u t op inion , this C o u rt5

rev iew s the d ec isi o n o f th e IJ. Pa rtyk a v . A tt o rne yG en era l, 4 1 7 F . 3 d 4 0 8 , 4 1 1 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 5 ). T h e IJ’ s f

in d in g s o f

f a c t ar e re v iew e d f

o r su b sta n tial e v id e n c e . D ia v . A sh c ro f t, 3 5 3 F .3 d 2 2 8 , 2 4 7 (3 d C ir. 2 0 0 3 ). A d v e rse c re d ib ili tyd e ter m in a tio n s a re sim ilarly r evi ew ed undera s ubs t ant i al evi dence s t andar d. G ao v. A s hcr oft , 299 F. 3d 266, 272 ( 3d C i r . 2002) . W her e cr edi bi l i t ydet erm i nat i ons ar e “ba s ed on s pecul at i on orconj ectur e, r athert han on evi dence i n t he r ecor d, ” theyar e r ever s i bl e, and “mi nori ncons i s t enci es and m i noradmi s s i ons . . . ‘ ar e notan ade quat e bas i s foran adve r s e cr edi bi l i t yfi ndi ng. ’ ” I d. (c ita tio n s o m itte d ). DI S CU S S I ON T he I J bas ed heradver s e cr edi bi l i t yfi ndi ng on t hr ee mai n poi nt s : ( 1) thatM r . Pol at left an d return ed to T u rke ysev era l t im es a fter h is seco n d arrest an d b ef o re h is de p arture fort he U ni t ed St at es ; ( 2) t hati n t w o i nt ervi ew s s hor t l yaft erhi s arr i val i n t he U ni t ed St at es , M r . Pol ats t at ed thathe had ne verbeen a r r es t ed; and ( 3) thatthe arr es tw arr ant s u b m itte d b yM r. P o la t w a s n o t b e lie v a b le . T h ese three fa ctors p rov ide s u b stan ti al ev iden ce to su p p o rtthe IJ’s h o lding . M r. Pol at ’ s ext ens i ve tr avel aft erhi s purpor t ed s econd a r r es tand bef or e hi s departur e fort he U n ited S tate s s u g g e st th a t h e w a s n o t in c o n sta n t f e a r o f a rre st d u rin g th is p e rio d . It i s a lso n o tab le th a t th e se trip s re q u ire d re p e a ted in ter a c tio n s w ith th e T u rk ish g o v e rn m e n t to rec eive ex itv isas an d a p assp o rtren ew al. (JA 1 1 5 -16 . ) G e n e ra lly , inc o n sis ten c ies b e tw e e n a n a sy lu m se e k e r’s a irp o rt sta tem e n ts a n d h is6

tes tim o n yb e f

o re th e IJ a re n o t su f

f icie n t in th e m se lv e s to su p p o rt a n a d v e rse c re d ib ili ty f in d in g ; “[ s]u c h a n in ter v iew is lik e lyto b e h u rrie d ; lan g u a g e d if f icu lti e s a rise ; th e re su lts ma yb e i n a c c u r a t e l yr e c o r d e d , a n d a n a r r i v i n g a l i e n wh o h a s s u f f e r e d a b u s e i n h i s h o me countr ym aybe r el uct antt o r evea l ful l i nform at i on i n hi s orherfi r s tm eet i ng w i t h t he governm ent . ” Fi adj oe v. A t t or neyG ener al , 411 F. 3d 135, 159 ( 3d C i r . 2005) . H er e, h o w e v e r, M r. P o lat f

a iled to m e n tio n th e a rre sts in tw o d if f e re n t in ter v iew s, a n d h is expl anat i ons fornotm ent i oni ng t hem w er e dubi ous . M or eover , the fa ctof hi s arr es t s w as nota mi norpoi nt , butr athera ce nt r al el ementof M r . Pol at ’ s cl ai m foras y l um . M ul anga v . A sh c ro f

t, 34 9 F .3 d 1 2 3 , 1 3 7 (3 d C ir. 2 0 0 3 ) (n o tin g th a t “ im m a ter ia l di s cr epanc i es betw een airpo rti nterview s and sub sequen tt est i m on yshou l d n ot be used to m ake ad verse c re d ib ili tyd e ter m in a tio n s” ) (e m p h a sis a d d e d ). It w a s th e re f o re re a so n a b le f

o r th e IJ to cons i dert hi s om i s s i on i n deci di ng w hetherM r . Pol atw as cr edi bl e. A s fort he arr es tw arr ant , M r . Pol atar gues thatthe I J err ed i n admi t t i ng the c o n su lar re p o rt b e c a u se its w e a k p ro b a tiv e v a lu e w a s o u tw e ig h e d b yits p re ju d icia l ef

f e c t. A s th e g o v e rn m e n t n o tes , the IJ p ro v id e d M r. P o lat s e v e ra l o p p o rtu n iti e s to in v e stig a te the w arran t and p rov ide e v iden ce o f it s reli ab il ity , as w ell as to d eterm ine w h ethe r M r. Pol at ’ s confi dent i al i t yhad bee n vi ol at ed as he cl ai m ed, butM r . Pol atw as unabl e t o do s o. ( See, e. g. , J A 120- 27. ) M or eover , the I J r ecogni zed thatthe mem o w as notdefi ni t i ve, n o tin g th a t itw a s h e a rsa y . (JA 4 1 .) In d isc re d iti n g th e a rre st w a rra n t, th e IJ d id n o t re ly so lelyo n th e m e m o . S h e n o ted th a t M r. P o lat h a d n o t ex p lain e d w h yit w a s a d d re ss e d to7

t he “Bi r t h D epart m ent , ” and a l s o cons i der ed the fa ctthatM r . Pol atw as athom e on s e v e ra l o c c a s io n s a f

te r r e c e iv in g th e a rr e s t w a rr a n t, b u t w a s n e v e r a rr e s te d . In c o m b ination , thes e p o ints pro v ide s u b stan ti al ev iden ce in su p p o rto f th e IJ’s d e c is io n . W e th e re f

o re d e n yth e P e titio n f

o r R e v ie w .