FI LED U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT Se pt e m be r 13, 2005 T HOM AS K. KAHN CL E RK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 05- 10140 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ A ge nc y N os . A 97- 190- 630, A 97- 190- 631 H A I D E R N A M E R S A L E H , C H A D I A I B R A H I M S A L E H , A L I H A I D A R S A L E H , W A I L H A I D A R S A L E H , P e titio n e r s , v ersu s U .S . A T T O RN E Y G E N E R A L , R e s p o n d e n t.

________________________ P e t i t i on f orR e vi e w of

aD e c i s i on of

the B o a r d o f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls

_________________________ ( S e pt e m be r13, 2005) B efo re D U B IN A , B L A C K an d P R Y O R , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M:Iti s n o tcl ear wh eth er th e le ad P et i ti o n er ’s n am e is “H ai dar” or “H ai d er , ” a s b o thsp el l in gs 1 areused in various locations in the re cord. 2 H ai der N am erS al eh (“ H ai dar” ) , hi s w i fe C hadi a I brahi m S al eh (“ C hadi a” ), 1 and thei r c hi l dren, A l i H ai dar S al eh (“ A l i ”) and W ai l H ai dar S al eh (“ W ai l ”) ( c ol l e c t i ve l y r e f

e rr e d t o a s “ P e t i t i one r s ” ) , s e e k r e vi e w of the B oa r d of

I m m i gr a t i on A pp ea l s’ s ( “ B IA ’ s” ) dec i si on af fi rm i ng the Im m i grat i on Judg e’ s ( “ IJ ’ s” ) order de ny i ng the i rappl i c a t i on f ora s y l um , w i thhol di ng of r e m ova l unde rthe I m m i gr a t i on a nd N a t i ona l i ty A c t( “ I N A ” ) a nd the U ni t e d N a t i ons C onve nt i on A ga i ns tT ortur e a nd O the rC rue l , I nhum a n, orD e gr a di ng T r e a tm e ntorP uni s hm e nt ( “C A T r e lie f

” ) , 8 U .S .C . § § 1 1 5 8 ( a ) , 1 2 3 1 ( b ) ( 3 ) , 8 C .F .R . § 2 0 8 .1 6 ( c ) . I n th e irap p lic a tio n , th e P e titio n e r s s o u g h t r e lie f f r o m b e in g r e m o v e d to N i geri a and L ebanon . O n app ea l , w i th res pectt o thei r N i geri an cl ai m s, P et i t i on er s a r gue tha tthe I J m i s c ha r a c t e r i z e d c e rt a i n f a c t s t o w hi c h H a i da rt e s t i f i e d a nd erroneou sl y app l i ed a “ si ng l ed ou t ” theory of pers ec ut i on t o thei r c l ai m s. T hey subm i tthatthey m ayes t abl i sh a w el l -f ou nd ed fe arthrou gh a patt ern and prac t i ce o f p er se cu ti o n o f p eo p le sim il ar ly situ ated to th em . T h ey co n ten d th at H aid ar ’s te s tim o n y a s w e ll a s th e d o c u m e n ta ry e v id e n c e e s tab lis h e d th a t w h ite L e b a n e s e in N i ge r i aw e r e s ubj e c tt o apa tt e rn a nd pr a c t i c e of pe r s e c ut i on on a c c ountof r a c e by bl a c k e thni c N i ge r i a ns . T he y a s s e rttha tthe e vi de nc e s how e d tha te thni c N i ge r i a n3

c i v i l i a n s we r e a g e n t s o f th e Ni g e r i a n g o v e rn m e n ts u c h th a tth e y q u a l i f i e d f o rC AT re l i ef . W ith re sp ec t t o th eir L eb an es e c laim s, th e P etit io n er s a rg u e th at H aid ar ’s t e s t i m ony i s c orr obor a t e d by c ountry c ondi t i ons i n the r e c or d tha ts how tha tthe L e b a n e s e g o v e rn m e n t is c o n tr o lle d b y S y r ia , a n d th e P e titio n e r s h a v e aw e llf ounde d f e a rof f utur e pe r s e c ut i on ba s e d on apa tt e rn a nd pr a c t i c e of pe r s e c ut i on of si m i l ar l y s i tuat ed M usl i m s i n L ebanon w ho bel i eve i n d em ocra cyand w es t ern v a lu e s . T h e y c o n te n d th a t th e y a r e e lig ib le f o ra s y lu m , w ith h o ld in g o f r e m o v a l, a n d C A T r e lie f

in L e b a n o n . W he n the B I A i s s ue s ade c i s i on, w e r e vi e w onl y tha tde c i s i on, e xc e ptt o the e x te n t th a t th e B I A e x p r e s s lya d o p ts th e I J ’s d e c is io n . A l N a jja rv . A s h c r o

ft , 257 F . 3d 12 62 , 12 84 (11th C i r. 20 01 ). T o the ext entthatthe B IA ’ s dec i si on w as base d o n a l eg al d et erm i n at i o n , rev i ew i s de no vo . Mo h a m m e d v . A s h c r o

ft , 261 F . 3d 12 44 , 12 47 -48 (11 th C i r. 20 01 ). T he B IA ’ s f ac tual det erm i nat i on s are re vi ew ed u n d e rth e s u b s ta n tia l- e v id e n c e te s t, a n d w e “m u s t a f f irm th e B I A ’s d e c is io n if it is

‘ supp ort ed by re as on abl e, subst ant i al , and p robat i ve evi dence on the re cord consi dere d as aw ho l e. ’ ” A l N aj j ar , 257 F . 3d a t1283- 84 ( c i t a t i on om i tt e d) . T he s ubs t a nt i a l e vi de nc e t e s ti s “ de f e r e nt i a l ” a nd doe s nota l l ow “ r e - w e i gh[ i ng] the evi dence fr om sc ra t ch. ” M az ar i egos v . U

. S. A t t ’ yG e n. , 2 4 1 F .3 d 1 3 2 0 , 1 3 2 3 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 1 ) . “T o r e v e r s e th e I J ’s f a c t f in d in g s , w e m u s t f

in d th a t th e r e c o r d n o t o n ly4

supp ort s r ever sa l , bu tcom pel s i t . ” Mendo za v. U . S. A t t ’yG en . , 327 F . 3d 1283, 1287 ( 11th C i r . 2003) ( c ons i de r i ng w i thhol di ng of r e m ova l c l a i m ) . B e c aus e the B I A di d noti s s ue ade c i s i on i n thi s c a s e , w e r e vi e w the I J ’ s de c i s i on. A n a l i e n w ho a rr i ve s i n ori s pr e s e nti n the U ni t e d S t a t e s m a y appl y f or a s y lu m . See I N A § 208( a ) ( 1) , 8 U . S . C . § 1158( a ) ( 1) . T he S e c r e t a ry of the D e pa rtm e ntof

H om e l a nd S e c ur i ty orthe A tt orne y G e ne r a l ha s di s c r e t i on t o gr a nt as yl um i f the al i en m ee t s the IN A ’ s def i ni t i on of a “ re fugee. ” See I NA § 208( b) ( 1) , 8 U . S . C . § 1158( b) ( 1) , a s a m e nde d by § 101( a ) of the R E A L I D A c tof 2 0 0 5 , P u b . L . N o . 1 0 9 -1 3 (M ay 1 1 , 2 0 0 5 ), 1 1 9 S t at . 2 3 1 , 3 0 2 -0 3 . A “ refu g ee” i s any per son w ho i s out si de any c ou ntryof such pers on ’ s nat i on al i ty or, in th e c a s e o f

ap e r s o n h a v in g n o n a tio n a lity , is o u t s i d e a n y c o u n try in w hi c h su c h pe r s on l a s thabi tua l l y r e s i de d, a nd w ho i s unabl e or unw i l l i ng t o retu rn t o, a nd i s unabl e orunw i l l i ng t o a va i l hi m s e l f or hers el f o f th e p ro t ec t i on of, thatcoun trybecause of per se cut i on or a w e l l - f ounde d f

e a rof pe r s e c ut i on on a c c oun tof r a c e , r e l i gi on, nat i on al ity, m em bers hi p i n a part i cul arsoci al grou p, or po l i t i ca l opi ni on. 8 U . S . C . § 1101( a ) ( 42) ( A ) . T he a s y l um appl i c a ntc a rr i e s the bur de n of pr ovi ng s ta tu to ry “r e f

u g e e ” s ta tu s . A l

N aj j ar , 257 F . 3d a t1284. T o e s t abl i s h a s y l um el i g i b i l i ty, th e al i en m u st , w i th sp eci fi c an d cred i b l e ev i d en ce, est ab l i sh (1 ) p ast pers ec ut i on on ac coun tof a s t atut ori l y l i st ed fa ct or, or (2) a“ w el l -f ou nd ed fe ar ” th a tth e s t a tu t o r i l y l i s t e d f a c t o rw i l l c au s e s u c h f

u tu r e p e r s e c u t i o n . 8 C. F. R. § 2 0 8 .1 3 ( a ) , ( b ) ; A l

N aj j ar , 257 F . 3d a t1287. “ D e m ons tr a t i ng s uc h ac onne c t i on5

re qu i re s the al i en t o p re se ntspec i fi c, det ai l ed fa ct s s ho w i ng a goo d rea son t o fear thathe or she w i l l be s i ngle d out f orpe r s e c ut i on on a c c ountof s uc h a n opi ni on [ or other s t atut ory f

ac t or] . ” A l

N aj j ar , 2 5 7 F .3 da t 1 2 8 7 ( in te rn a l q u o ta tio n o m itte d ) . A n asyl u m ap p l i can tm ay n o tsh o w m erel y th ath e h as a p o l i t i cal o p i n i o n , b u tm u st s h o w th a t h e w a s p e r s e c u te d b e c au s e o f th a t o p in io n . I

N S v . E l i as - Zac ar i as , 502 U . S . 47 8, 48 3, 11 2 S . C t . 81 2, 81 6, 11 7 L . E d. 2d 38 (199 2). T o qua l i f y f orw i thhol di ng of

r e m ova l unde rthe I N A , a n a l i e n m us ts how tha ti ti s m or e l i ke l y tha n nottha ti f r e turne d t o hi s orhe rc ountry , the a l i e n’ s l i f e or f r e e d o m w o u ld b e th r e a te n e d o n a c c o u n t o f r a c e , r e lig io n , n a tio n a lity , m e m b e r s h ip i n ap a rt 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 N A § 2 4 1 ( b ) ( 3 ) ; 8 U . S. C. § 1 2 3 1 (b )(3 ). “ A n al i en b ears th e b u rd en o f d em o n strat i n g th ath e m o re-l i k el yth a n - n o t w o u ld b e p e r s e c u te d o rto rtu r e d u p o n h is r e tu rn to th e c o u n try in qu es t i on . ” Men do za , 327 F . 3d a t1287. F orboth a s y l um a nd w i thhol di ng of r e m ova l , a n a l i e n m us tde m ons tr a t e s om e ne xus be tw e e n the a l l e ge d pe r s e c ut i on or f e a ro f p e r s e c u tio n a n d o n e o f th e f iv e p r o te c te d g r o u n d s . See P er lera-Esc ob ar v. E x e c ut i v e O

f f i c e f orI m m i gr at i on , 894 F . 2d 1292, 1297 ( 11th C i r . 1990) ( “ E ve n a c l e a rpr obabi l i ty tha ta n a l i e n’ s l i f e i s thr e a t e ne d w i thouta ny i ndi c a t i on tha tthe b a s is o f th e th r e a t is r e la te d to as ta tu to r ilye n u m e r a te d g r o u n d is in s u f f ic ie n t to e s tab lis h e lig ib ilityf

o rr e lie f .” ) .6

A n a l i e n w ho ha s nots how n pa s tpe r s e c ut i on m a y s t i l l be e nt i t l e d t o a s y l um orw i thhol di ng of

r e m ova l i f

he c a n de m ons tr a t e af

utur e thr e a tt o hi s l i f

e or fr ee do m on a prot ec t ed grou nd i n h i s c ou ntry . 8 C . F . R . §§ 20 8. 13 (b)( 2), 2 0 8 .1 6 ( b ) ( 2 ) . T o e s tab lis h a“w e ll- f o u n d e d f e a r ,” “a n ap p lic a n t m u s t d e m o n s tr a te th a t h is o rh e rf

e a ro f p e r s e c u tio n is s u b

je c tiv e lyg e n u in e a n d o b je c tiv e ly re as on abl e. ” A l

N aj j ar , 2 5 7 F .3 d a t 1 2 8 9 ( d is c u s s in g w e ll- f o u n d e d f e a ra s it appl i e s t o a s y l um ) . A n appl i c a ntm a y e s t abl i s h aw e l l - f ounde d f e a rw i thout show i ng thathe w ou l d b e s i ng l ed ou tfor per se cut i on i f ( A ) T h e ap p l ic a n t e s tab lis h e s th a t th e r e is ap a tte rn o rp r a c tic e in h is o r h er co untry of

na t i ona l i ty or , i f

s t a t e l e s s , i n hi s orhe rc ountry of la s t h ab itu a l r e s id e n c e , o f p e r s e c u tio n o f

ag r o u p o f

p e r s o n s s im ila r ly si tu at ed to th e ap p l i can to n acco u n to f race, rel i g i o n , n at i o n al i ty, m e m be r s hi p i n apa rt i c ul a rs oc i a l gr oup, orpol i t i c a l opi ni on; a nd ( B ) T he appl i c a nte s t ab l i s he s hi s orhe row n i nc l us i on i n, a nd i de nt i f i c a t i on w i th, s uc h gr oup of pe r s ons s uc h tha thi s orhe rf e a rof pers ec ut i on up on re turn i s r ea sonabl e. 8 C .F .R . § 2 0 8 .1 3 ( b ) ( 2 ) ( iii) ( a s y lu m ) ; s e e a ls o 8 C .F .R . § 2 0 8 .1 6 ( b ) ( 2 ) ( i) , ( ii) ( w i thhol di ng of

r e m ova l ) . “ A n i m put e d pol i t i c a l opi ni on, w he the rc orr e c t l y or i ncorrec t l y a ttri bu t ed, m ayconst i tut e agrou nd for a‘ w el l -f ou nd ed fe ar ’ of po l i t i ca l pers ec ut i on w i thi n the m eani ng of the IN A . ” A l N aj j ar , 257 F . 3d a t1289 (quo t at i on om i tt ed). If

, ho w ever , “ an appl i canti s unabl e t o m ee tthe ‘ w el l -f ou nd ed fe ar ’ st andard for as yl um , he i s gener al l y pre cl ud ed fr om qu al i fy i ng for e i ther as yl um or w i thh ol di ng of [r em ov al ] . ” I d. a t 1 2 9 2 - 9 3 ( q u o ta tio n o m itte d ) .7

T o obt a i n w i thhol di ng of r e m ova l unde rthe C A T ’ s i m pl e m e nt i ng re gu l at i on s, an al i en m ustes t abl i sh thathe “ m ore l i kel y than n ot ” w i l l be t ortured up on hi s r eturn t o h i s hom e c ou ntry . 8 C . F . R . § 2 08 . 16 (c )( 2). “ T orture” i s def i ned as a n y a c t b y w h ic h s e v e r e p a in o rs u f f e r in g , w h e th e rp h y s ic a l o rm e n ta l, i s i nt e nt i ona l l y i nf

l i c t e d on a pe r s on f

or s uc h purpos e s as o bt a i ni ng f r om hi m orhe rorathi r d pe r s on i n fo rm at i o n orac onf e s s i on, pu ni shi ng hi m o r he r f or a n a c t he or s he or a thi r d pe r s on has c om m i tt e d ori s s us pe c t e d of ha vi n g co m m i tt e d, ori nt i m i da t i ng or c oe r c i ng hi m orhe rorathi r d pe r s on , o rf ora ny r e a s on ba s e d on di s c r i m i n at i on of

a ny ki nd, w he n s uc h pa i n ors uf f e r i ng i s i nf

l i c t e d by o ra t th e in s tig a tio n o f

o rw ith th e c o n s e n t o ra c q u ie s c e n c e o f ap u b lic o f f ic ia l o ro th e rp e r s o n a c tin g in a n o f f ic ia l c ap a c ity . I d. § 208. 18( a ) ( 1) . I f

the pe t i t i one r s “ f

a i l e d t o de m ons tr a t e a‘ w e l l - f ounde d f e a rof p ersecu t i o n ’ su ffi ci en tt o su p p o rtan asyl u m cl ai m , th ey l i k ew i se can n o test ab l i sh

‘ t ortur e ’ s uf

f i c i e ntt o w a rr a ntr e l i e f

unde rC A T ” be c aus e “ [ t ] he bur de n of pr oof f or an appl i cantse eki ng w i thh ol di ng of re m ov al un der the C on vent i on , l i ke thatfor an appl i c a nts e e ki ng w i thhol di ng of r e m ova l unde rthe s t a tut e , i s hi ghe rtha n the bu rden i m po se d o n an asy l um appl i cant . ” A l N aj j ar , 257 F . 3d a t1303.

“ N otal l exce pt i on al tre atm enti s per se cut i on . ” G onz alezv . R e no , 212 F . 3d 13 38 , 13 55 (11th C i r. 20 00 ). “ [W ] e have di sc usse d o ther c i rc ui t s’ ho l di ng s that ‘p e r s e c u tio n ’ is an ‘e x tr e m e c o n c e p t,’ r e q u ir in g m o r e th a n af e w is o la te d in c id e n ts o f v e rb a l h a r a s s m e n t o rin tim id a tio n , a n d th a t m e r e h a r a s s m e n t d o e s n o t a m o u n t to pers ec ut i on . ” Se

pulv e da v . U

. S. A t t ’ yG e n. , 401 F . 3d 1226, 1231 ( 11th C i r . 2005)8

( q u o ta tio n o m itte d ) . “[ D ]is c r im in a tio n o n th e b a s is o f r a c e o rr e lig io n , a s m o r a lly re prehensi bl e a s i tm aybe, do es no tordi nari l y a m ou ntt o ‘ pers ec ut i on . ’ ” Si ng h v. I NS , 13 4 F . 3d 96 2, 96 7 (9th C i r. 19 98 ) ( qu ot at i on om i tt ed). “ M er e genera l i ze d l a w l e s s ne s s a nd vi ol e nc e be tw e e n di ve r s e popul a t i ons , of the s ortw hi c h abounds in n u m e r o u s c o u n tr ie s a n d in f lic ts m is e ry u p o n m illio n s o f in n o c e n t p e o p le d a ily a r o u n d th e w o r ld , g e n e r a llyis n o t s u f f ic ie n t to p e rm it th e A tto rn e y G e n e r a l to gr a nta s y l um t o e ve ry one w ho w i s he s t o i m pr ove hi s orhe rl i f e by m ovi ng t o the U ni t ed S t at es . . . . ” I

d. “ [ A ] c t s of

c om m on c r i m i na l i ty orpe r s ona l hos t i l i ty . . . do no ti m pl i ca t e a sy l um el i gi bi l i ty. ” V a tu le vv . A s h c r o

ft , 3 5 4 F .3 d 1 2 0 7 , 1 2 0 9 ( 1 0 th C ir . 2 0 0 3 ) . F o r c e d r e c ru itm e n t b y ag u e r illao r g a n iz a tio n d o e s n o t c o n s titu te pe r s e c ut i on m e r e l y be c aus e the gue r i l l agr oup ha s apa rt i c ul a rpol i t i c a l opi ni on, a nd a n i ndi vi dua l w ho r e f us e s t o s i de w i th a ny pa rt i c ul a rpol i t i c a l gr oup orf a c t i on d o e s n o t e x p r e s s ap o litic a l o p in io n . See E l i as - Zac ar i as , 502 U . S . a t482- 83, 112 S . C t. a t 8 1 6 . In the i nst antca se , subst ant i al evi dence s up po rt s the IJ ’ s det erm i nat i on that the P et i t i on er s w er e notent i t l ed t o asy l um , w i thh ol di ng of re m ov al , or C A T re l i ef w ith r e s p e c t to e ith e rN ig e r iao rL e b a n o n . H a id a rr e la te d in c id e n ts in N ig e r iain w h ic h ( 1 ) h e a n d s o m e f r ie n d s w e r e r o b b e d b y th ie v e s ; ( 2 ) h is b r o th e rw a s s e v e r e ly beat en by po l i ce l oo ki ng for bri bes; (3) aL ebanes e “ bi g b usi ness m an” w as ki l l ed and h i s w i fe raped b y e m pl oyee s; (4) hi s babys i tt erpo ss i bl y abu se d h i s s on , l at erWe acknowle dg e that the Petitioners are cor rect in their ass ert i o n s th atthe IJmisstated 2 some of the f

acts. How ever , even a s correctly stated, the facts do not warrant re lief. 9 d e m a n d e d m o n e y , a n d b e g a n th r e a te n in g H a id a ra n d h is f a m ily ; a n d ( 5 ) h is b r o th e r - in - la w ’s w a te rf a c to ry w a s c lo s e d , a lle g e d lyb y e th n ic N ig e r ia n s . T h is 2 tr e a tm e n t d o e s n o t r is e to th e le v e l o f p e r s e c u tio n . T h e c o u n try c o n d itio n s in d ic a te that(1) e thn o-re l i gi ou s vi ol ence i s w i despre ad ac ross m any of N i geri a’ s e thn i ci t i es a nd r e gi ons ; ( 2) pol i c e r e gul a r l y m i s tr e a tc i vi l i a ns t o e xt ortm one y ; a nd ( 3) N i geri a’ s e cono m y i s i n d ec l i ne. A dd i t i on al l y, the P et i t i on er s have notes t abl i shed ane xus be tw e e n one of the f i ve pr ot e c t e d gr ounds a nd the tr e a tm e nt . A l though H ai dar t es t i fi ed thatthe event s w er e m ot i vat ed by ra ce or nat i on al i ty, no other e vi de nc e i n the r e c or d c om pe l s the c onc l us i on tha tthe N i ge r i a n gove rnm e ntor N i geri ans i n g ener al pers ec ut e L ebanes e or other non -N i geri ans on accountof ra ce or nat i on al i ty. T he evi dence s ug gest s thatN i geri a s uffe rs fr om w i despre ad confl i ct due t o i t s num e r ous i nt e rna l e thni c popul a t i ons . F urthe r , e vi de nc e r e l a t i ng t o the P e t i t one r s ’ de pa rtur e f

r om N i ge r i as ugge s t s , a s the I J f ound, tha tH a i da rw a s not f l e e i ng pe r s e c ut i on. T he r e f or e , the P e t i t i one r s f

a i l e d t o e s t abl i s h pa s tpe r s e c ut i on in N ig e r ia . T h e P e titio n e r s o f f e r e d n o e v id e n c e o f

p e r s e c u tio n in L e b a n o n . T h e r e f o r e , th e y f

a ile d to e s tab lis h p a s t p e r s e c u tio n in L e b a n o n a s w e ll. T he P et i t i on er s a l so di d n otdem on strat e aw el l -f ou nd ed fe arof future p ersecu t i o n . W h i l e ev i d en ce o f a p att ern an d p ract i ce o f p ersecu t i o n ag ai n st10

s i m i l a r l y s i tua t e d i ndi vi dua l s m a y be us e d t o e s t abl i s h aw e l l - f ounde d f e a rof f utur e pe r s e c ut i on, a s di s c us s e d above , the tr e a tm e nti n N i ge r i adoe s notr i s e t o the l e ve l of pe r s e c ut i on, a nd the P e t i t i one r s of f e rno e vi de nc e tha tc om pe l s the c onc l us i on tha tane xus e xi s t e d be tw e e n the tr e a tm e nta nd as t a tut ory f a c t or . T he f a c t th a t n u m e r o u s m e m b e r s o f H a id a r ’s f

a m ilyc o n tin u e to r e s id e in N ig e r ia w ith o u t in c id e n t s u g g e s ts th a t H a id a r ’s s u b je c tiv e f e a ro f f u tu r e p e r s e c u tio n in N i geri a i s notobj ec t i vel y r ea sonabl e. H ai dar’ s s ubj ec t i ve fe arof future pe r s e c ut i on i n L e ba non i s a l s o notobj e c t i ve l y r e a s onabl e . T he e vi de nc e on co u n try co n d i t i o n s i n L eb an o n d o es n o tco m p el a co n cl u si o n th at“ p o l i t i cal p art i es” o rte rr o r is t g r o u p s a c tiv e lyr e c ru it m e m b e r s in v o lu n ta r ilyin L e b a n o n . E v e n if it d id c o m p e l s u c h ac o n c lu s io n , r e c ru itm e n t is n o t p e r s e c u tio n a s s ta te d e a r lie r . F urther, the P et i t i on er s have notes t abl i shed a nexus betw ee n any future pers ec ut i on , or a patt ern and prac t i ce of pers ec ut i on agai nstsi m i l ar l y s i tuat ed in d iv id u a ls , a n d as ta tu to ry f a c to r . T h e P e titio n e r s c la im th a t th e g r o u p s p e r s e c u te L e ba ne s e w ho be l i e ve i n de m oc r a c y a nd w e s t e rn va l ue s . H ow e ve r , nothi ng i n the r e c or d c om pe l s the c onc l us i on tha tthe gr oups s oughtt o r e c rui tH a i da ron a c c ount of hi s be l i e f

s , a nd H a i da r ’ s m e r e r e f us a l t o j oi n by i t s e l f

i s nota n e xpr e s s i on of pol i t i c a l opi ni on. T hus , the e vi de nc e doe s notc om pe l the f i ndi ng tha tthe P e t i t i one r s ha ve aw e l l - f ounde d f e a rof f utur e pe r s e c ut i on i n e i the rN i ge r i aor11

L e ba non, a nd the y a r e i ne l i gi bl e f orw i thhol di ng of

r e m ova l , a s the y di d not es t abl i sh el i gi bi l i ty f

or as yl um , w hi ch carr i es a l ow erbu rden of proo f. F i na l l y , the P e t i t i one r s ’ c l a i m f orC A T r e l i e f

f a i l s be c aus e ( 1) the y di d not de m ons tr a t e tha tthe ha rm the y s uf f e r e d orw i l l s uf

f e rw a s i nf

l i c t e d a tthe i nst i gat i on of, or w i th the consentor ac qu i es ce nce of, a pub l i c off i ci al , and (2) they f a i l e d t o d e mo n s tr a t e aw e l l - f o u n d e d f e a rs u f f i c i e n tt o s u p p o rtac l a i m o f a s y l u m, and C A T re l i ef

re qu i re s ahi gh erbu rden of proo f. T hu s, subst ant i al evi dence supp ort s the IJ ’ s det erm i nat i on thatthe P et i t i on er s are no tent i t l ed t o rel i ef ; a c c or di ngl y , w e de ny the pe t i t i on. P E T I T I ON DE NI E D.