FI LED U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT January 30, 2006 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- 10622 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ B I A N o. A 79- 443- 724 G E R M A N A N D R E S M O R A L E S R O D R I G U E Z , P e titio n e r , 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

a n O r de rof

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

_________________________ ( Jan u ar y 30, 2006) B efo re A N D E R S O N , B IR C H an d B L A C K , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M:2

C o l o m b i an n at i v e an d ci t i zen G erm an A n d res M o ral es R o d ri g u ez p et i t i o n s f orr e vi e w of

the B oa r d of

I m m i gr a t i on A ppe a l s ’ ( B I A ’ s ) a f f i rm a t i on of

the i m m i gr a t i on j udge ’ s ( I J ’ s ) or de rof r e m ova l a nd de ni a l of

a s y l um a nd 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 tyA c t( I N A ) a nd the 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 ). M oral es R od ri gu ez as se rt s nei ther the IJ , no r the G ov ernm ent , qu es t i on ed hi s c r e di bi l i tya thi s a s y l um he a r i ng. H e f urthe ra s s e rt s he i s e l i gi bl e f ora s y l um a n d w ith h o ld in g o f

r e m o v a l b e c au s e h e w a s p e r s e c u te d a s ar e s u lt o f h is m em bers hi p i n the soci al grou p o f busi ness ow ners and h i s i m pu t ed po l i t i ca l o p i n i o n . M o ral es R o d ri g u ez fu rth er co n t en d s h e q u al i fi es fo r C A T rel i ef b ecau se gue r i l l am ove m e nt s i n C ol om bi a , s uc h a s the R e vol ut i ona ryA rm e d F or c e s of C ol om bi a ( F A R C ), const i tut e the go vernm entthere and b ec ause he dem on stra t ed f e a runde rC A T . W e de nyM or a l e s R odr i gue z ’ s pe t i t i on. I . DI S C US S I ON A . A s y lum and W

i thholdi ng of

R e m ov al A s an i ni t i al m att er , w e “ ‘ ar e obl i gat ed t o i nq ui re i nt o subj ec t -m att er j uri sdi ct i on sua s po nt e w henever i tm aybe l ac ki ng . ’ ” Cadet v. B ul ger , 377 F . 3d 1173, 1179 ( 11th C i r . 2004) ( c i t a t i on om i tt e d) . W e c a n r e vi e w af i na l or de rof r e m o v a l o n lyif

“th e a lie n h a s e x h au s te d a ll a d m in is tr a tiv e r e m e d ie s a v a ilab le to the al i en as of ri gh t. . . . ” 8 U . S . C . § 1 25 2(d)(1). A cc ordi ng l y, w e l ac k3

ju r is d ic tio n to c o n s id e rc la im s n o t r a is e d b e f o r e th e B I A . See Ferna ndez -B erna l v. A t torne yG e n. of the U . S. , 2 5 7 F .3 d 1 3 0 4 , 1 3 1 7 n .1 3 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 1 ) . 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 ytha tde c i s i on, “ e xc e ptt o the ext entthati texpres sl y a do pt s the IJ ’ s opi ni on . ” A l N a jja rv . A s h c r o

ft , 257 F . 3d 1262, 1284 ( 11th C i r . 2001) . H e r e , the B I A di d note xpr e s s l ya doptthe de c i s i on of the IJ . T o the ext entthe B IA ’ s dec i si on w as base d o n a l egal det erm i nat i on , re vi ew is d e n o v o . Mo h a m m e d v . A s h c r o

ft , 2 6 1 F .3 d1 2 4 4 , 1 2 4 7

– 4 8 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 1 ) . T h e B I A ’s f

a c tu a l d e te rm in a tio n s , h o w e v e r , a r e r e v ie w e d u n d e rth e “h ig h ly de f e r e nt i a l s ubs t a nt i a l e vi de nc e t e s t , ” w hi c h r e qui r e s us t o “ vi e w the r e c or d i n the lig h t m o s t f

a v o r ab le to th e [ B I A ]’s d e c is io n a n d d r a w a ll r e a s o n ab le in f e r e n c e s in fa vo r of thatdeci si on . ” A de fe m i v . A s h c r o

ft , 38 6 F . 3d 10 22 , 10 26 –2 7 (11 th C i r. 2 0 0 4 ) ( e n b a n c ) , c e r t. deni ed , 1 2 5 S . C t. 2 2 4 5 (2 0 0 5 ). W e “m u st af firm th e B IA ’s de c i s i on i f

i ti s ‘ s upport e d byr e a s onabl e , s ubs t a nt i a l , a nd pr oba t i ve e vi de nc e on the re cord consi dere d as aw ho l e. ’ ” A l N aj j ar , 257 F . 3d a t1284 ( 11th C i r . 2001) ( c i t a t i on om i tt e d) . W i th r e s pe c tt o c orr obor a t i ng e vi de nc e , the R E A L I D A c tof 20 05 prov i des, “ [n] o cou rtshal l re vers e adet erm i nat i on m ade by atri erof fa ct w i th r e s pe c tt o the a va i l abi l i tyof c orr obor a t i ng e vi de nc e . . . unl e s s the c ourtf i nds

. . . ar e a s onabl e tr i e rof f a c ti s c om pe l l e d t o c onc l ude tha ts uc h c orr obor a t i ng e vi de nc e i s una va i l abl e . ” R E A L I D A c tof 2005 § 101( e ) , P ub. L . N o. 109- 13, 119 S ta t. 2 3 1 , 3 0 5 ( 2 0 0 5 ) .4

I n or de rt o r e vi e w ac r e di bi l i tyde t e rm i na t i on, i tm us tf i r s tbe e s t abl i s he d the I Jm a d e a n a d v e r s e c r e d ib ilityf in d in g . See Y

ang v . U . S. A t torne

yG e n. , 418 F . 3d 1198, 1201 ( 11th C i r . 2005) . “ I J ’ s m us tm a ke ‘ c l e a n de t e rm i na t i ons of cr edi bi l i ty. ’ ” I

d. ( c i t a t i on om i tt e d) . F urthe rm or e , i n Y ang , w e h eld th e I J’s r e f e r e nc e t o pe t i t i one r ’ s c l a i m a s a“ r i di c ul ous f abr i c a t i on” a nd c om m e nt p et i t i o n er’ s t est i m o n y w as “ ex trem el y i n co n si st en tan d m ad e ab so l u t el y n o sen se w h a ts o e v e r ” w a s n o t a n e x p lic it a d v e r s e c r e d ib ilityf in d in g . I d. ( a l t e r a t i on o m itte d ) . 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 yappl yf or a s y l um . 8 U . S . C . § 1158( a ) ( 1) . T he S e c r e t a ryof H om e l a nd S e c ur i tya nd the A tt o rn ey G en er al h av e th e d iscr etio n to g ra n t asy lu m if th e a li en m ee ts th e I N A ’s d efi n i t i o n o f a “ refu g ee. ” 8 U . S . C . § 1 1 5 8 (b )(1 )(A ). A “ refu g ee” i s d efi n ed as: a n yp e r s o n w h o is o u ts id e a n yc o u n tryo f s u c h p e r s o n ’s n a tio n a lity. . . a nd w ho i s unabl e orunw i l l i ng t o r e turn 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

orhe r s e l f

of the pr ot e c t i on of

, tha tc ountrybe c aus e of pers ec ut i on or a w el l -f

ou nd ed fe arof pers ec ut i on on ac coun tof ra ce , r e l i gi on, na t i ona l 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, or p o litic a l o p in io n . . . . 8 U . S . C . § 1101( a ) ( 42) ( A ) . W e ha ve not e d tha t , t o e s t abl i s h ac l a i m of pe r s e c ut i on o n acco u n to f th e p ro t ect ed g ro u n d o f p o l i t i cal o p i n i o n , th e p et i t i o n er “ m u st e s t abl i s h tha tthe [ pe r s e c ut or s ] pe r s e c ut e d he rorw i l l s e e k t o pe r s e c ut e he ri n the future b eca u se of

he ra c tua l ori m put e d pol i t i c a l opi ni on. I ti s note nough t o s how5

th a t s h e w a s o rw ill b e p e r s e c u te d o rto rtu r e d d u e to h e rr e f u s a l to c o o p e r a te w ith the [pers ec ut ors] . ” Sanc hezv . U . S. A t torne

yG e n. , 39 2 F . 3d 43 4, 43 8 (11 th C i r. 2 0 0 4 ) ( in te rn a l c ita tio n o m itte d ) . T he as yl um appl i cantcarr i es the bu rden of prov i ng st atut ory “ re fugee” s ta tu s . 8 C .F .R . § 2 0 8 .1 3 ( a ) . T o e s tab lis h a s y lu m e lig ib ility , th e a lie n m u s t, w ith spec i fi c and cr edi bl e e vi dence, es t abl i sh (1) pas tpers ec ut i on on ac coun tof a s t a tut or i l yl i s t e d f

a c t or , or( 2) a“ w e l l - f

ounde d f e a r ” tha tthe s t a tut or i l yl i s t e d f a c t or w i l l cause f

uture pers ec ut i on . 8 C . F . R . § 2 08 . 13 (b)( 1), (2). T o s h o w h e h a s aw e llfoun ded fearof future pers ec ut i on , an al i en m ustdem on stra t e ( 1) he fe ar s p e r s e c u tio n b a s e d ap r o te c te d g r o u n d , ( 2 ) th e r e is ar e a s o n ab le p o s s ib ilityh e w ill s uf f e rpe r s e c ut i on i f

r e m ove d t o hi s na t i ve c ountry , a nd ( 3) he i s unabl e or u n w illin g to r e tu rn to th a t c o u n tryb e c au s e o f s u c h f e a r . 8 C .F .R . § 2 0 8 .1 3 ( b ) ( 2 ) . A d d itio n a lly , “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 . . . f e a ro f p e r s e c u tio n is subj ec t i vel y genui ne and o bj ec t i vel y r ea sonabl e. ” A l N aj j ar , 2 5 7 F .3 d a t 1 2 8 9 . A n I Jm a yg r a n t w ith h o ld in g o f r e m o v a l if

th e I Jd e c id e s , th a t if

r e tu rn e d to hi s c ou ntry , the al i en’ s l i fe or fr ee do m w ou l d b e threa t ened on ac coun tof ra ce , r e lig io n , n a tio n a lity , m e m b e r s h ip in ap a rtic u la rs o c ia l g r o u p , o rp o litic a l o p in io n . 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 3 1 ( b ) ( 3 ) . T h e b u r d e n o f p r o o f is o n th e a lie n to s h o w h is e lig ib ility f o rw ith h o ld in g o f

r e m o v a l. 8 C .F .R . § 2 0 8 .1 6 ( b ) . A n a lie n is e n title d to w i thh ol di ng of re m ov al i f he c an es t abl i sh, w i th speci fi c and cr edi bl e e vi dence:6

( 1) apa s tthr e a tt o l i f

e orf r e e dom thr ough pr oof

of pa s tpe r s e c ut i on on a c c ountof a prot ec t ed grou nd , or (2) afuture threa tt o l i fe or fr ee do m i f i t“ i s m ore l i kel y than no t ” the prot ec t ed grou nd w i l l cause f uture pers ec ut i on . 8 C . F . R . § 2 08 . 16 (b)( 1), (2). B ec ause thi s s t andard i s m ore s tri ng entthan the “ w el l -f ou nd ed fe ar ” s t andard f ora s y l um , i f

a n appl i c a nti s unabl e t o m e e tthe “ w e l l - f ounde d f e a r ” s t a nda r d f

or a s y l um , he i s ge ne r a l l ypr e c l ude d f r om qua l i f

y i ng f ore i the ra s y l um orw i thhol di ng o f r e m o v a l. A l

N aj j ar , 257 F . 3d a t1292–93. I n th is c a s e , M o r a le s R o d r ig u e z d id n o t p r e s e n t to th e I Jo rth e B I A h is c la im for a sy l um on ac coun tof hi s m em bers hi p i n a part i cul arsoci al grou p. T here fore , he ha s f a i l e d t o e xhaus thi s a dm i ni s tr a t i ve r e m e di e s w i th r e ga r d t o thi s c l a i m , a nd w e la c kju r is d ic tio n to c o n s id e rit. See Fe rnandez - B e rnal , 2 5 7 F .3 d a t 1 3 1 7 n .1 3 . A s are sul t , w e w i l l on l y c on si der M oral es R od ri gu ez ’ s c l ai m he w as pers ec ut ed and h as a w el l -f

ou nd ed fe arof pers ec ut i on i n C ol om bi a bas ed on hi s pol i t i ca l opi ni on. M or a l e s R odr i gue z di d notpr e s e nta nyc orr obor a t i ng e vi de nc e t o the I J , a nd appl y i ng the de f

e r e nt i a l s t a nda r d of

r e vi e w f r om the R E A L I D A c t , w e a r e not com pel l ed t o con cl ud e thatany c orrobo ra t i ng evi dence i n sup po rtof M oral es R o d r ig u e z ’s c la im w a s u n a v a ilab le a t th e tim e o f h is h e a r in g . See R E A L I D A c tof 20 05 , P ub . L . N o. 10 9-13 , 11 9 S t at . at30 5. In addi t i on , nei ther the IJno r the B IA m a de a n e xpl i c i tc r e di bi l i tyf i ndi ng aboutM or a l e s R odr i gue z a s de s c r i be d i n Y ang .7

T h e r e f o r e , w e d o n o t r e a c h th e is s u e o f w h e th e rth e I Jo rB I A e rr e d in a d v e r s e ly d e te rm in in g M o r a le s R o d r ig u e z ’s c r e d ib ility . See Y ang , 4 1 8 F .3 d a t 1 2 0 1 . F urtherm ore, subst ant i al evi dence s up po rt s the det erm i nat i on thatM oral es R od ri gu ez fa i l ed t o est abl i sh pastpers ec ut i on or a w el l -f ou nd ed fe arof future p e r s e c u t i o n b a s e d o n h i s p o l i t i c a l o p i n i o n . Du r i n g h i s c r e d i b l e f e a ri n t e rv i e w, M or a l e s R odr i gue z s t a t e d the F A R C thr e a t e ne d t o ki l l hi m i f he di d notpa ythe a m ountor de r e d. T he F A R C di d nota s k hi m f ora ny thi ng othe rtha n m one y , nor di d the ye ve rdi s c us s pol i t i c s orw he the rhe s upport e d the m . I n hi s a s y l um appl i c a t i on, M or a l e s R odr i gue z s t a t e d the F A R C c ont a c t e d hi m t o pa ya“ w a rt a x” u s e d t o s u p p o rtth e FA RC’ s c au s e s a n d ab o u ttw o w e e k s l a t e r , th e FA RC i nv es t i gat ed hi m and con cl ud ed he w as a m em ber of the L i bera l P arty. L i kew i se , du ri ng hi s a sy l um hear i ng , M oral es R od ri gu ez t es t i fi ed the F A R C tri ed t o ext ort m on eyfr om hi m , and o nl y a ft erhe fa i l ed t o p aythem the ful l am ou ntdem anded di d they dec l ar e hi m a “ m i l i t ary obj ec t i ve” w ho w ou l d b e ki l l ed. T here fore , subst ant i al evi dence s up po rt s the IJ ’ s c on cl usi on M oral es R od ri gu ez had n otm et hi s bur de n of

pr ovi ng e l i gi bi l i tyf

ora s y l um be c aus e he f

a i l e d t o s how tha the s uf f e r e d pe r s e c ut i on, orha d aw e l l - f ounde d f e a rof f utur e pe r s e c ut i on, on a c c ount o f h is p o litic a l o p in io n . See San chez , 392 F . 3d a t438 ( e xpl a i ni ng a l though the r e c o r d c o n ta in e d e v id e n c e th e F A R C h a r a s s e d ap e titio n e rd u e to h e rr e f u s a l to c oope r a t e w i th the m , s uc h e vi de nc e di d notqua l i f ythe pe t i t i one rf

orw i thhol di ng8

of re m ov al un der the IN A because s he fa i l ed t o sho w any nexus betw ee n h er p o litic a l o p in io n a n d th e F A R C ’s p e r s e c u tio n ) . A c c o r d in g ly , M o r a le s R o d r ig u e z h a s f a ile d to m e e t h is b u r d e n o f p r o o f w ith r e s pe c tt o hi s a s y l um c l a i m . B e c aus e he ha s f a i l e d t o de m ons tr a t e he i s e l i gi bl e f or a s y l um , M or a l e s R odr i gue z ne c e s s a r i l yha s f a i l e d t o m e e tthe hi ghe rbur de n of p r o o f r e q u ir e d f

o rw ith h o ld in g o f

r e m o v a l. Se e A l

N aj j ar , 2 5 7 F .3 d a t 1 2 9 2

– 9 3 . T he r e f or e , w e de nyM or a l e s R odr i gue z ’ s pe t i t i on a s t o hi s a s y l um a nd w i thhol di ng o f rem o v al cl ai m s. B . C A T R el i ef I n o r d e rto o b ta in r e lie f

u n d e rth e C A T , th e b u r d e n is o n th e ap p lic a n t to e s tab lis h it is “m o r e lik e lyth a n n o t” h e w ill b e to rtu r e d in th e c o u n tryo f r e m o v a l. 8 C . F . R . § 2 0 8 . 1 6 (c)(2 ). T o rtu re i s d efi n ed as a n ya c t b yw 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 yi nf

l i c t e d on ape r s on f

ors uc h purpos e s a s obt a i ni ng f r om hi m orhe rorathi r d pe r s on i nf orm a t i on orac onf

e s s i on, pu ni shi ng hi m or her f

or an acthe or she or a thi rd pers on has c om m i tt e d ori s s us pe c t e d of ha vi ng c om 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, orf ora nyr e a s on ba s e d on di s c r i m i na t i on of

a nyki 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 . 8 C . F . R . § 208. 18( a ) ( 1) . I n Sa nchez , w e h e ld in o r d e r“[ t]o d e m o n s tr a te e lig ib ility f orC A T pr ot e c t i on, a n appl i c a ntm us ts how tha ti ti s m or e l i ke l ytha n nottha ts he w i l l be t ortured i n h erho m e c ou ntryatthe hand s of hergo vernm entor thather9

gove rnm e ntw i l l a c qui e s c e i n the t ortur e , ” a nd r e j e c t e d the appl i c a nt ’ s appl i c a t i on because s he pres ent ed no evi dence on ei ther poi nt . 39 2 F . 3d at43 8. C A T re l i ef c a rr ie s ah ig h e rle g a l s ta n d a r d th a n a s y lu m , a n d th u s is v e ryd if f ic u lt to m e e t. Al N aj j ar , 2 5 7 F .3 da t 1 3 0 3 . T he r e i s nothi ng i n the r e c or d t o s ugge s t , i nc l udi ng a nya l l e ga t i ons by M or a l e s R odr i gue z , tha the w a s pr e vi ous l yt ortur e d bythe F A R C w i th the c ons e nt ora c qui e s c e nc e of

the C ol om bi a n gove rnm e nt . L i ke w i s e , the r e i s nothi ng i n the r e c o r d to s u g g e s t h e “m o r e lik e lyth a n n o t” w o u ld b e to rtu r e d b yth e F A R C w ith th e c o n s e n t o ra c q u ie s c e n c e o f th e C o lo m b ia n g o v e rn m e n t u p o n h is r e tu rn to C ol om bi a . C ons e que nt l y , be c aus e M or a l e s R odr i gue z di d notpr e s e nta ny e vi de nc e tha ta nya l l e ge d ha rm w a s “ i nf l i c t e d a tthe i ns t i ga t i on of orw i th the c ons e ntora c qui e s c e nc e of apubl i c of

f i c i a l , ” he ha s note s t abl i s he d e l i gi bi l i tyf or C A T r e lie f

. See Sa nchez , 3 9 2 F .3 d a t 4 3 8 .

I I . C ON C L US I ON S u b s ta n tia l e v id e n c e s u p p o rts th e B I A ’s d e c is io n th a t M o r a le s R o d r ig u e z is no tent 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 e deny M oral es R o d r ig u e z ’s p e titio n f

o rr e v ie w . P E T I T I ON DE NI E D.