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 10-3-2005 

# D ol a b 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 . 04-4031

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 a nova . 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 l l a nova 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 a n author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i l l a nova 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 l l a nova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion
" D o l a b v . Atty Ge n U SA" (2005). 2005 D e cisio n s . P ape r 457. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005/457NOT 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- 4031

__________ ZHANNA DOLAB, P eti ti o n er,
vs. A TTO RN EY G EN ER A L O F TH E U N I TED STA TES, R e sp o n d e n t.

__________ O n Pet i t i on forR evi ew of an O r derof R emoval f ro m th e B o a rd o f

Im m ig ra tio n A p p e a ls U . S. D epart m entof J us t i ce E xecut i ve O ffi ce f

orI m m i gr at i on R evi ew ( B I A N o. A 78- 308- 433)

__________ Subm i t t ed U nderT hi r d C i r cui tL . A
. R . 34. 1( a)

Sept ember27, 2005

___________ B efor e: R E N D E L L , FU E N T E S, and G A R T H , C i r cui tJ udges

( O pi ni on Fi l ed: O ct ober3, 2005)

__________ OP I NI ON

__________As of March 2003, “theI NS cea sed to existas an independent ag ency within the United 1 States Depa

rtment of Just ice [‘DOJ’] and its functions were tra nsfer red to the newly

formed United States Depa

rtment of Homela

nd Security .” Le ia v. A sh c ro ft , 393 F.3d 427, 430 n.4 ( 3d Cir. 2005). The B IA re mains within the DOJ
. Kna pik v . A sh c ro ft , 384 F.3d 84, 86 n.2 ( 3d Cir. 20 04 ) ( c iti ngHo me land

Se c urity Ac t of 20 02 , Pu b. L . N o. 10 7- 29 6, §§ 44 1, 45 1, 47 1, 11 6 St at. 2135 (2002))
. -2- G ar t h, C i r cui tJ udge: Z h an n a D o lab (“ M s. D o lab” ), a n ati v e a n d cit izen o f B elaru s, p eti ti o n s this C o u rt t o r evi ew an or derof the B oar d of I m m i gr at i on A ppeal s ( “B I A ”) s um m ar i l yaff i r m i ng t he deni al of herappl i cat i on foras y l um , w i t hhol di ng of r emoval , and pr ot ect i on undert he C o n v en ti o n A g ains t T o rtu re (“C A T ”). T h e Im m igrati o n Ju d g e (“ IJ”) d en ied M s. D o lab’s appl i cat i on s ol el ybeca us e he de t erm i ned thats he w as notcr edi bl e. T he I J m ade s ever al fac tual fi ndi ngs on w hi ch he ba s ed thi s det erm i nat i on. Som e of thes e fi ndi ngs have no bas i s i n t he r ecor d, w hi l e other s do fi nd s uppor ti n t he r ecor d. T hough t hi s i s a cl os e ca s e,
w e f ind that there is sub stan ti al ev iden ti arysu p p o rtfo r th e IJ’s d en ial o f M s. D o lab’s
a p p l i c a t i o n . We wi l l d e n yt h e P e t i t i o n f o rRe v i e w. BA CKGROUND I. O n Sept ember16, 2001 M s . D ol ab ent er ed the U ni t ed St at es unl aw ful l yfr om M exi co bycr os s i ng t he R i o G r ande Ri veri nt o T exas . T he I m m i gr at i on and Na tu r a l i z a t i o n S e r v i c e ( “ I NS” ) f o u n d M s . Do l a b r e mo v a b l e p u r s u a n tt o 8 U. S
. C. 1 §1182( a) ( 6) ( A ) ( i ) beca us e s he w as an al i en pr es enti n t he U ni t ed St at es w i t houtbei ng admi t t ed orpar ol ed, and w ho arr i ved i n t he U ni t ed St at es ata t i m e and pl ace ot hert hanThe g overnment repre sents that the “IJcontinued the he aringon the merits for over one 2 year to enable thePetitioner to file additional supporting evidence .” -3- th a t d e sig n a ted b yth e A tto rn e yG e n e ra l. V e n u e w a s tra n sf e rre d f ro m E l P a so to Phi l adel phi a. A tan i ni t i al hear i ng on D ece m ber13, 2001, M s . D ol ab conc eded r emovabi l i t y , but
s t at ed heri nt ent i on t o appl yforas y l um , w i t hhol di ng of r emoval and pr ot ect i on undert he C A T , c la im in g s h e h a d b e e n p e rs e c u te d in B e la ru s o n th e b a s is o f h e r p o litic a l o p in io n . Soon t her eaf

t er , s he s ubm i t t ed herappl i cat i on. O n M ay9, 2002, t he I J cont i nued the hear i ng on t he mer i t s of thatappl i cat i on fors l i ght l ym or e than a y ear . M s . D ol ab i ndi cat ed thats he w oul d be s ubm i t t i ng evi dence t o s uppor therappl i cat i on overt he
co u rse o f th at y ea r. (10 8 ). 2 II. A ta mer i t s hear i ng on M ay19, 2003 and i n t he af fi davi ts he s ubm i t t ed w i t h her appl i cat i on, M s . D ol ab t es t i fi ed t o t he fol l ow i ng: She w as a mem berof the pr o- democr acyU ni t ed C i vi l Par t y( “U C P”) , w hi ch op po ses the au t ho ri t ari an regi m e of B el arus’ s Presi den tA l exan der L uk ashenk o. M s. D ol ab w as i ns pi r ed t o j oi n t he part yi n 2000 w hen s he r etur ned t o B el arus aft ers pendi ng tw o y e a rs in th e U n ited S tate s. S h e sta ted in h e r a f f id a v it: H avi ng vi s i t ed the U S fort he fi r s tt i m e myl i fe vi ew s have change d[. ] I r eal i zed I change d and s t ar t ed t o l ook att hi ngs di ffe r ent l y . E ven bef

or e thi s t r i p I r eal i zed thatr egi m e of our Pr es i dentL ukas henko w as unfai rand thatt her e w as no d e m o c ra c yin o u r c o u n try , an d th a t p e o p le s u f f e r in d ig n ity-4- t h r o u g h o u tt h e i rl i v e s . Af t e ra v i s i tt o t h e Un i t e d S t a t e s my cou ntryof B el arus and li fe un der r egim e of L uk ashenk o just se e m e d to m e a h o rrif

y in g p lac e to liv e . I re a lize d th is w a s a ll t he fa ul tof ourgovernm entand i t s pol i cy. . . I coul d notput up w i t h s uch a gove r nm entand dec i ded I had t o s t ruggl e for d e m o c ra c yto g e th e r w ith th e p a rt yo f “ U C P .” (26 8 ). M s . D ol ab’ s pr i m aryr ol e i n t he partyw as t o cr eat e and di s t r i but e part yl eaf l et s and fl y er s . O n s ever al occa s i ons s he s uffe r ed abus e att he hands of s t at e age nt s due t o her
m e m b e rs h ip in a n d a c tiv itie s o n b e h a lf o f th e U C P . O n O c to b e r 8 , 2 0 0 0 , sh e a tten d e d a ra llyo p p o sin g c e rta in g o v e rn m e n t o f f icia ls in herci t y , G r odno. Pol i ce a r r es t ed and be atm anypeopl e dur i ng t he r al l y , butM s . D ol ab
w as notamong t hem. Soon t her eaf t er , how ever , herm ot herw as appr oache d by uni dent i fi ed peopl e w ho as ked ques t i ons aboutM s . D ol ab. M s . D ol ab dr ew fr om t hi s t he concl us i on t hats he w as undergovernm ents ur vei l l ance . I n t he mi ddl e of February , 2001, on herw ayhom e fr om an eve ni ng s pentpas s i ng outU C P l eaf

l et s on a s uburban tr ai n, M s . D ol ab w as appr oache d bypol i ce w ho as ked her t o fo l l ow t hem t o p oli ce hea dq uart ers . A thead qu art ers , t he p oli ce refused t o all ow M s. D ol ab t o cal l hom e t o l etherfami l yknow s he w as al r i ght
. T heyas ked herw hethers he
w as a mem berof the U C P and w hats he di d fort he part y . T heyal s o as ked herfor i n f o r ma t i o n a b o u th e rf

r i e n d s wi t h i n t h e p a r t y . M s . Do l a b t o l d t h e p o l i c e a b o u th e ro wn i nvol vementi n t he U C P, butr efus ed t o “i nfor m on [her ] fr i ends
. ” ( 122)
. I n r es pons e, t he-5-

pol i ce t ol d hers he w as nai ve, y el l ed ather , and thr eat ened he r . T heyt hen for ci bl ypour ed vodka dow n hert hr oat , gave he ra bl ood- al cohol t es tt o det erm i ne thats he w as i ntoxi cat ed, and t hen fi ned her for drunk and dis orderl ycon du cti n a p ub l i c place. M s. D ol ab pai d t he fi ne, and w as al l ow ed t o l eave aft erabout8 hour s , butthe pol i ce t ol d her t o cea s e heract i vi t i es w i t h t he U C P, orel s e thatw oul d notbe the l as tm eet i ng betw een h e r a n d th e m . T h e p o lice late r to ld M s. D o lab ’s e m p lo y e r th a t sh e h a d b e e n f in e d f o r p u b lic drunk enn ess. S he ex plai ned t o h er em ploy er w hat had actual l yhap pen ed – t hat the arr est had bee n pol i t i cal l ym ot i vat ed. A s a pr i vat e ent erpr i s e empl oy eral r eadydi s favor ed by t he ant i
- pr i vat i zat i on governm ent , how ever , he w as r el uct antt o at t r actat t ent i on, and thus f ir e d M s . D o la b a n yw a y . A ft ert hi s i nci dent , M s . D ol ab t ook a br i ef tr i p t o Pol and, w hi ch s he t es t i fi ed w as 1 7 k il o m eters f

rom h er h o m e, t o b u yfo o d an d m ed ici n e. (15 7 -58 ). O n M a rc h 2 5 , 2 0 0 1 , M s. D o lab a tten d e d a d e m o n stra tio n in a c e n tra l sq u a re in M i ns k. M i l i t arys ol di er s des cende d on t he s quar e and be atand arr es t ed s ever al par t i ci pant s , i ncl udi ng M s . D ol ab. T he s ol di er s t ook M s . D ol ab i nt o cus t odyand then tur ned herovert o pol i ce of fi cer s fr om G r odno. T he pol i ce i s ol at ed M s . D ol ab for24 hour s and then or der ed hert o pl ead gui l t yt o t hei racc us at i ons . M s . D ol ab di d notknow
w hatt hos e ac cus at i ons w er e and a ccor di ngl yr efus ed t o pl ead gui l t y . T he pol i ce then in ter ro g a ted h e r a n d c a lled h e r “ b a d n a m e s.” T h e yk ick e d h e r a n d b e a t h e r w ith b a to n s in-6-

hers t om ach unt i l herut erus began t o bl eed. T hi s w as es peci al l ypai nful forM s . D ol ab beca us e s he s uffe r s fr om fi br om a. R eal i zi ng how badl ys he w as hurt , t he pol i ce de l i ver ed h e r t o th e h o s p ita l, w h e re s h e s ta y e d f o r t h re e d a y s . A ft ers he w as r el eas ed fr om t he hos pi t al , s he w entt o M os cow t o s t ayw i t h heraunt
an d rec o v er. Fo ll o w ing a p eriod o f re cu p era ti o n , h o w ev er, M s. D o lab n ee d ed to ea rn
som e m on ey . A tt he en d o f A pri l she t hu s foun d a job as a “bu s st ew ardess ” i n B el arus, and r etur ned t o l i ve and w or k t her e. O n A pr i l 30, 2001, i n hercapa ci t yas a bus s t ew ar des s , M s . D ol ab es cor t ed a bus l oad of t our i s t s t o t he C zec h R epubl i c. She r etur ned t o B el arus on M ay17, 2001. O n J ul y3, 2001, M s . D ol ab att ended a cel ebr at i on i n G r odno comm emora t i ng B el arus ’ s l i ber at i on fr om fas ci s m dur i ng t he Second W or l d W ar . A s s he w as r etur ni ng hom e l at e thatni ght , s he hea r d foot s t eps behi nd her
. Fr i ght ened, s he r an i nt o t he l obbyof herbui l di ng and pus hed the but t on fort he el evat or . T he el evat ordi d notcome i n t i m e; M s. D o lab’s p u rsue rs ca u g h t up w ith h er a n d h ith er o v er the h ea d w ith a b o tt le. B ef o re M s . D ol ab l os tcons ci ous nes s , s he r ecogni zed the men w ho had hi theras t he pol i ce w ho had i nterrogat ed an d b eat en h er on M arch 25 , 20 01
. W hen she regai ned con sci ou sness,
s h e re a liz e d s h e h a d b e e n ra p e d
. A ft ert hi s i nci dent , M s . D ol ab “c oul d notgetback t o [her ] s el f fora l ong t i m e. ” ( 134)
. She began t o r ece i ve phone c al l s i n w hi ch the ca l l ert hr eat ened thati f s he compl ai ned t o any one aboutw hathad happe ned, the pol i ce w oul d putheri n pr i s on orIvanov is currently in California. (142)
. 3 -7- m ake h er “di sappea r” as otherpro-dem ocracyact i vis t s i n B el arus had. T err i fi ed, M s. D o la b f le d w ith h e r f

ri e n d T im o f

e yIv a n o v (“ Iv a n o v ” ) to M e x ic o o n S e p te m b e r 5 , 2 0 0 1
. 3 B e f o re sh e lef

t, ho w e v e r, M s. D o lab to o k se v e ra l b rie f trip s to P o lan d a n d a trip to M o sc o w . S o m e o f

th e se trip s a p p a re n tlyh a d so m e c o n n e c tio n w ith M s. D o lab ’s a ttem p ts to s e c u re a tic k e t to M e x ic o . (1 6 1 -6 3 ). III . I n s uppor tof herappl i cat i on M s . D ol ab s ubm i t t ed countr ycondi t i ons r epor t s fr om t he U
. S. St at e D epart m entand s ever al non- governm ent al or gani zat i ons , as w el l as s ever al
new spaper art i cl es abou tpo l i t i cal prot est s and p oli ce m i scond uct i n B el arus. T hese
m at eri al s conf

i rm ed g eneral l yt hat the L uk ashenk o regi m e com m i t t ed ab uses against tho se w h o o p p o sed it
. F o r ex am p le, the in tr o d u cti o n to the S tat e D ep artm en t R ep o rt al one cont ai ns t hi s corr obor at i ng i nfor m at i on:

t he Pr es i dent i al G uar d – w hi ch w as cr eat ed i ni t i al l yt o pr ot ect s eni oroffi ci al s – cont i nued t o actagai ns tt he pol i t i cal enemi es of the Lukashe nko r egi m e w i t h no j udi ci al orl egi s l at i ve over s i ght
. M ember s of the s ecur i t yfor ces comm i t t ed num er ous s er i ous hum an r i ght s abus es . . . A tl eas tone s us pi ci ous death of a pol i t i cal act i vi s tw as r epor t ed. T he author i t i es di d notunder t ake s er i ous eff or t s t o acc ountfort he d isa p p e a ra n c e s o f

w e ll-k n o w n o p p o sitio n p o lit ica l f ig u re s in p re v io u s y e a rs a n d d isc o u n ted c re d ib le r e p o rts d u rin g th is y e a r r e g a rd in g th e re g im e ’s ro le in th o s e d is a p p e a ra n c e s . . . Secur i t yfor ces arbi t r ar i l yarr es t ed and de t ai ned ci t i zens , and t he numberof appa r ent l ypol i t i cal l ym ot i vat ed det ent i ons g re a tlyin c re a se d , alth o u g h m a n yo f th o se d e tain e d w e re h e ld forbr i ef pe r i ods
. T he s ecur i t ys ervi ces cont i nued t o i nfr i nge-8- o n p riv a c yrig h ts a n d f

re e d o m o f

m o v e m e n t b yc lo se ly m oni t or i ng t he ac t i vi t i es of oppos i t i on pol i t i ci ans , hum an ri g h ts o rg a n iz a tio n s , a n d o th e r s e g m e n ts o f th e p o p u la tio n . . . O p p o sitio n p o lit ica l p a rties a n d m o v e m e n ts w e re su b jec ted to i ncr eas ed pr es s ur e thr ough bot h j udi ci al and extr a- j udi ci al m easures, i ncludi ng ph y si cal abu se of p oli t i cal op po nen t s. (16 9 ). A sid e f

ro m th e c o u n tryc o n d iti o n s re p o rts a n d n e w sp a p e r a rticle s, M s. D o lab d id nots ubm i tanyot herdocument aryevi dence w i t h herappl i cat i on. W hen as ked w hys he d id n o t sub m itlet ters fro m h er f am il ym em b ers c o rrob o rati n g h er story , sh e sa id: “I do n ’t
corr es pond w i t h t hem. I j us ts i m pl yt el ephone them. ” ( 163)
. W hen as ked w hyI vanov di d notat t end herhear i ng t o gi ve t es t i m onyi n s uppor tof herappl i cat i on, s he s t at ed: “I d o n ’tu n d erstan d the q u esti o n . I ha v e n o idea w h yh e’s n o t here tod ay . T h is i s m yco u rt h ea ri n g , n o t his. ” (1 4 2 ). M s . D ol ab l eftpaper s – i ncl udi ng or i gi nal paper s document i ng t he medi cal t reatm ent s he recei ved aft er s he w as beat en an d raped – w i t h h er s i st er i n B el arus. M s. D o la b ’s s is te r g a v e th e o ri g in a l p a p e rs to h e r m o th e r, w h o p a s s e d a w a yo n A p ri l 2 2 , 2 0 0 2
. N o o n e w a s a b le to f

in d th e p a p e rs in M s . D o la b ’s m o th e r’ s h o m e a f te r s h e p a s s e d a w a y . M s. D o lab a lso too k co p ies o f th ese p ap ers w ith h er to the U n it ed S tat es. T h eyw ere des t r oy ed, how ever , dur i ng herpas s age thr ough t he R i o G r ande Ri vert o t he U ni t ed S ta te s . I V. A f te r t h e h e a ri n g , th e IJ f

o u n d M s . D o la b n o t c re d ib le a n d d e n ie d h e r a p p lic a tio n .-9-

T h e a d v e rse c re d ib ili tyd e ter m in a tio n re ste d o n se v e ra l b a se s. T h e IJ f o u n d it i m p lau sib le t hat( 1) pol i ce w oul d have s i ngl ed M s . D ol ab outform i s t r eatm entw hen s he had be en i n v o l v e d w i t h t h e U C P f o ro n l y a s h o r tt i m e a n d h a d p e r f o r m e d f o rt h e p a r t y o n l y a “meni al j ob, ” and that( 2) M s . D ol ab w oul d have r etur ned t o B el arus aft erl eavi ng t he
co u n tryo n sev era l occ asio n s w h en sh e h ad b ee n tr ea ted s o b rutall yin B elaru s. F u rth er, the IJ w as d istu rbe d b yw h at he iden ti fied as in co n sist en cies b etw ee n M s. D o lab’s t es t i m onyatt he hea r i ng and i nform at i on s he s uppl i ed i n herappl i cat i on and
acc om pany i ng aff

i davi t . Fi nal l y , t he I J w as di s turbed thatM s . D ol ab l acke d document at i on of heras s er t i on t hats he w as undergovernm ents ur vei l l ance aft ert he O ct ober8, 2000 r al l y , herm ember s hi p i n t he U C P, and the medi cal t r eatm ents he
re c e iv e d a f

ter b e in g b e a ten a n d ra p e d . T h e IJ d id n o t re lyf o r h is a d v e rse c re d ib ili ty d e te rm in a tio n o n h is p e rs o n a l o b s e rv a tio n s o f M s . D o la b ’s d e m e a n o r. T h e IJ g av e n o ind icati o n in h is op inion that h e h ad rev iew ed the c o u n try condi t i ons r epor t s t hatM s . D ol ab s ubm i t t ed, orcompar ed the s peci fi c i nci dent s s he d e s c ri b e d to th e g e n e ra l in f o rm a tio n in th o s e re p o rt s . T he B I A s um m ar i l yaff i r m ed the I J ’ s deci s i on. J URI S DI CTI ON & S TANDA RD O F REVI EW T h e B IA ’s ju risd ictio n a ro se u n d e r 8 C .F .R . § 1 0 0 3 .1 (b ). W e h a v e ju risd ictio n to revi ew t he B IA ’s decis i on un der 8 U
. S
. C
. §1 25 2. W here, as here, “t he B IA i ssues a
su m m aryaf

firm an ce u n d er it s str ea m li n ing reg u lat ion s, w e e ssen ti all yrev iew the IJ’s deci s i on as i f i tw er e the dec i s i on of the B I A
. ” Jis hi as hvi l i v. A t t or ney G ener al , 402 F. 3d-10-

3 8 6 , 3 9 1 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 5 ). “[A ] dm i ni s t r at i ve fi ndi ngs of fa ctar e conc l us i ve unl es s anyr eas onabl e adj udi cat or
w oul d be compel l ed t o concl ude t o t he contr ary . ” 8 U
. S. C
. §1252( b) ( 4) ( B )
. I n ot her
w o rd s , th e IJ ’s d e c is io n m u s t b e s u p p o rt e d b ys u b s ta n tia l e v id e n c e . D ia v . A sh c ro ft , 353 F . 3 d 2 2 8 , 2 4 7 (3d C ir
. 2 0 0 3 ).

“ An a l i e n h a s t h e b u r d e n o f s u p p o r t i n g [ h e r ] c l a i m f o rr e l i e f f r o m r e mo v a l
. An al i en’ s cr edi bi l i t y , byi t s el f, m ays at i s fy[her ] bur den, ordoom [her ] cl ai m . ” Id
. ( ci t i ng G a o v . A sh c ro

ft , 2 9 9 F .3 d 2 6 6 , 2 7 2 (3 d C ir. 2 0 0 2 )). “ W e lo o k a t an a d v e rse c re d ib ili ty determ i nati on t o en sure that i tw as approp ri at el ybased o n inconsi st ent s t at em ents , contr adi ct or yevi dence s , and i nher ent l yi m pr obabl e t es t i m ony . ” I d. at249. M i nor in c o n s is te n c ie s d o n o t p ro v id e a n a d e q u a te b a s is f o r a n a d v e rs e c re d ib ility f in d in g . X

in J ie X ie v . A sh c ro

ft , 3 5 9 F . 3 d 2 3 9 , 2 4 3 (3d C ir
. 2 0 0 4 ) (cit ati o n s an d q u o tat ion s o m itted). “W her e an I J bas es an adve r s e cr edi bi l i t ydet erm i nat i on on ‘ i m pl aus i bi l i t y , ’ ” as t he IJ in p a rt d id h e re , “s u c h a c o n c lu sio n w ill b e p ro p e rlyg ro u n d e d in th e re c o rd o n lyif it i s
m a d e a g a in st th e b a c k g ro u n d o f th e g e n e ra l co u n tryc o n d iti o n s . . . [ A ]d v e rse c re d ib ili ty det erm i nat i ons bas ed on s pecul at i on orconj ectur e, r athert han on evi dence i n t he r ecor d,
ar e r ever s i bl e. ” D ia , 3 5 3 F . 3 d at 24 9 (cit ati o n s an d q u o tat ion s o m itted). DI S CU S S I ON T h e IJ d e n ied M s. D o lab re lief o n lyb e c a u se h e f

o u n d h e r n o t cr e d ib le. T h e so le i s s ue bef or e us i s w hethert hatadver s e cr edi bi l i t ydet erm i nat i on w as s uppor t ed by
s ubs t ant i al r ecor d evi dence
. W e thus eval uat e ea ch bas i s ci t ed byt he I J fort hat-11-

d e te rm in a tio n . 1. I m pl ausi bi l i t i es T he I J found M s . D ol ab notcr edi bl e i n par tbeca us e he f ound t w o as pect s of her t est i m on yi m plausi ble. A s explai ned below , there i s no b asi s i n the r ecord fo r the fir st fi ndi ng of i m pl aus i bi l i t y , buts ubs t ant i al evi dence s uppor t s t he s econd s uch fi ndi ng. F irst, th e IJ f

o u n d it d if

f icu lt t o b e liev e th a t th e B e lar u ss ian g o v e rn m e n t w o u ld have s i ngl ed M s . D ol ab outform i s t r eatm ent . H e s t at ed:

I ti s di ffi cul tfort he C our tt o under s t and ort o bel i eve thatt he pol i ce w oul d have a ves t ed and s uch an i nt er es t[s i c] i n t he r es pondentas s he w oul d have me t o bel i eve. T he r es pondent w as o n lya m em b er o f th e [ U C P ] pa rtyfo r a rathe r sho rt per i od of t i m e and ha d t he meni al j ob of pr i nt i ng fl i er s and h a n d in g o u t f

liers a lo n g w ith o th e r in d iv id u a ls. It is i nco nceivable for this C ou rtt o b el i eve thatt he p oli ce w ere s o i nt er es t ed i n hert hatt heyw oul d arr es therand then i nt err ogat e heras t o t he names of otherpar t ym ember s . T he C our tdoes notunder s t and w hyt he pol i ce w oul d even thi nk t hats he w oul d know ot herpar t ym ember s i ns ofaras her d u tie s in th e p a rt yw o u ld p ro v id e h e r w ith s u c h in f o rm a tio n . T h a t li n e o f

tes tim o n yw a s to tallyin c re d ib le to th e C o u rt. (8 7 ). T h e S tate D e p a rtm e n t R e p o rt o n B e lar u s, h o w e v e r, co n tain s s tate m e n ts th a t d ire c tly b ea r up o n an d inf

ere n ti all ysu p p o rt M s . D ol ab’ s t es t i m onyt hatt he G overnm ents i ngl ed h er o u t fo r i n terrog ati o n d esp it e the fa ct th at he r j o b d issem inating fly ers w as, i n the IJ’s vi ew , “meni al
. ” Forexampl e, t hatR epor ts t at es t hat

[ u ]n id e n tifie d p lain c lo th e s o f f icia ls w o rk in g f

o r th e se c u rity se rv ice s . . . re g u lar lya p p re h e n d e d a n d d e tain e d in d iv id u a ls eng aged i n an t i regi m e dem on strat i on s and i n the dis tr i but i on of oppos i t i on m at er i al

s . Ther e w er e s eve r alr epor t s thatDisturbingly, the IJdid not even indicatethat he had reviewe d the country conditions 4 repor ts, as he wa s require d to do. Se eBeris ha j v. A sh c ro

ft , 378 F.3d 314, 320 ( 3d Cir. 2004) (notingthat an ar

ticle in the re cord c orroborated pe titioner’s testimony and that it is not “per missibl e for

the IJ. . . not to address the releva nt country

repor t in some detail”). -12- in d ivid u a ls a n d

m e m b e rs o

f o rg a n iza tio n s in v o lve d in publ is hi ng oppos i t i on m edi a w er e ar r es t ed and detai ned. (1 7 1 ) ( e m p h a s is a d d e d ). T he I J ’ s “i m pl aus i bi l i t y ” fi ndi ng w as not“made agai ns tt he bac kgr ound of the g e n e ra l c o u n tr yc o n d itio n s ,” a s w a s re q u ir e d
. D ia , 353 F. 3d at249. I tt hus i s not
s u p p o rt e d b ys u b s ta n tia l e v id e n c e . See i d. at259 ( r ej ect i ng I J ’ s fi ndi ng t hati tw as i m pl aus i bl e thatl ow - r anki ng per s ons i n a G ui nean oppos i t i on par t yw oul d be arr es t ed and detai ned w hen t he record con t ai ned evidence thatsuch arres t s and d et enti on s w ere o cc u rri n g in G u inea ). 4 T he I J al s o found i ti m pl aus i bl e thatM s . D ol ab w oul d have r etur ned t o B el arus aft erl eavi ng t he countr yon s ever al occa s i ons ( t o go t o Pol and, t he C zec h R epubl i c and R us s i a)
. T he I J s t at ed

I ti s di ffi cul tfort hi s C our tt o bel i eve . . . t hatnot w i t hs t andi ng t he horr endous epi s odes t hatt he r es pondentr el at ed t o t he C our ts he t i m e and t i m e aga i n r etur ned t o B el arus w hen s he had the oppor tuni t yof l eavi ng t hatcountr yand s t ay i ng i n t he c o u n trytra v e led to a n d a sk in g f o r so m e typ e o f

p ro tec tio n in that co u n try . W h en co n fro n ted w ith this fac t th e re sp o n d en t’ s a n s we rwa s s i mp l e , a n d s h e s t a t e d t h a tBe l a ru s wa s h e rh o me and cons equent l ys he w oul d r etur n t her e. T hati n and of i t s el f, agai n, does notm ake pa r t i cul ars ens e. I f, i ndeed, t he r es pondenthad under gone w hats he t ol d t he C our ts he had exper i ence d i n hercountr y , s ur el yi n one of he rm anyt r i psMs. Dolab explained that she re turned from her visit to her aunt in Moscow in pa rticular 5 be c a us esh ene e de d to e arn

so memon e y . Weno tethat ne e din gto w or k is no t an unre a so na

ble impetus for re turninghome. In fac t, we re cently reversed a

n IJ ’s denial of

asylum to a Ghanaia

n woman who had been persecuted in Ghana despite the fact that she ha d fled to Nig eria and then returne d from there to Ghana in part bec ause shehad “no money .” Fiadjoe v. Attorney General , 411 F.3d 135, 140 ( 3d Cir. 2005). -13-

out s i de of Bel arus s he w oul d have s oughts om e type of pr ot ect i on i n t hatcountr ys he w as vi s i t i ng. (9 3 ). T h e f

ac t th at an asy lum ap p li ca n t l ea v es th e c o u n tryin w h ich s h e a ll eg ed lyfe ars p e rse c u tio n a n d th e n re tu rn s to it b e f o re f lee in g f o r g o o d is n o t pers e e n o u g h to
u n d e r m i n e h e rc r e d i b i l i t y. S e e , e .g ., D in gv . A s h c r o ft, 3 8 7 F . 3 d 1 1 3 1 , 1 1 3 9 -40 (9th C ir
. 5 2 0 0 4 ); D a m a iz e -J

o b v . I.N .S ., 787 F. 2d 1332, 1337 ( 9t h C i r . 1986)
. N ev erthe less, w e a re
as t r oubl ed as t he I J w as byt he fa ctt hatM s . D ol ab t ook s uch an unus ual l yl ar ge number of i nt ernat i onal t r i ps dur i ng 2001, and ea ch t i m e r etur ned t o B el arus . T hi s fac t , and the fac tt hats ever al of thes e tr i ps occurr ed af t ert he i nci dent( t he J ul y2001 r ape) t hats he p re se n ted in h e r te stim o n ya s th e tu rn in g p o in t – th e e v e n t th a t p re c ip itate d h e r d e sire to l eave B el arus forgood – ar e di ffi cul tt o r econc i l e w i t h hercl ai m t hats he fe ar ed forher
s afe t y . W hen the G overnm entas ked M s . D ol ab w hys he r etur ned t o B el arus t i m e and tim e a g a in , s h e re p lie d (a s th e IJ n o te d ) o n ly: “ It ’s m yh o m e . I r e s id e d , I h a d m yf a m ily. I cannotl i ve i n a for ei gn countr yon t he s t r eet . ” ( 163)
. W e ca nnotconcl ude thatany
r eas onabl e adj udi cat orw oul d be compel l ed t o fi nd M s . D ol ab cr edi bl e des pi t e the many trip s s h e to o k to P o lan d , the C z e c h R e p u b lic a n d R u ss ia d u rin g th e p e rio d sta te a g e n ts-14-

all eg ed lyw ere p erse cu ti n g h er. 2. Inco n si st en ci es T he fi r s ti ncons i s t encyt he I J i dent i fi ed w as i n M s . D ol ab’ s acc ount s of the J ul y3, 20 01 rape. M s. D olab w rot e an af fi dav i ti n R ussi an w hich she had t ransl at ed int o E ng l i sh and then s ubm i tt ed w i t h heras y l um appl i cat i on. I n t he tr ans l at ed af fi davi tM s . D ol ab stat ed that, o n the w ayh o m e f rom an ev en ing sp en t distri b u ti n g leaf let s at h er c ity ’s cel ebr at i on of “the dayof Li ber at i on of B el arus fr om Fas ci s t s , ”

I hear d s t eps behi nd m yback. I t r i ed t o es cape butt hey caughtup att he por ch of myhous e and hi tm e on the hea d w i t h a b ott l e. A s I w as l oo si ng [si c] m ycon sci ou sness I m anage d t o m ake outt he fa ces of tw o m en, w ho w er e the s ame i ndi vi dual s t hatchas ed me ear l i er . I know t heyw er e the m i l i t i a off

i cer s . I cannott el l how m uch t i m e I s pentl y i ng u n c o n s c i o u s o n t h e g r o u n d , b u twh e n I r e g a i n e d my c o n sc io u sn e ss I re a lize d I w a s ra p e d . It i s v e ryh a rd f o r m e to p u t in w o rd s w h a t I f

e lt at th a t h o rrif

ic m o m e n t. ( 271)
. A therhear i ng, M s . D ol ab r ecount ed the s ame st or y . A n i nt erpr et erpr es entatt he h e a r i n g t r a n s l a t e d h e rw o r d s i n t h i s w a y:

A : [I n] J ul yt her e w as a l i ber at i on dat e i n B el arus and the c e l e b r a t i o n o f

t h e c i t y. Q : W h a th a p p e n e d o n t h a td a y? A : I am com i ng back home i n t he eve ni ng. I tw as l i ke, i tw as t he mi ddl e of the ni ghtbeca us e w e di s t r i but ed fl [y ] er s . I can h e a r s te p s in th e b a c k . I g o t f ri g h te n e d , ra n in to a lo b b y . I t r i ed t o pr es s t he but t on t o gett he el evat ordow n, butt he el evat orw as faraw ay . I m ean the el evat orw as up and I knew th e yw ill g e t m e . . .-15- Q : A nd t he bui l di ng y ou w al ked i nt o w as y our , w as y our apart m enthous e orw as t hatanotherbui l di ng? A : T hat ’ s corr ect . M yr es i dence
. Q : A l l r i ght
. A nd w hathappene d. A : O k a y . I p u sh e d th e b u tto n to g e t th e e lev a to r, b u t I k n e w it w as notenough t i m e bec aus e the el evat orw as up and the door in th e lo b b yw e re a lr e a d yin th e p ro c e s s o f b e in g o p e n e d . I s ee tw o m en runni ng t ow ar d m e. I m ade de ci s i on run ups t ai r s . I r es i de on the s i xt h fl ooratt he t i m e. T heygotm e. Q : W h a t h a p p e n e d n e x t? A : T heyknocked me w i t h a bot t l e on myhead .
. . I fel l t o t he g ro u n d a n d I a m , I am f e e lin g I’m p a ss in g o u t. I co u ld i dent i fyt hos e as a pol i ce. I s aw t hem befor e att he t i m e I been i nt err ogat ed bac k on M ar ch 25
. E ventual l yI pas s ed th o u t. W h e n I r e g a in e d m yc o m p o s u re I r e a liz e I g o t r a p e d
. . . A f ter , af ter th a t p a rticu lar e v e n t I c o u ld n o t g e t b a c k to m y se lf fora l ong t i m e. (13 1 -32 ). M s. D o lab ’s a tto rn e yp o in ted o u t th a t th e E n g lish v e rsio n o f M s. D o lab ’s a f

f id a v it t r ans l at ed the w or d M s . D ol ab us ed t o des cr i be the pl ace w her e the r ape t ook pl ace as “po rch, ” w hereas the int erpr et er att he h eari ng (a di fferentperson t han t ransl at ed M s. D ol ab’ s aff

i davi t ) t r ans l at ed thatw or d as “l obby
. ” To dem ons t r at e thatt hi s di ffe r ence
w as one of tr ans l at i on onl yand di d notr efl ecta s ubs t ant i ve di ffe r ence i n t he tw o t el l i ngs of the s t or y , M s . D ol ab’ s at t or neys how ed the i nt erpr et erpr es entatt he hea r i ng t he
v e rsio n o f

M s. D o lab ’s a f

f id a v it th a t sh e h a d w ritten in R u ss ian , an d a sk e d h im to t r a n s l a t e t h e r e l e v a n tp o r t i o n o f i t . T h e i n t e rp r e t e rt r a n s l a t e d t h a tp o r t i o n i n t h i s w a y:-16- C om i ng back home I hear d behi nd s t eps . I w as runni ng. B ut t heyappr ehende d m e i n t he l obby and theyl i t er al l ygave me a bot t l e on myhead, w hi ch i s t heys t r i ke form yhead. ( 166) ( emphasi s added)
. A ft ert hi s cl ar i fi cat i on, i tw as cl eart hatt he por ch/ l obby d isp a rityw a s a c tu a llyn o d isp a ritya t all. D ur i ng M s . D ol ab’ s cr os s - exami nat i on, t he G overnm entpoi nt ed outt hather aff i davi tr efe r r ed t o t he bui l di ng i n w hi ch s he l i ved ( i n t r ans l at i on) as a “hous e” w her eas i thad bee n r efe r r ed t o ( i n t r ans l at i on) att he hea r i ng as a “bui l di ng. ” The G overnm ent
as ked
c a n y o u e x p lain w h yy o u c a ll i t y o u r h o u se in y o u r a f f id a v it, buther e i n t es t i m onyy ou cal l i ty ourbui l di ng, an apa r t m ent bui l di ng. T her e i s a s i gni fi cantdi ffe r ence betw een thos e. ( 141)
. M s . D ol ab r epl i ed: “W el l , y ou have t o under s t and eve r ybui l di ng w e ca l l a hous e. ” Id
. In d e e d , the w o rd s “ h o u se ” a n d “ a p a rtm e n t” a re o f ten u se d in ter c h a n g e a b lyb yc ity d w e lle rs in th is c o u n tr ya s w e ll. B ot h i ncons i s t enci es i n M s . D ol ab’ s t w o acc ount s of herr ape thus w er e ( 1) i n t he fi r s tpl ace , m i nor , and ( 2) expl ai ned aw ayatherhear i ng as bei ng pr oduct s of tr ans l at i on f ro m th e R u ss ian . N e v e rth e les s, th e IJ c ited th e m a s o n e o f th e m a jo r re a so n s f

o r h is deni al of M s . D ol ab’ s appl i cat i on. H e s t at ed thatt he ver s i on of hers t or ys he t ol d att he hear i ng w as
c o m p le te ly d if f e re n t th a n th e v e rs io n s e t f o rt h in h e r a f

f id a v it. W heneve rt he C our ts ees di amet r i c di ffe r ence s betw een the tes tim o n yo f

th e re sp o n d e n t an d th e a f f id a v its th a t sh e is-17- s ubm i t t i ng i n s uppor tof hercl ai m , t he cr edi bi l i t yof the resp o n d en t i n a c ase in ch ief n atura ll ysu ff er. [sic]. ( 90) . T hes e di ffe r ence s w er e expl ai ned. T he I J ’ s adver s e cr edi bi l i t ydet erm i nat i on i s not
s u p p o r t a b l e o n t h e b a s i s o f t h e m. T he otheri ncons i s t enci es t he I J i dent i fi ed w er e betw een i nfor m at i on s ubm i t t ed on M s . D ol ab’ s I
- 589 appl i cat i on and i nfor m at i on s he s uppl i ed atherhear i ng. T hey , t oo,
w e re e x p lain e d a t M s. D o lab ’s h e a rin g , b u t th e IJ p e rsis ted in re ly in g o n th e m , p o in tin g to t hem i n hi s opi ni on as one bas i s forhi s adver s e cr edi bi l i t yfi ndi ng. O n h e r a p p lica tio n M s. D o lab sta ted th a t sh e f irst c a m e to th e U n ited S tate s in O c to b e r 1 0 , 2 0 0 0 , (2 8 5 ), w h e re a s s h e tes tifie d a t th e h e a rin g th a t sh e f irst e n ter e d th is countr yi n autum n of 1998. ( 143- 44)
. O n herappl i cat i on s he s t at ed thats he had ha d no
e mp l o y e r s i n t h e p a s t5 y e a r s , ( 2 8 6 ) , b u ts h e t e s t i f i e d a th e rh e a r i n g t h a ts h e h a d h a d t wo
e m p lo y e rs d u rin g th a t p e rio d . T h e lo c a tio n o f h e r sig n a tu re o n h e r a p p lica tio n re f lec ts t hatno one bes i des M s . D ol ab pr epar ed the document , ( 292) , buts he t es t i fi ed that
s o m e o n e in h e r l a w y e r’ s o f f ic e h a d a c tu a lly typ e d it f o r h e r. ( 1 4 4 , 1 4 6 -4 9 ). M s . D ol ab s t at ed thatt he i nfor m at i on on herappl i cat i on t hatconfl i ct ed w i t h her t es t i m onyw as err oneous and thatt he fa ul tfori tl ayw i t h herl aw y er ’ s offi ce. H erl aw y er th e n re p re se n ted to th e c o u rt:

I d o c o n f ir m th a t o u r o f

f ic e d id f ill o u t th e a p p lic a tio n . . . I w as t r ai ni ng a new s ecr et aryatt he t i m e and thes e ar e her t yp o s , Yo u rHo n o r . I d o a p o l o g i z e . . . Th i s i s c o mp l e t e l ymy m is ta k e a n d n o f

a u lt o f th e re s p o n d e n t.-18-

(15 1 -52 ). D es pi t e thi s admi s s i on, t he I J appar ent l yr efus ed t o bel i eve thatM s . D ol ab had not compl et ed the I
- 589 appl i cat i on her s el f, and thus t hatt he i ncons i s t enci es betw een the appl i cat i on and the t es t i m onyw er e notevi dence t hats he w as l y i ng. H e s t at ed that

I ti s extr emel ydi ffi cul tfort hi s C our tt o bel i eve thatan a tto rn e y ’s o f

f ice c o m p letin g a n a p p lica tio n f o r a sy lu m w o u ld not e on thatappl i cat i on t hati tw as not , i ndeed, compl et ed by th e m . (1 9 2 -9 3 ). T he IJ’ s adverse cr edibi l i t ydeterm i nati on i s not s up po rt able on t he b asi s of t hese i nco nsi st encies
. 3. L ack of

D ocum ent at i on F in a lly , the IJ b a se d h is a d v e rse c re d ib ili tyf in d in g o n th e f

a c t th a t M s. D o lab d id notpr es entdocument at i on ( 1) demonstr at i ng t hats he w as undergovernm ents ur vei l l ance aft ert he O ct ober8, 2000 r al l y , ( 2) pr ovi ng t hats he w as a mem berof the U C P, and ( 3)
s how i ng t hats he had unde r gone medi cal t r eatm entaft ers he w as beat en and r aped by p o lic e . O f

c o u rs e , c o rr o b o ra tio n is n o t a lw a y s re q u ir e d to e s ta b lis h c re d ib ility. D ia , 353 F .3 d a t 2 5 3 . W e h a v e h e ld , h o w e v e r, th a t an a p p lica n t – e v e n a n o th e rw ise c re d ib le appl i cant– m aybe r equi r ed t o pr es entevi dence t o corr obor at e hers t or ys o l ong as t he B I A ( 1) i dent i fi es t he fa ct s forw hi ch i ti s r eas onabl e t o expec tcorr obor at i on, ( 2) i nqui r es i nt o w hethert he appl i canthas pr ovi ded i nfor m at i on corr obor at i ng t he r el evantfac t s , and ( i f s he has not ) ( 3) anal y zes w hethert he appl i canthas adequa t el yexpl ai ned hi s orherThe State Department Repor t, for example, stated that “ [t ]he security service s continued 6 to infring e on priva cy

rights and fre edom of movement by closely monitoring the activities of opposition pol iticians, human rights org anizations, and other segments of the population . . . The Presidential Guard (or se curity service ) reportedly

continued to conduc t surveillanceactivities of the President’s political opponents.”(169 &171). -19- f a ilu re to d o s o . A b d u la i v. A sh c ro ft , 2 3 9 F .3 d 5 4 2 , 5 5 4 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 3 ). S e e a ls o , e .g ., D ia , 3 5 3 F .3 d a t 2 5 3 -5 4
. W e f in d th a t itw a s u n re a so n a b le f o r th e IJ to h a v e e x p e c ted M s. D o lab to
corr obor at e heras s er t i on t hats he w as undergovernm ents ur vei l l ance aft ert he O ct ober8, 2 0 0 0 ra lly. It is n o t a t a ll c le a r h o w a p e rs o n w o u ld c o rr o b o ra te s u c h a n a s s e rt io n , s ee,
e .g ., D ia , 353 F. 3d at253 ( fi ndi ng i ti m pos s i bl e t o i m agi ne how an as y l um appl i cant coul d have pr ovi ded document arys uppor tforhi s as s er t i on t hatt he mi l i t aryw as “af t er hi m ”) , ot hert han t o s ubm i tr epor t s i ndi cat i ng t hatt he Lukashe nko r egi m e moni t or ed the act i vi t i es of oppos i t i on gr oups and thei rm ember s gener al l y , w hi ch M s . D ol ab di d. 6 U ndert he part i cul arci r cumst ance s of thi s cas e, how ever , w e do fi nd t hati tw as
re a so n a b le f

o r th e IJ to e x p e c t s o me so rt o f c o rro b o ra tin g e v id e n c e f o r M s. D o lab ’s c laim th a t s h e w a s a m e m b e r o f th e U C P a n d th a t s h e u n d e rw e n t m e d ic a l tr e a tm e n t. See A bdul ai , 2 3 9 F . 3 d at 55 4 (ob serv ing w ith o u t exp ressing ag ree m en t th at th e B IA ’s deci s i ons es t abl i s h t hati ti s r eas onabl e t o expec tan appl i cantt o corr obor at e heras s er t i on th a t s h e u n d e rw e n t m e d ic a l tr e a tm e n t)
. T hough M s . D ol ab had mor e than a y eardur i ng w hi ch t o gathers uch evi dence , s he fai l ed t o do s o. She expl ai ned how or i gi nal copi es of ce r t ai n document at i on of her
m edi cal t r eatm entand mem ber s hi p i n t he U C P w as l os t( aft erherm ot herdi ed) andThe IJtold Ms. Dolab 7 Idon’t believeyour testimony and you haven’ t helped yourself by the fa ct that you have not submitted one bit of evidence to support wh at you ’rete lli ngme . Y ou c ould h avesu

bmi tte d le tters , aff idavits, any

thing. Even from this person you trave led with, [Ivanov]. Nothing. Now , your af fidavit says that you had copie s of medical reports a

nd a complaint ag ainst the g overnment and had evidenc e that what you were tellingme was trueand that while you cameinto the United States they g ot wet and they

g ot destroyed. It’s highly

unlikely , ma’am. Then in your af fidavit you say

you left e very thingba c k in

B e laru s w ithyour s ist e r . . . Wel l, s inc ethi s casewas last hea

rd more tha

n [a] year ag o, the natural presumption would be that you would g et these documents from your sister. An d your rebuttal to that is , w e ll, my sis te r g avethem to my mother and my

mother, and nowthe documents a re lost. That doesn’t makesense e ither. I ’m pretty sure you’relying. I

know you ’reno t c re dib le . I ’m

pre tty sureyou ’reint e nti on a lly lyingto me and that you made [up] this entire . . . ca se. (167-68)
. -20- des t r oy ed ( i n t he R i o G r ande Ri ver )
. She pr es ent ed no expl anat i on, how ever , forw hys he
w as n o t able to o b tai n af fid av it s fro m Iva n o v (w h o is cu rren tl yin C ali fo rnia) o r m em b ers
o f h e r f a m ily(w ith w h o m sh e is in tele p h o n e c o n tac t) c o n f irm in g so m e o f

th e f a c ts to
w hi ch s he t es t i fi ed, t hough t he G overnm entgave he rt he oppor tuni t yt o ar t i cul at e s uch an
e x p la n a tio n d u ri n g its c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n o f h e r. ( 1 4 2 , 1 6 3 ). See, e. g. , i d. ( not i ng t hatt he B I A has “s t at ed thati ti s gener al l yr eas onabl e t o expec tappl i cant s t o pr oduce l et t er s fr om f a m ilym e m b e rs r e m a in in g in th e a p p lica n t’s h o m e c o u n try ” ). W h e n th e IJ e x p lain e d h is deni al of herappl i cat i on t o M s . D ol ab, he s t r es s ed thatherfai l ur e t o ei t herpr oduce document at i on orexpl ai n w hys he coul d notdo s o w as a maj orr eas on forhi s deci s i on. 7 H e ther ebyanal y zed w hetherM s . D ol ab had a dequat el yexpl ai ned herfai l ur e t o pr oduce-21-

document at i on, w i t hi n t he meani ng of A bdul ai . CO NC L US I ON T h o u g h s o me o f

t h e e v i d e n c e s u p p o r t s a f i n d i n g t h a tM s . Do l a b wa s c r e d i b l e , we hol d t hatt he I J ’ s det erm i nat i on i s s us t ai nabl e on the bas i s of M s . D ol ab’ s s ever al i nt ernat i onal t r i ps and herfai l ur e t o pr oduce w i t nes s es ( e. g. , I vanov) and document at i on of ce rt ai n fac t s. W e w i l l D E N Y t he Pet i t i on forR evi ew of the B I A ’ s deci s i on.