Opinion ID: 58225
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Torres’s Asylum Claim

Text: Any alien who is physically present in or arrives in the United States may apply for asylum. INA § 208(a)(1), 8 U.S.C. § 1158(a)(1). Any alien may establish eligibility for asylum if he shows that he has suffered “past persecution” or has a “well-founded fear” of future persecution.” 8 C.F.R. § 208.13(a), (b). To establish asylum eligibility, the alien must, with specific and credible evidence, establish past persecution, or a “well-founded fear” of future persecution, on account of “race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.” 8 C.F.R. § 208.13(a), (b); INA § 101(a)(42)(A), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42)(A). 6 The burden is on the alien to establish asylum eligibility. Al Najjar, 257 F.3d at 1284. The alien can carry this burden solely through his testimony if it is credible, specific, and persuasive. INA § 208(b)(1)(B)(ii), 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(1)(B)(ii); see Yang, 418 F.3d at 1201-02; Al Najjar, 257 F.3d at 1287. While credible testimony may be sufficient alone to sustain the applicant’s burden of proof for asylum, “[t]he weaker an applicant’s testimony, . . . the greater the need for corroborative evidence.” Yang, 418 F.3d at 1201. Although the INA and the regulations do not define “persecution,” we have indicated that “persecution is an extreme concept, requiring more than a few isolated incidents of verbal harassment or intimidation, and that mere harassment does not amount to persecution.” Sepulveda v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 401 F.3d 1226, 1231 (11th Cir. 2005) (quotation marks and citation omitted). A “well-founded fear” of future persecution may be established by showing (1) past persecution that creates a presumption of a “well-founded fear” of future persecution, (2) a reasonable possibility of personal persecution that cannot be avoided by relocating within the subject country, or (3) a pattern or practice in the subject country of persecuting members of a statutorily defined group of which the alien is a part. See 8 C.F.R. § 208.13(b)(1), (2), (3)(i). Once the alien demonstrates his well-founded fear of future persecution, the burden shifts to the government to show by a preponderance of the evidence that (1) there is a 7 fundamental change in circumstance such that the alien no longer has a wellfounded fear of future persecution, or (2) the alien could avoid future persecution by relocating to another part of his country or place of last habitual residence and under all the circumstances it would be reasonable to expect the alien to do so. 8 C.F.R. § 208.13(b)(1)(i). Based on our precedent, we conclude that the record as a whole compels a determination that Torres suffered past persecution by the FARC. Specifically, Torres’s undisputed, consistent, and detailed testimony regarding the July 2000 shooting incident (further detailed in his application documents) and three other separate incidents involving the FARC (including one in which he was pushed to the ground at gunpoint and kicked), cumulatively compels a finding that Torres suffered past persecution by the FARC in Colombia. See Mejia, 498 F.3d at 125758; Sanchez Jimenez, 492 F.3d at 1233; Ruiz v. Gonzales, 479 F.3d 762, 766 (11th Cir. 2007). In short, Torres’s evidence cumulatively includes not only the shooting incident, but also an incident in which he was stopped and actually attacked by the FARC; two incidents in which he was confronted personally by the FARC but escaped without harm; and multiple threatening phone calls from the FARC to do further harm. Given that Torres has established past persecution by the FARC, he is entitled to the rebuttable presumption of a well-founded fear of persecution in 8 Colombia, and the BIA and in turn the IJ must allow the government to attempt to rebut this presumption.