Opinion ID: 164574
Heading Depth: 5
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Alleged Failure to Consider Past Persecution

Text: Petitioner first argues that in ruling on his asylum claim, the IJ erred in considering only whether he had a well-founded fear of future persecution. -9- Instead, he seems to argue, the IJ should have based his decision on the past persecution Petitioner allegedly suffered in Pakistan. Quoting from the United Nations Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status (UN Handbook), Petitioner asserts that “a person who . . . has suffered under atrocious forms of persecution should not be expected to repatriate[.]” Aplt. Br. at 3. The UN Handbook is not binding on this court. INS v. Aguirre-Aguirre, 526 U.S. 415, 427 (1999). Our case law does, however, recognize that under the INA an asylum applicant can establish refugee status by showing he “has suffered past persecution, which gives rise to a [rebuttable] presumption [of] . . . a wellfounded fear of future persecution,” Krastev, 292 F.3d at 1270, or has suffered “past persecution so severe as to demonstrate compelling reasons for being unwilling or unable to return” to his country of nationality, id. at 1271 (internal quotation marks omitted). Contrary to Petitioner’s assertion, the IJ understood this to be the law, and applied it to his case. See Oral Decision at 1 (“If [Petitioner] can show that he was persecuted in the past . . . he is entitled to asylum.”); id. at 7–9 (weighing evidence of past persecution). Petitioner’s argument on this point therefore has no merit. (We note that Petitioner does not assert that the IJ’s determination of his past-persecution claim fails substantialevidence review. As a result, we need not examine that matter.) -10-