Opinion ID: 3018762
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: proceedings before the ij and the bia.

Text: The Immigration Judge denied Ghebrehiwot’s claim without making a credibility determination. Her decision was based upon her conclusion that the evidence Ghebrehiwot presented did not establish eligibility for any relief. The IJ 4 Ghebrehiwot testified that “helicopter” consists of tying a prisoner’s hands and legs behind his back and then suspending the prisoner from a tree for hours at a time. 8 believed that Ghebrehiwot’s fear of returning to Eritrea arose from his “desertion” from the army, and prosecution for desertion does not ordinarily constitute “persecution” for immigration purposes.5 The IJ acknowledged that legally justified prosecution can be so severe that it rises to the level of “persecution” and an alien may therefore establish that he/she is a “refugee” if the unduly harsh treatment is based upon race, religion, nationality, or membership in a social or political group. Nonetheless, the IJ ruled that since Ghebrehiwot had not established that his fear of prosecution for desertion was based upon any of those protected traits, he was not entitled to any relief. The IJ rejected Ghebrehiwot’s claim of refugee status based upon religious persecution because he had never experienced problems in Eritrea related to his faith, and his brother remained in Eritrea where he continued to observe his religion without any problems. Although the IJ noted that the background materials and reports Ghebrehiwot introduced did show some conflict between the various religious groups in Eritrea, the IJ concluded that “the background material is not supportive of the facts presented. . ..” She reasoned that Ghebrehiwot was “never a target of the government” in Eritrea 5 We realize that Ghebrehiwot does not concede that he deserted his army post. Rather, he maintains that he was forced to flee to Sudan by the advancing Ethiopian army and he was not able to get back across the border. The IJ found to the contrary. However, that finding does not alter our analysis. 9 and therefore the evidence did not support a finding that his subjective fear was reasonable. Id. After concluding that Ghebrehiwot was not entitled to asylum, the IJ denied withholding of removal and relief under the CAT. Her only explanation for doing so was as follows: “The Court must necessarily deny the applicant’s request for withholding of removal and relief under the Convention against Torture which require a more stringent evidentiary burden [than asylum].” The BIA affirmed without opinion, and this petition for review followed.