Opinion ID: 221002
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Hu was engaged in protected activity

Text: Despite the compelling evidence that Chinese officials imputed an anti-government political opinion to Hu and that he was engaged in pro-labor political activities, the IJ concluded that Hu's activities were not protected under the asylum laws because the protest seems to have been an illegal gathering for which he was arrested for disturbing the peace. Contrary to the IJ's conclusion, the Chinese police officials who arrested Hu did not accuse him of illegally gathering without a permit. Rather, they accused him of gathering a crowd to cause trouble and disturb the order of the society, and [a]cting against the government and against the [Communist] party. Perhaps a gathering without a permit disturbs the order of society, but it is hardly an act against the ruling party unless it is construed as a political protest. Even though there might have been multiple motivations for the government's mistreatment of Hu, his credible testimony compels a finding that one of the central reasons for his alleged persecution was because of a protected ground  his expression of a political opinion, actual or imputed. See Parussimova, 555 F.3d at 741. China can legitimately require permits even for peaceful demonstrations  in America the First Amendment tolerates as much  but nothing in the record suggests that Hu's lack of a permit actually motivated the arrest and abuse. See Yidong Bu v. Gonzales, 490 F.3d 424, 429 (6th Cir. 2007) (concluding that petitioner was detained not as a `common criminal' for violating China's anti-strike laws, but as a political prisoner who was guilty of opposition to the government). [6] The absence of any legitimate criminal prosecution is circumstantial evidence suggesting the Chinese government was not legitimately punishing Hu for protesting without a permit or simply disturbing the peace. See Ndom v. Ashcroft, 384 F.3d 743, 755 (9th Cir. 2004) ([P]ersecution in the absence of any legitimate criminal prosecution, conducted at least in part on account of political opinion, provides a proper basis for asylum and withholding of deportation....), superseded in part by statute as stated in Parussimova, 555 F.3d at 739-40. Hu suffered an eleven-day detention, harsh interrogation, beatings by police officials, and the requirements after his release that he report to the police station weekly and endure the supervision of neighborhood committees, despite never being convicted of, or even charged with, a crime. Instead, Hu was accused of opposing the Communist Party. Accordingly, the IJ's conclusion that Hu was not engaged in protected activity because [h]is protest seems to have been an illegal gathering for which he was arrested for disturbing the peace is not supported by substantial evidence in the record.