Opinion ID: 202559
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Chreng's Appeal to the BIA

Text: In his motion of appeal to the BIA, Chreng asserted he had no objection to the immigration court's recitation of the facts but believed that it was unfair for him to have to show both that he experienced past persecution and also that present country conditions made it dangerous for him to return to Cambodia, in light of his individual circumstances. He also alleged that he had learned of the importance of present country conditions only after his testimony, and that if the granting of immigration relief necessitated such evidence, then he should be entitled to present the same. The petitioner asked the BIA to remand the case to the IJ for further testimony regarding country conditions. The BIA expressly adopted and affirmed the decision of the IJ. It also stated: The Immigration Judge correctly concluded that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) successfully rebutted the presumption of future persecution by demonstrating that country conditions had changed in Cambodia. The BIA denied -14- Chreng's motion to remand stating that the relevance of the present-day country conditions requirement (sic) was evident from agency regulations. It noted that Chreng had not presented any prima facie evidence that country conditions in Cambodia were such that he would have a well-founded fear of persecution if he returned to his country of origin.