Opinion ID: 694893
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Settling in Other Parts of India

Text: 12 The BIA's denial of Malik's asylum application is also supported by evidence that Malik could peacefully live in parts of India other than Punjab. An alien is not eligible for asylum if he can go to another section of his country and not fear persecution. See Quintanilla-Ticas v. INS, 783 F.2d 955, 957 (9th Cir.1986); Diaz-Escobar v. INS, 782 F.2d 1488, 1493 (9th Cir.1986). Malik argues that the burden is on the INS to prove that he can live peacefully in other parts of India, however, and that it has failed this burden. We disagree. 13 The language of Diaz-Escobar indicates that the burden is on the applicant, not the INS. 782 F.2d at 1493. Moreover, even if the burden is on the INS, the record more than adequately demonstrates that Malik does not reasonably fear persecution throughout India. 14 First, Malik admits that when he grew afraid, and left his hometown, he went to New Delhi and lived there safely for a month and a half. Second, both he and his wife have siblings still living in New Delhi. Third, the documentary evidence also indicates that Malik can live peacefully in most parts of India, where Hindus are in the majority. See, e.g., State Department Country Reports on Human Rights Practice for 1992 at 1135, and Letter from State Department to IJ (May 18, 1993) (Many residents of the Punjab and surrounding areas, both Sikhs and Hindus, establish residences in other parts of India where they are able to pursue their lives without interference by the police or by Sikh nationalist organizations.). Lastly, when asked whether he agreed with the State Department's information stating that he could find safe places to live in India, Malik acknowledged that this is indeed the case: Where we could have gone we didn't have a house. We didn't have relatives. 15 Against all of the evidence that Malik does not reasonably fear persecution in New Delhi, he forwards only the fact that his brother was murdered in New Delhi. We find this fact unpersuasive as evidence of the likelihood that Malik will be persecuted. It has been 26 years since his brother was murdered. Moreover, Malik does not know the reason that his brother was killed, or even if a Sikh was responsible. Indeed, from Malik's testimony, it appears that his brother was murdered in connection with either extortion or burglary; it does not appear that he was murdered for being a Hindu.