Opinion ID: 2756145
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Basis of Persecution

Text: Mr. Catchai’s final argument is that the BIA erred in assessing his asylum application as seeking protection from religious persecution rather than political persecution. True, the BIA did note that, according to Mr. Catchai’s background materials, the Angolan government does not interfere with the country’s churches or clergy. But the BIA referenced those materials as just one part of its assessment of the “totality of the circumstances and all relevant factors” supporting the IJ’s adverse credibility finding, R. at 5 (internal quotation marks omitted), and elsewhere it correctly stated that Mr. Catchai feared persecution “on account of his anti-MPLA political opinion,” id. at 3. Further, the BIA’s citation to Angola’s apparent respect for religion supports its conclusion that Mr. Catchai was not credible: if clergy in Angola are free from oppression in general, then they are likely free from oppression on the basis of both their religious and political views. Mr. Catchai’s argument here, like his others, can afford him no relief. 8