Afriyie v. Holder (PUB)

**Asy/wh, gov’t control; internal relocation; persecution on account of religion; CAT**

The BIA made numerous factual errors in its “unable or unwilling” analysis, ignoring evidence favorable to Afriyie, misstating Afriyie’s testimony, and improperly treating as irrelevant police reports made by individuals other than Afriyie. A reasonable fact-finder would be compelled to conclude that the government was unable, or in the alternative unwilling, to protect Afriyie. While Afriyie’s ability to file a police report suggests the police were willing to protect Afriyie, it says little about its ability to do so– they may be able  to take a crime report while still being powerless to stop the persecution.  The BIA ignored portions of Afriyie’s testimony that specifically indicate the Ghanaian police forces lacked the resources necessary to protect him, and Afriyie testified that police expected individuals reporting crimes to track down and bring in the perpetrators.  The BIA also erred by giving no weight to the government’s failure to solve other similar crimes against individuals associated with Afriyie or to provide protection when asked. Moreover,  the British Home Office report, upon which the BIA heavily relied, does not support the conclusion that the Ghanaian government was willing and able to protect Afriyie.  Regarding internal relocation,  Afriyie argues that the BIA improperly placed the burden on him with respect to relocation.  Because it is unclear from the record whether that is true or whether the BIA considered the factors set forth in 8 C.F.R. § 1208.13(b)(3), a remand is necessary with respect to this claim as well.

http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2010/07/26/08-72626.pdf