Ghulam Mustafa v. Eric Holder, Jr.
707 F.3d 743
| 7th Cir. | 2013Background
- Mustafa, a Pakistani national and PML-N member, sought asylum and withholding of removal after fleeing to the U.S. in 2003.
- He alleges he was persecuted for aiding Musharraf's government in a corruption investigation of a PML-N senator (Rehman).
- Attacks and harassment occurred in UAE and Pakistan (2000–2003), including a 2003 beating in Pakistan and a prior 2000–2001 coercive interrogations.
- Immigration Judge found no nexus to a protected ground, deeming the harm as personal retaliation, and denied asylum/withholding (CAT not at issue).
- Board affirmed, adopting the IJ’s findings and adding that the record did not show imputed political opinion or persecution by the current Pakistani government.
- This court granted review, remanding for reconsideration in light of evidence suggesting mixed motives and potential imputed anti-PML-N opinion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Mustafa’s past and future harm was due to an imputed political opinion | Mustafa argues attackers viewed him as anti-PML-N for assisting Musharraf’s probe | Board found attacks were personal retaliation, not tied to political opinion | Reversed in part; record supports mixed motives and imputes anti-PML-N opinion; remand granted |
| Whether the record shows mixed motives for the attacks | Evidence suggests anti-PML-N political opinion influenced attackers | Record shows only personal vendetta | Remand required to assess mixed-motive evidence and presumption for asylum/withholding |
| Whether Mustafa may fear persecution from the Zardari government | Zardari regime could target him for PML-N ties | Movements by Zardari regime not sufficiently evidenced in record | Board to assess fear from current government on remand; Dr. Parker’s 2007 testimony considered with caution |
| Whether the Board and IJ erred by not considering evidence in context of Pakistan’s politics | Context shows political retaliation against opponents; weight of evidence overlooked | The Board appropriately focused on nexus to protected grounds | Evidence of political context and mixed motives requires remand for proper analysis |
Key Cases Cited
- Boci v. Gonzales, 473 F.3d 762 (7th Cir. 2007) (standard for substantial evidence review in asylum cases; need reasonable, probative record evidence)
- Elias-Zacarias v. INS, 502 U.S. 478 (1992) (well-founded fear and nexus standard for asylum applications)
- Gjerazi v. Gonzales, 435 F.3d 800 (7th Cir. 2006) (mixed-motives framework for persecution claims under pre-REAL ID Act)
- Mohideen v. Gonzales, 416 F.3d 567 (7th Cir. 2005) (recognition of mixed-motives and need to consider all probative evidence)
- Marquez v. INS, 105 F.3d 374 (7th Cir. 1997) (personal vendetta alone cannot support asylum)
- Wang v. Gonzales, 445 F.3d 993 (7th Cir. 2006) (supports requirement that political motivation be shown or imputed)
- Bueso-Avila v. Holder, 663 F.3d 934 (7th Cir. 2011) (application of substantial evidence review to asylum/withholding)