PRECETAJ v. Holder
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 16539
| 1st Cir. | 2011Background
- Precetajs are Albanian citizens who entered the U.S. in 2002; Mark used a false passport, Nilda entered on a tourist visa.
- Mark filed an asylum application in 2003 listing Nilda as a derivative beneficiary; Nilda later applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection.
- Multiple hearings from 2005–2008; Mark provided evidence of threats, beatings, and other abuses in Albania beginning in the early 1990s through 2002.
- IJ found Mark credible but described incidents only generally and concluded past persecution not shown and future persecution not reasonably feared due to changed circumstances.
- Board affirmed, denying past persecution and finding change in Albania’s conditions rebutted any well-founded fear; noted no humanitarian asylum merits discussed in detail.
- On review, the First Circuit vacates the Board’s decision and remands for further consideration of past persecution and country-conditions evidence consistent with its reasoning.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether past persecution was established | Precetajs contends the family endured substantial, sustained persecution. | IJ/Board found no persuasive, severe persecution rising to asylum; relied on changed conditions. | Remand necessary; past persecution not clearly resolved. |
| Effect of changed country conditions on fear of future persecution | Changed conditions do not automatically negate specific threats against him. | Country-conditions evidence supports no well-founded fear due to political change. | Remand to assess whether local power structure preserves threats despite central government change. |
| Availability of humanitarian asylum based on past persecution | Humanitarian relief could be warranted given extraordinary suffering of family. | Record does not show the level of suffering required for humanitarian asylum. | Claim rejected on the current record; remand may revisit with full analysis. |
Key Cases Cited
- Sok v. Mukasey, 526 F.3d 48 (1st Cir. 2008) (persecution may include related harms affecting family members)
- Jorgji v. Mukasey, 514 F.3d 53 (1st Cir. 2008) (supports link between family-based persecution and asylum analysis)
- Waweru v. Gonzales, 437 F.3d 199 (1st Cir. 2006) (changed country conditions must be weighed against specific evidence)
- Uruci v. Holder, 558 F.3d 14 (1st Cir. 2009) (local power retention can affect asylum outcomes post-change in regime)
- Tokarska v. INS, 978 F.2d 1 (1st Cir. 1992) (humanitarian asylum under extreme circumstances)
- Brucaj v. Ashcroft, 381 F.3d 602 (7th Cir. 2004) (paradigm case for humanitarian asylum requires extraordinary suffering)
- In re Chen, 20 I. & N. Dec. 16 (BIA 1989) (discretionary humanitarian asylum for past persecution)
- Ang v. Gonzales, 430 F.3d 50 (1st Cir. 2005) (discusses scope of humanitarian relief and standard)