In re R----S----H----
| Decision Date | 04 August 2003 |
| Docket Number | Interim Decision Number 3495 |
| Citation | 23 I&N Dec. 629 |
| Parties | In re R----S----H---- et al., Respondents |
| Court | U.S. DOJ Board of Immigration Appeals |
In a decision dated November 22, 2002, an Immigration Judge found the respondents removable and ineligible for asylum, withholding of removal, and voluntary departure, and ordered them removed from the United States. The respondents have appealed from that decision. The Department of Homeland Security ("DHS"), formerly the Immigration and Naturalization Service, has filed a brief in opposition to the appeal. The appeal will be dismissed.
The respondents are a married couple and three of their children.3 The adult male, who is the lead respondent, is a native and citizen of Lebanon, as is one of the minor respondents. The adult female respondent and one of the children are natives and citizens of Kuwait. The third minor respondent is a native of Kuwait and a citizen of Lebanon. The family was admitted to the United States on September 2, 1998, as nonimmigrant visitors with authorization to remain until August 31, 1999.
The lead respondent was served with a Notice to Appear (Form I-862) on December 14, 2001. The other respondents were served on January 18, 2002. The respondents' proceedings were consolidated before the Immigration Judge, and they conceded removability. The lead respondent filed an Application for Asylum and Withholding of Removal (Form I-589).4 The respondents also requested voluntary departure.
During the course of proceedings, the DHS requested that one of its central documents, the declaration of Special Agent Brent E. Potter of the Federal Bureau of Investigation ("the Potter Declaration"), be subject to a protective order pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 3.46.5 See Protective Orders in Immigration Proceedings, 67 Fed. Reg. 36,799, 36,802 (May 28, 2002). The order was granted by the Immigration Judge on August 27, 2002. The Immigration Judge issued an amended order on October 1, 2002.6 The Immigration Judge subsequently found that respondent's counsel violated the protective order by giving the Potter Declaration to unauthorized persons and ordered him to provide more information on the violation.7
The respondent initially testified that he had an alternative name to add to his asylum application. The name was acquired after his conversion to Islam, and he did not initially list it because it was not an alias but was based on the projected name of his first son. The respondent did eventually have a child of this name who passed away. The respondent was born a Christian and started practicing Islam in 1979. He began to intensely study and practice his religion in 1986, and it "fully transformed" his life. The respondent eventually learned enough to be referred to as an "Imam."
The respondent recalled working in an ambulance and fire rescue unit in Lebanon during the civil war in the 1970s. He denied ever receiving military or paramilitary training, or ever being involved in terrorist activities. The respondent was a cofounder, treasurer, and board member of the Global Relief Foundation ("GRF"). The respondent stated that it was strictly an Islamic humanitarian organization. The GRF office was located in Bridgeport, Illinois.
The respondent explained the five pillars of Islam. For example, he stated that the term "jihad" covered internal, personal struggles but could have a military connotation. The concept of "zakat" is a percentage of income to be distributed to the poor. Under Islam, a visitor to a foreign country would be obliged to abide by the rules of that country upon recognition that a "contract" regarding the admission exists. The respondent condemned the horrific acts of September 11, 2001, and did not find them to be in any way justified under Islam. The respondent also disagreed with the concept of "fatwah" as issued by Osama bin Laden against Americans.
The respondent explained that the GRF often operated with foreign nongovernmental organizations and accepted money from a variety of donors. He denied that the GRF supported terrorism or had ever provided material support to Al Qaeda or the Taliban. The GRF did support charitable operations in Afghanistan before and after September 11, 2001, and the organization consulted with the United States Embassy in that country before undertaking activities after that date. The GRF also engaged in relief activities in other countries with Moslem populations, such as Pakistan.
The GRF had a "sister" organization in Belgium, and the respondent was listed on its articles of incorporation. The respondent was aware of the Belgian office's activities although he had not actually visited it. The respondent denied personally knowing Wadih el Hage, who had been convicted of the United States Embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania. He explained that it would not be unusual for the Belgian branch to receive money from various organizations, such as the Holy Land Foundation, which has been named a Specially Designated Global Terrorist ("SDGT") organization by the United States Department of State. The respondent denied knowledge of any of the photographs that were found in a dumpster behind the GRF office in 1997 and were listed as suspicious in the Potter Declaration.
The respondent frequently wrote and edited articles for the GRF newsletter and spoke in public and at mosques. He did not urge support for armed struggle and was unaware of any GRF funds being used for this purpose. He would cancel a GRF project if he became aware of the misuse of funds. The respondent participated in several community activities after September 11, 2001, including those that involved other local religious leaders.
The respondent feared returning to Lebanon for several reasons. One stemmed from the publicity generated in the United States as a result of allegations that he had terrorist ties, including ties to Osama bin Laden and the Al Qaeda terrorist organization. The respondent believed that he would be targeted by the Lebanese Government, which was strongly influenced by Syria. He asserted that both countries had an interest in appeasing the United States. The respondent also feared retaliation from Al Qaeda operatives in Lebanon, or related entities, because of his condemnation of the events of September 11, 2001. Additionally, he feared persecution from Christian groups as a result of his conversion. He did not believe that the Lebanese Government would or could protect him.
The DHS conducted a lengthy cross-examination. The respondent reasserted that he was unaware of any militaristic or terrorist activities supported by the GRF. He had access to donor information, and his contact with the Belgian office was "very scarce." He was aware that a $200,000 donation had been made to that office, but he did not know that it was from Wadih al Hage. The respondent was shown a newsletter, which was allegedly issued by the GRF, calling for zakat to provide food and ammunition for armed struggle. The respondent acknowledged that the document looked like it was issued by the GRF, but he did not recall the particular publication.
It was revealed during cross-examination that the respondent had lived in Lebanon from June 1997 to September 1998. He stated that he had no problems during that period related to his religion. His mother still lives there and runs a store. The respondent's father recently passed away.
The respondent reviewed his travel history. He married his spouse in the United States in 1987 and lived in Pakistan pursuant to a work permit from 1988 to 1992. He subsequently went to Kuwait for approximately 1 year and then returned to the United States. He had a visitor's visa and remained here until 1996 with visits to Lebanon, Kuwait, and Pakistan. The respondent was in Kuwait from 1996 to 1997, and in Lebanon until 1998. He returned to the United States in September of that year with a nonimmigrant visa and has remained here since that time.
The respondent visited Afghanistan to check on relief activities in 1989 and 1994. The respondent's father-in-law was formerly a high-ranking diplomat in Kuwait. The respondent explained that Kuwait has very strict residency laws, and that he would not necessarily receive residency there just because he was married to a Kuwaiti citizen.
The respondent's brother testified on his behalf.8 He stated that he was a dual citizen of Canada and Lebanon. He was Christian but supported his brother's conversion to Islam. The witness frequently...
To continue reading
Request your trial