Skripkov v. Barr
| Decision Date | 20 July 2020 |
| Docket Number | No. 19-3922,19-3922 |
| Citation | 966 F.3d 480 |
| Parties | Andrei SKRIPKOV, Petitioner, v. William P. BARR, Attorney General, Respondent. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit |
Andrei Skripkov, a citizen of Russia, seeks review of a decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) upholding an Immigration Judge’s (IJ’s) denial of his application for asylum and the withholding of removal. Skripkov asserted in his application that he was persecuted in his home country on account of his political opinion. He specifically contended that his anticorruption whistleblowing activities motivated Russian officials to persecute him. The IJ and the BIA, on the other hand, found that the officials were motivated solely by their pecuniary interest in furthering a corrupt scheme disrupted by Skripkov.
In his petition for review, Skripkov argues that the BIA erred in disregarding evidence that he would be criminally prosecuted for his political opinion if he is returned to Russia. For the reasons set forth below, we GRANT Skripkov’s petition for review and REMAND the case to the BIA for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Skripkov is a former civil servant from the Chelyabinsk region of Russia. In 2000, he began working as an event planner for the Chelyabinsk regional government, and in 2008 he was appointed to lead the government enterprise responsible for organizing banquets and mass events in Chelyabinsk. He also served on a commission that oversaw government procurement activities.
Skripkov’s anticorruption activism began in 2010, when the president of Russia appointed Mikhail Yurevich as governor of the Chelyabinsk region and Aleksander Ufimtsev as deputy governor. The new regional leadership began directing Skripkov to accept bids from specified suppliers at inflated prices. After Skripkov refused to comply with these directives, Deputy Governor Ufimtsev warned him that "we will find justice on [sic] you." Skripkov began receiving what he characterized as "[c]onstant threats" for his refusal, causing him to resign from his position within the Chelyabinsk government.
Even after resigning from his position, Skripkov received threatening phone calls from unknown callers and his front door was defaced with messages. These threats caused Skripkov and his wife to sell their home and move in with Skripkov’s parents in a different town within Chelyabinsk. After unsuccessful attempts to find a job in his area of expertise, Skripkov began working as a truck driver.
In October 2014, Skripkov learned about a bidding competition held by the government of Chelyabinsk. The competition fell within his former professional purview—procurement activities—so Skripkov’s interest was raised. He believed that the "staggering" amount at issue in the bidding competition was unjustified. Skripkov reported the competition to Russia’s Federal Antimonopoly Service and to the Prosecutor’s Office. Both entities ignored his concerns. He then brought the competition to the attention of the Anti-Corruption Foundation, a prominent watchdog organization led by Russian political activist Alexei Navalny. Governor Yurevich and Deputy Governor Ufimtsev were removed by President Putin in 2015, although the record does not make clear what role, if any, that the Anti-Corruption Foundation or Skripkov’s whistleblowing had in their removal.
Skripkov continued to experience threats and mistreatment even after Governor Yurevich and Deputy Governor Ufimtsev were removed from office. In February 2015, someone threw a rock through a window of the house where Skripkov lived with his parents. The next day Skripkov found a crumpled note in his parents’ backyard reading: "[Y]ou d[ug] into our business, we will spoil your life." In October 2015, Skripkov found the tires of his car slashed. He discovered in May 2016 that someone had destroyed the goods stored in his truck.
In 2018, Skripkov assumed a more public role as an anticorruption activist. He began volunteering with Navalny’s Anti-Corruption Foundation, which in turn led to several arrests by the local police. In January 2018, for instance, Skripkov was detained for two days for handing out leaflets on behalf of the Anti-Corruption Foundation. Skripkov, in his oral testimony, described this arrest as a "pretext." He explained that he had been "there for a lawful, authorized meeting," yet he had been singled out among "a lot of people" who had attended the meeting. The actual reason for his detention, according to Skripkov, was that he was interfering with the corrupt business interests of the local authorities.
Skripkov was arrested and again detained for two days in February 2018 for his association with an unsanctioned rally. And in May 2018, he was detained at a meeting for organizing an "uncoordinated" rally against Putin. Skripkov explained that he was arrested at this rally for holding a placard proclaiming that Putin was a criminal. One of the officers instructed him to "[t]hink back" to "who does not like you" while Skripkov was being held in police custody.
Finally, in July 2018, Skripkov was detained for participating in another rally held by the Anti-Corruption Foundation. He again described the arrest as a pretext. According to Skripkov, the arresting officers said that they were holding him "to clarify [his] identity." The investigator at the police station asked Skripkov if he "owe[d] someone." He also threatened Skripkov with prosecution under Article 212.1 of the Russian Federation Criminal Code, which, according to Skripkov, allows the government to impose up to a five-year prison sentence on citizens who have been repeatedly arrested in connection with peaceful protests.
Against this backdrop of repeated arrests, Skripkov suffered two incidents of physical violence. In June 2018, three men beat Skripkov outside of his parents’ house. The men claimed that they were seeking repayment of a debt arising from several past corrupt-bidding competitions that fell through due to Skripkov’s lack of cooperation. They were mostly dressed in civilian clothes, but Skripkov noticed that one of the men was wearing police pants. He also saw that they had a Federal National Guard Troops Service car with them. Skripkov’s neighbor helped stop the attack and assisted Skripkov with his injuries. The next day Skripkov went to a hospital’s emergency room for stitches. He considered bringing charges against the men, but he was talked out of doing so by his wife.
The second incident of violence occurred in August 2018, when Skripkov was stopped near his parents’ house by two of the men who had beaten him in June. These men threatened that Skripkov would be "poisoned for a long time" if he did not "pay a debt." Although the men were dressed in civilian clothes, Skripkov noticed the same Federal National Guard Troops Service vehicle from the previous incident in June. One of the men punched Skripkov in the face. Skripkov believed that the police had been deployed by the local authorities to collect the "debt" that he purportedly owed for interfering with their corrupt schemes.
This last incident spurred Skripkov and his wife to make plans to move from his parents’ house in Chelyabinsk. But before they finalized their plans, they decided to go with their adopted son on a vacation to the United States. Skripkov, while on vacation, received a phone call from his mother explaining that individuals claiming to be child-service workers had come by her house one evening to ask about the whereabouts of Skripkov’s son. Because the child-service workers had no reason to visit, and because such visits do not normally occur at night, Skripkov believed that this incident was further harassment by the corrupt authorities. He feared that they would take his adopted son away as further retaliation. Feeling that this was "[t]he last straw," he and his wife decided to remain in the United States and seek asylum.
In December 2018, the Russian government issued an indictment against Skripkov under Article 212 of the Russian Federation Criminal Code. The government also issued two summonses for Skripkov’s interrogation in relation to his July 2018 arrest.
In December 2018, the Department of Homeland Security initiated removal proceedings against Skripkov. Skripkov filed an asylum application two months later. The IJ who heard Skripkov’s case determined that Skripkov’s testimony was credible, but nevertheless denied Skripkov’s application. Some of the incidents described by Skripkov, in the IJ’s view, did not amount to persecution. Considering those incidents that might have amounted to persecution, the IJ found that Skripkov had not shown that the mistreatment was on account of his political beliefs. Rather, the IJ determined that the police officers who threatened, arrested, and beat Skripkov were driven to attack him because he had interfered with their business interests. The IJ specifically noted that "[t]here was no mention of any political party that he supported, or a political cause he favored" during any of Skripkov’s detentions or arrests. On this basis, the IJ also determined that Skripkov had no well-founded fear of future persecution. The IJ then summarily denied Skripkov’s withholding-of-removal claim based on Skripkov’s failure to meet the requirements for asylum.
In April 2019, Skripkov filed an appeal of the IJ’s decision regarding his asylum and withholding-of-removal claims. Skripkov argued that the IJ had failed to consider evidence of his threatened prosecution under Article 212.1 in assessing Skripkov’s asylum application. He also submitted evidence of his indictment and summonses under Article 212 in support of this argument.
The BIA dismissed Skripkov’s appeal in an opinion affirming the IJ’s decision. It determined that the evidence of Skripkov’s indictment and summonses under Article 212 was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Tolentino-Hernandez v. Garland, 20-4021
... ... 1252(a)(2)(D) as extending to mixed questions of fact and ... law. Guerrero-Lasprilla v. Barr, 140 S.Ct. 1062, ... 1068-69 (2020). Because the BIA's ... exceptional-and-extremely-unusual-hardship determination is a ... mixed ... comments, "we review both the IJ's decision and the ... [BIA's] additional remarks." Skripkov v ... Barr, 966 F.3d 480, 486 (6th Cir. 2020) (quoting ... Karimijanaki v. Holder, 579 F.3d 710, 714 (6th Cir ... 2009)). Section ... ...
-
Sandoval v. Garland
...in a particular social group, or political opinion." 8 U.S.C. §§ 1158(b)(1)(B)(i), 1101(a)(42)(A), 1231(b)(3)(A); Skripkov v. Barr, 966 F.3d 480, 492 (6th Cir. 2020). The petitioners argue that they have been persecuted of their membership in a particular social group-that is, as members of......
-
Malam v. Adducci
...of Appeals found that Article 212.1 "penalizes protest activity that is not approved through government channels." Skripkov v. Barr, 966 F.3d 480, 489 (6th Cir. 2020). Furthermore, the Sixth Circuit found that "both the context and substance of Skripkov's threatened prosecution under Articl......