Federal law prohibits the granting of asylum to a refugee who, before coming to the United States, participated in “the persecution of any person” on account of race, religion, nationality, ethnicity or political opinion. Accepting an appeal from an Eritrean, Daniel Girmai Negusie, the court agreed to decide whether that prohibition bars relief for a refugee whose participation in the persecution was compelled by a threat of torture or death.
Mr. Negusie, caught up in the civil war between Eritrea and Ethiopia, was drafted and forced to be a guard in an Eritrean prison, where he was ordered to mistreat prisoners. He eventually escaped, hiding in a shipping container on a ship bound for the United States. Despite a finding that he was likely to be tortured if returned to Eritrea, he was denied asylum because of his activities in the prison.
Rejecting his appeal, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, in New Orleans, ruled that issues of coercion and intent were irrelevant in contrast to the treatment of these questions by other appeals courts.
In his Supreme Court appeal, Negusie v. Mukasey, No. 07-499, his lawyers at the Yale Law School Supreme Court Clinic told the justices that with an increase in civil strife around the world, the issue was arising frequently and required a uniform response in the courts. Congress did not mean to apply the asylum prohibition to those whose participation was coerced, the brief argued.
No comments:
Post a Comment