Ozdemir v. I.N.S. , 40 F.3d 384 ( 1995 )


Menu:
  •                     UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    for the Fifth Circuit
    _____________________________________
    No. 94-40315
    Summary Calendar
    _____________________________________
    SEYHHAMAT OZDEMIR,
    Petitioner,
    VERSUS
    IMMIGRATION & NATURALIZATION SERVICE,
    Respondent.
    ______________________________________________________
    Petition for Review of an Order
    of the Board of Immigration Appeals
    ______________________________________________________
    (November 1, 1994)
    Before DUHÉ, WIENER, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:
    Petitioner Seyhhamat Ozdemir's applications for asylum and
    withholding of deportation were denied by the Board of Immigration
    Appeals (BIA).    Ozdemir petitions us to review the BIA's decision.
    We dismiss his petition.
    FACTS
    Ozdemir, a twenty-six year old ethnic Kurd, is a citizen of
    Turkey.   Turkish police arrested him on March 16, 1992, after he
    participated in a Kurdish anti-government demonstration.         The
    police detained him for three days, during which time they beat him
    on the soles of his feet.     The police interrogated him about his
    participation in terrorist organizations.      Ozdemir testified that
    he is a member of the TKP, an organization that uses peaceful means
    to combat discrimination against Kurds, and not a member of the
    PKK, a terrorist organization. The police released Ozdemir, and he
    participated in no further demonstrations.                   Nevertheless, the
    police twice questioned him after terrorist incidents occurred in
    Istanbul.    Ozdemir left Turkey on February 17, 1993, and entered
    the United States illegally.
    DISCUSSION
    We review factual conclusions of the BIA for substantial
    evidence.    Silwany-Rodriguez v. INS, 
    975 F.2d 1157
    , 1160 (5th Cir.
    1992).     We will affirm the BIA's decision unless the evidence
    compels a contrary conclusion.          
    Id. The BIA
       concluded   that     Ozdemir   had    not    suffered   past
    persecution on account of political opinion.                 The BIA based its
    conclusion on two grounds:       (1) it found that Ozdemir's testimony
    was not credible; and (2) even if he was credible, Ozdemir had not
    suffered past persecution on account of political opinion.
    The BIA reviews the record de novo and may make its own
    credibility determinations.           Damaize-Job v. INS, 
    787 F.2d 1332
    ,
    1338 (9th Cir. 1986).        Generally, we review only the decision of
    the BIA.    Castillo-Rodriguez v. INS, 
    929 F.2d 181
    , 183 (5th Cir.
    1991).     In this case, however, the immigration judge (IJ) found
    Ozdemir     to    be   a   credible    witness.         If    the   credibility
    determinations of the IJ and the BIA conflict, we may consider
    both.    McMullen v. INS, 
    658 F.2d 1312
    , 1318 (9th Cir. 1981).
    We need not decide the credibility issue because, even given
    Ozdemir's testimony, we conclude that he did not suffer past
    2
    persecution on account of political opinion.           The BIA found that
    the   police    interrogated     Ozdemir    because   they    were   seeking
    information on terrorist organizations such the PKK.            The Supreme
    Court requires a petitioner for asylum to prove that a group in his
    country will persecute him because of his political opinion.              INS
    v. Elias-Zacarias, 
    112 S. Ct. 812
    , 816 (1992).           The record shows
    that numerous terrorists incidents occurred in Istanbul.                  The
    police were searching for information relating to these incidents.
    They did not interrogate Ozdemir because he was Kurdish or because
    he wanted discrimination against Kurds to end. They were searching
    for information on terrorist organizations.             We conclude that
    substantial evidence exists to support the BIA's conclusion of no
    past persecution on account of political opinion.
    Ozdemir also applied for withholding of deportation.                The
    burden of proof for withholding of deportation, however, is higher
    than that for asylum.      See INS v. Cardoza-Fonseca, 
    480 U.S. 421
    ,
    449 (1987).     Thus, Ozdemir cannot succeed on his application for
    withholding of deportation if he fails on his application for
    asylum.
    Lastly, Ozdemir would have us apply the Convention Against
    Torture   and   Other   Cruel,   Inhuman,    or   Degrading   Treatment   or
    Punishment.     We have no jurisdiction to decide this issue because
    it was not raised to the BIA.       Townsend v. INS, 
    799 F.2d 179
    , 182
    (5th Cir. 1986).
    For the foregoing reasons, Ozdemir's petition is DISMISSED.
    3