You are on page 1of 31


RG: 148 Exposition, Anniversary, and Memorial Commissions

SERIES: 9/11 Commission, Team 5


BOX: 00025 FOLDER: 0003 TAB: 2 DOC ID: 31198430


The item identified below has been withdrawn from this file:

FOLDER TITLE: DOS Documents - NIV [1 of 5]





This document has been withdrawn for the following reason(s):

9/11 Classified Information


RG: 148 Exposition, Anniversary, and Memorial Commissions

SERIES: 9/11 Commission, Team 5


BOX: 00025 FOLDER: 0003 TAB: 3 DOC ID: 31198431


The item identified below has been withdrawn from this file:

FOLDER TITLE: DOS Documents - NIV [1 of 5]




SUBJECT: INS forms re. Omar Abdelrahman

This document has been withdrawn for the following reason(s):

9/11 Law Enforcement Privacy
9/11 Law Enforcement Sensitive


RG: 148 Exposition, Anniversary, and Memorial Commissions

SERIES: 9/11 Commission, Team 5


BOX: 00025 FOLDER: 0003 TAB: 4 DOC ID: 31198598


The item identified below has been withdrawn from this file:

FOLDER TITLE: DOS Documents - NIV [1 of 5]




SUBJECT: Omar Abdelrahman

This document has been withdrawn for the following reason(s):

9/11 Classified Information



RG: 148 Exposition, Anniversary, and Memorial Commissions

SERIES: 9/11 Commission, Team 5


BOX: 00025 FOLDER: 0003 TAB: 5 DOC ID: 31198599


The item identified below has been withdrawn from this file:

FOLDER TITLE: DOS Documents - NIV [1 of 5]

DOCUMENT DATE: 04/30/1993 DOCUMENT TYPE: Memorandum

FROM: Inspector General

TO: Director of Central Intelligence

SUBJECT: Omar Abdelrahman, Visa

This document has been withdrawn for the following reason(s):

9/11 Classified Information

15: 20

^£>Vo CD^P ,f0^

****«, «nr JBUXT

«» 7«3 750

« .« Jict, «cy
*t th» tl«o of application for «&xl«Bloa...vbo
t« not La po**«Mian of • rmild un*xpir«d inn I greet
rocatry p«rnit, border crtx&Lag idfltrt±£ic*tion
or Otb*r r»Iid *tttz7 docuMfit rwjulrwd by this
Act, and & vclid fmczjtlrvd passport, or otbor suitable
trtvul doc«a«at, or (Jocwwnt of identity uad
11 Ktzeb d o a c d t !• r0qol«*d oodcr tb«
Attorney Cesoral onder sacU.oa 2U(a)

in UM Onit*d (rom I-M7J,

S«ctlea aO« of tit* to
(8 n. «jxj HitiotiAiity Act,

of D«part«Uon to laypt,
ayp, ?>Mr»u«nt to Section
2*3 (h) of tb« Xmi^rctioa &od N«tlon«lltr Act,
(8 U.B.C.tl2S3j.

* Ifclvocu
C forkhod
KMIKU ctxvet, Jtoat {.!(.«»/ TrlAl
Kflv Tork, «T 100M MCtor «tTMt
K? 07102

On or *boot Aoaact 27, 1992, tb« »p?llc«st fll«d «n

•ppliottioa and accoopanylay docmwtttitloa witfi tM« coort
rcquerclfiff tint b* b« orvnted »*yluni La. the Ooxt«d CCAt*«
aixl' withholding of d«port4tJLon to Soypt. Caca
' now
' pending b*for« thi*
£N. COUN. HQ P.03
15:20 FRO1

B«fort pr»t«ntij>? 4 di«ou«oioa of tb« applicant-*

«li9l2>ilit7 for relief froa «cclu»ion proc*«d±nge, thl»
court will pr»««at factual Uvek^rauad Inforgxrtloa aad
Addreaa preliaioarT1 laru«v.

Th» »ppl leant 1* « fijfty-foar y»«r old o*tiT« «xJ

citlc«n of Xyypt, vho 1« < •«hi«B»l/» Of the I«l«Btc Suuni
ralicion. Tb« »ppUe«nt foUowo tM ItlnnJe -SlurU'iA-
r^Uytcu* l«v, «• *«t forth in «>« fg?*^ TJ» «fplio«nt t»
blind «-ad b** A <3I«b*tlo condition. £b« «ppUc«jjt doea not
rpcaX, r«*<3 or vr|ta Ca^lLsh, and the proceed Ing t v*r«
th*rofcr« cem<Suct«d JLn tb« prcscnen of »n official Arabic
Interpreter Iroa tb« B«rlltE
*oa fra
ivsaed Hotlca to Applicant for aruK
for He&ris? Befora lemi^ratlca judg« [Tore J-122J (Sxhiiit
Ho. i) on Xaxch 6, 19W/ cbarg/io? tb« cpp]4-B«»t with
«XcludabUIty porsuaot to reotieax 212(«)(7)(X)(i}(X} of th*
IwaiTrmtion aM ^rationality Act (h»r*in*rt«r 'Act'),
(9 7.8. Cr t H W ( a ) ( 7 ) ( A ) ( i J ( I ) ] , la tbtt, tb« applicaat is
not in postoflaion of * valid «Wbtyir»d laaigrant rl»a or
oth*f trtOld «fitry <Jocua*nt a« rvqoirtd by th* Act.

At a 8axt«r Oalrcdar B»ari»7 b^-d en Bay 14, 1592, th«

applicant, through bi« ronn*r oouasa-1, eut«J«<l tb* following

applloaot 1» not a oiti*«a, flatioool or lawful pera*n*nt

rvcideat of thai' Dnlt«d Vt«to«) tppllrant is a elt
ao4 ftational of --fcsyptf applicant was
y p f appicant was properly
properly «crvwd
vith th* Kotlo* to Appllcaat for Adaftiaaion &8taia*d for
Baartog Sefore IcmiTratloa Jodo» [rora I -122 3 (Sxbiblt
Bo. 1); applicant i»d*rrtaad* wjqr b« i* b«for« tb«
uad*r«tgijad/ applicant !• pirupeely is «xeltt*tan
proc»«dl»ys imrnant to $212(t>(7)(A){i}(2) of tk« Act:,
(8 V.S.C.fU02(4)C7K*><i)(X)J (l"2)c forn»rly
f212{a)(20) of the *ct? cad *pj>lieaat **«Jai **ylt» la
tha oaitod st*t«« W3 wititt of daportatton to
•f^R-16-1993 16:42 flC dEGIONRL COUNSEL EASTERN

P«?-16-19S3 15:20 FRCM INS hEUW LLfiS TO

On or «lx*it Auvmt 37, 19V3, U* applicant riled an

Application with this court resetting thrt ho be granted
twyitna is tba United states *nd withholding 'of deportation
to rgypt.^/ X* rwjuinrd by 8 c.r.JU £236. 3(3) (b}/ upon
receipt of the asylna And withholding of. deportation
application, this court forwarded * copy of tbe application
to tbe T7«5. Pepareaeat of 8tate, froreau of Buoas Right* sad
HuaanXtsrlsn Affairs { -BHKBA") for their aoonants puetnont
to 8 C.y.R. (208.11. Tb« .umS«rsl$r«ri bald IMividn*!
C«icndtr b*«riagv on October 22 , 1992 *od J«uu«rr 20, 199J
to <UJdr**« tba aarita of kp^I^0**^'' Mrlaa «ad withholding
of dwportttion raqaettc.
Before preccntLafl a di«cn«*icn of applicant '«
eligibility fcur n»li«f froet cxolniien yroo«*lljiffi. thi*
court will addftM prtliminiry t»«u«» tb«t «roe« daring the
coor*« of tix» procMdibgCf ncoalyt th« mthoricy of tb«
Znmigr«tioa Judge to rvcoosider t±« d«ci«ion of th* District
oa««r«d on lUrcli 6, I992r mciadlng tb«
r»re«n»nt r»«i<J«nt rt*ttt«; «nd tht totbority of
the lanigration Jadg« to accept * ol*«iif l«d docoacat.
Firrt, tfa* court will £irct cddren wbotaa* th«
XmigtCtioa JOdge bu tl>« antbority to **eoo«i4«r th*
of tb» District Oir»ctor, mtvcvd oa n*c«k 6, 1992f
tb« «>pllc*at'« p«r«*atBt rt«ld*0t ttctvs. At *
Cal«»Ur Staring h*ld on X*y 14, 1992, tb« «pplic«rtr
COQBJMlr COOCWjfld that h« i« not •
eltixaa or r*rraai™t"t midjnt of tba Onit«d Stttmt. ud i»
properly in •xcltuioa proe<»diog»> Applio«ot, through hi*
footer attorn«y/ iadtott*d tfact b« iru nbjvot to rweiMim
proo^tdtagt cad cOfle«d«4 that tba *j>plic*at did aot ti**ly
fil* « rtqutrot to -r*«p»i»4 to tba notice of zat«at to
Applicaat, throagda bis fonoar cooa<al, then
tbct bis poraan^ftt r««id«at atatua had b*«a
rw»oiad*d, cad •ppJLLccnt is tbenfor* no loogcr a
poraaasnt re«id«7rt of tb« United fitatmi. Applicant'* '£oza«r
ccrooool statod that be fil»d a •otioo to r«op*o with tba
District 2ir*ctor rdgardiag tba District Director's Heal
Order of Jttvcisaioo of applicant's pexmaoent resident
st«toc, bat the fUing of s«ah potion should b*rw no affect.
on tbe exol&cioo case.
Sotwithstsaling the abore ntnttonnd coaoe«sioo«r
applicwt's DOV il objected to tb* propriety/ basis «ad
validity of the rescission proceedings «n*a tbe
ixttrodaeed tbe Notice of latest to Rescind (Sxftibit Wo. 7)
and the final Order KeiCiading €tttU« (SdiBlt Ho. tj, at an
oTrJLdarrtUry bearing beld an October 32, 1992. Applicaot's
•7 An Application for atylua shall also be considered an
appiicAtioa for withholding of deportation pursuant to
*«etian 244(h) Of tbe Act. 6 C.7.R. $205,3(I>J(1W2}/ lUttey
Pf-Cftar«d«ohi. 19 I fi IT Dec. 311, ^1« (»IA 1585).

A29 783 7ZO 3

\. COUN. HQ P.85
•r*R-16-1993 16^2 PROM ' -=BIONflL OXNSEL EASTERN TO
[-FK-1&-1993 15:23 FROl INS t€UP&< LLPS TO

couo««l »ryu«<3 tft4t tfcfl applicant h»d not boon properly

•or-red not Leo a« required by 8 c.r.R. (34«.i (i»»2), *r*&
that,- tht ordar of tba Oirtrict Director v»« iapropar.
PurthezTDors, applicant'* coun*«l urged tii« court to reri*v
th« re*el**io« pro9**oUaf* and the ord«r th*t rwoioded hi*
permanent rtcidenc* *t«tq* dated Xarch 6, 1992. Sinoo tb«
applicant did not caqo*«t * k««rijag b«for* »n IiBigr«tXon
*t th« tine p»«oi«>ton proc««dlogg w«r«
this court ct3oclad»d tA*.t it did not bar* jorlKtletioa
rericrv UM ord«r of th« District, Dir»ctor. fiag 8
£24£.J (1992). Coo**<ju«atly, tttli court
»ppl_Lcant'» r*goeot to r*ri«w the order
applicant '» lavful p«nun*st r«»L4ant vtatno.
Vb«n th« bttriag rosizaad on J«m«ry 20, 1991, ooeaaal
tb« tppliouit ft$«in r«l«0d b«r objtctloa to tba Kotlce
i. of Ict«nt to Ratciod (gyhihit Ho. 7), aod ttut rtaal ord«r
^t»oiadia7 EtBTtos (Zxbibit Xo.6), aod «rv«4 tho tiad«r>i9tt*d
to roepR«itf«T b^* dVoci^ioa d«nylag appULcaat'a c*qao«t to
rrrlow tb* order of t&e Di*trict Director. Applicant •«
tryaKl t&«t tlitv oonrt bai tb« aothority to r«rl«v
order of th* Oivtrlot Cir*ctor IA cxol««ioa proo««dia7«
that tti« C«ei*ioa by th« Board of Imloratioo Appeal
(bcr«iatft*r Board) in tho
Otcicieo #30OS (KX 1989}r applied only to
doportctififi proct»di»S». Coaawtl argo*d that fch« plaia
of 8 C.7.1U (£3.1(b) aod 2*6.1 ?wraUs th«
that th« Tuaigrttioo JBdff* ba» th* avthorlty to
rvrlew, rcootwldar «ad ervreol* th* District Pir«ctor*«
order of r**ai*»£oo. Bowwrmr, this coart r»*4« Kat^ef of
t3EOLr to apply both ia tWportatlon and

la flrtter,. of Rcxlrioxie*-grt«bfn. gtiprt^ th«

fosad thct tba rraci*»iaa of Uw reapoodeat'«
p»nrtan«nt rMidoat rtxtsB wa» iznraJLLd bocaaM Uw Serriew
bad not 6eBoa*tr*fc«d that th« re«po»d«ttt «a« p*r0oaaliy
tcrr^l with th« Rotle* of Intaat to X«*elnd. Id at 3.
Tb*r*£or«f tha fimfgrafcino ^do> taoaiaatad deportirtioQ
On appe«lr tbc 8o*rd ooaolad*d that tb*
l«ck*d ^rltdictloo la deport«tloar
to rocoacMcr tb« Cictrlct Director•• r««et«*«jM»
order, la It'* doolUoa, tb» Board aotMd that 8 C.7.S. $246
(1988) did not prorite for tbt rorlev of tb* PUtriet
Dlrvotor'v deeifioft by *a. Ijai^rvtloo J^do*^ aod that tb*
vatrd'i <7p«llct« jorlvdlctlon did not ttwtad* cotuidvrttioa
of th*. dUtrlct director'* declcioo la re*ci**ioo JMttar»,
21* «t 3H; £tA 8 O.JT.JU fi.l(b)« OonaegavaUr, U*» >o«rd
wltbdrew it's holding In yatter of g«m>dgr«. 0.6 I fi II Dec.
32€ (BZ» 19T7}, to the «Xt«at thtt it iaplled that the
TmnTgratloa ^odge or the. Board h»4 jurlv^letloa or«r tbe
District &ir*ctor'a decision IQ r«««l**io& «attar». Ig. at 4.
applylb? th* e aaalyai* need by th* Board la
Kabfcer p this court fiodf that aa
A29 753 ?«0

rFR-l&-1933 15^21 FROM IhS SEUPF3C LLPS TO ROCOU P.06

int»Ior»tion }ud?» lack* tiws jurisdiction In both deportation

and exclusion ' proceed Log* to reconsider tbe District
Director's rescission order. Tb«r* is nothing in 8 c.r.R.
$246 (1792) that allow Cor concideration by th« tonioxstioj*
JudT*; o£ * district Director'* order. Although cov&sel for
the applicant asserts that then appears to be no specific
limitation* prescribed by tit* Act and reculations, this
Court it Of tbe opinion that 8 C.F.R. $246.2 i* « specific
limitation on an <»aa1gr»ticBi judg»'§ jurisdiction u veil afl
the Board'M jurUdictioa. Sag H!BQ 8 c.T^K. SP.l(b) ftad
to th« prorivioaa contained in 8 C.T.R.
it ie clear th«t if tht rocpoodant'c ^/ mavar to the
not. lew of Intent to R*«aiad «dmit« all tb» allegation* in
th* noticTj, or if th« izwrir i> not filed within
tMrtr*dar*. or if co bwaring i« r«o^«*-t»d vitbia neb
period/ and th* «t*t«» of a p*raat>«nt r*«id«nt w»» aee>ir«d
thrmgn ad^ctiwmt of »tttttC voder vectioat 24$ OC 249 of
tbe Xet, th« DUtriat Director tlMU rescind tho pr*rioaaly
C/raated »t*tB§f aad no auoaal Bhall tie from >iin dectelon.
fifit. * C.7.X. $242.2 (t«ph4«i» Added). 73ns, if U»
rwrpoadtat't taeo fall* vithln UM acop* of 8 c.r.K. S2<2.2,
Pi*trict Director'* order of r*sci*vioa U tiaal.
thia court find* th*t 8 C.r.K. P46.2 act* as
«. •peoifio limitation ea fOw avtberitr of boU» an
Iwaigration Jadg« and th« B«trd to rtriaw or overrule tna
District Director. Tb* reyulation clearly state* that no
appeal. *b*ll lie froa the DUtrict Director '• deoisioa.
tb*. raQolxtioca goterning reeoiccion
only iU-lOK «*e raipoodent to bare a hearing
feefor* 1C iaroitfcation jodgv if be cooplie* with 8 C.r.R.
$246.3. Purtvant to 8 C.r.IU $246.3, a hearing before an
ixaioration jwdcm i» proriOwd "if, vitbia the prnoribvd
tiae foUcwia? ••rrica of the notic* pursuant to Section
246.1, the rvopondont ba* filed, an aavwer wfaicb oonte*t* or
d«oi«« coy allagttion in tbe notice, or * h»»t^«j i*
re<jue*t*d* by tbe r*«poad«at« ' Cobmqaeofe *wb»ectioo« of 8
C.7.R. £246 describe th* isoiOTstioo Jttdoe's authority, tbe
laanne* is which the bearing U to Do coatactod, tfeeUioa at»d-i
order, «M cffpvtlt, BO*. 8 C.r.R. $f24«.4, 246.5, 24C.C, Bad
246.7. RowOTvr, QOBt of tbtM prorl*ion* proride the
Zcaiigmtioa Cudo« or So*rd witil tbe eatbority to rtriav en
order of rweUvioa i«n«d fey tb« ditteict dir*«to* poreoaat
to B e.r.iu $246.). After tba fiittrict Pirtotec bu Usuad
an order cf r*«ei*«iotw Che Only Bean* of recourM Uft to
the respondent is to fU« c. aatioa to r«opan with tbe
district director u proridod ia 8 O.7.IL. $24S.8. £s>.
Kitter of _yodrioaet~t*teban.
•a/ The alien is re far red to as tbe r««pondeat in
rescission procoodinos. 8 C.r.K. $246.1 (1992).

A29 753 730

r-W?-16-1993 16:44 PRO-P KEG I ONfiL COUNSEL EftSTERN TO GEN. COUN. HQ P.07

m?-l&-1993 15=22 FRCM INS t&ffK U-ftS TO RDCOU P.07

Go T
In c*s« «t bar, tj« applicant ftllftd to fila in anewer
to tb« Hotlc* of Int«nt to JtMeiod vithln th* thirty-4«r» or
to re<ju«*t a haarin? before aa imiyration Judge.
Therefore, do Xarca $, lfr$2, the Diatrlet Director, pursuant
to 8 C.r.ft. $244.3, i««u«d «a enter r*»cindin$ the
applicjurt.' « rt«to« «« « pcnMtaaot r*«ld«at alien.
Consequently, tho *ppl_to»nt'o only <aour«« of action
ro^mrtlLft^ r«*ci«ii<m 1* to fil« • notion to r*op*n wlti the
Dijrtrict Director. AppUCtnt'f chAUgnga to tha rociMioc
proco«tUag« Curing hi« axclaaioa batria? JU lapruper «lnc«
thi* o«nwt l*c)« tb« Juirisdlction to r»coa»l<ter «» Wetrlct
Dlr«ct«'« rtMUaion errrfar. Fortlxiraorw, *pplio»nt'»
farmar ocnu»»0t ttfttttl on th« rvcortl tint ba £ilod « potion
to reopen with tb« DlitriOt Oixactor ng*r&Lag tb* flo«l
ord«r of rt»ci«§ion of »f^>llc*nf» pwnotiiAflt
«nd oonc«Hj*d tb«t tb« IlIiAg of vuch oation
nc effect on t&« cxclasioa our*.
court wUUL aJLvo addrec* the authority of
the Igni.yntl.oa Jodoe to accept * classified document
the coarse of the pcoeeedioflt. fiariao an
bearing bald oa October 22, 1992, the Serrice attested to
eater ft clasaLfied Department of Mate advieory opinion
Into the raoord of proceeding*. T3i« aodoialyaed refa>«d to
«rach document and Infozwtd the Service to epeciry is
tha Zmigrwtioa ffaOgm'w aothority to accept
bvarlno mrfil Janaary 20, 1993. Oa October SO, 1*92, the
Scrrioe, through Jane H. Xiaiehiello, trial Attorney,
a written re^oaat ftrhthit. A), ponmaat to 8 <
and 2.36.3{cJ(4;, •skin; tte ondcrvionod to
aocopt a* non-record •vidarK*, * ola«al£i«d rtport pcorided
&y tb« O.6, D«parta*at of 6t«t«,
If tb* U.S. &«partaMOt of «t*t«, 8«c*«a of ffmnan Riybt*
and Hunmitariaa Affair* (•JJBJOTi') coaaoota 09 as
appLloatlTQ fll*d pormairt to 8 C.IMt, $$20«.4(a.), U(.a Off
242.17, tb* applicant shall b» glvvn a copy of 00011 oooneaea
and b* prerided an opporfctmtty to rwrpoad* tial«e« tho
coBo*ata ar* cla««ifl*d. Tb« rvgslvtiona prorlda, ia
r«l*rant parti -
toy P*partaB*Afc of •ta^t* «UMiit> prorldtd wcter
thi« Mctloo «hall be •*£• • pert of tM aiylua
record. Pnlosa tte oonaenm •*• elaMiX£«d«... th*
applieaat »hall ba ^Irva • copy of nea ooaocati
•ad b* prorlo^d aft opportunity to r**pond prior to
tbc iccitaa«« of an «4v«rM d««i«ioo.
8 C.r.R,S2OT.ll{e) (1V92).
TT*o Trial Attomvy »ay pr»»«at cOa««ifl«d
*« for th* rvoord, po«tiant to

A29 7S3 750

Cbw »-••<«*••-.•N**rTrvr«r**-***

" ftt?-16-1993 16:44 PROM* KEGIONflL COUNSEL EftSTERN TO GEN. COLN. HO P.88

M3R-1G-1993 15:23 FRCM ING SBiPR< LJLflS TO ROCOU P. 08

At aa rrid«ntlary h«aring bald on January 20, 1993, the
WWlar*ign«d acctpt«d, as aaa-ncard evidence, afl nnop*n»d
"»*crttw «ov«lap« contalniag & cla*«LCied U.S. frgparta^ot of
fitat* attri*ory opiaioa. Tb* undor signed r*e«i**3
•••crut-larai" svcority cl«ara«c» And bit authority to r**<l
•qcb tfocu»mut» Jlltikooglj th« nsdervigaed &«.• cutborlty to
butt bU a*cUion on th« ol»n*Ui*<i inforo&tiot) ooaUia^d in
th* *£tri»orjF opLoio&r tba uad«r»i9n«<l ba« not oonciterad th«
in r»«ehlag • <J«ot»lcm in
xmd«r«tqTJ«tJ *ccepted tb«
th« Bo«7d and Mghrr tcibunxla my c<an»ider tbe
information oontain«d in nob docoaoat, vhould either p*rty
«ppval froa thi« d»oi*ion. Tb« anderaiyn«d notes that tb*
inforroitioa coataifiad in tbo clasKifiad docttoent La relcraat
to tbe C«M *o4 L» » aor« datallad account of applicant's
all«7od aotlYitl*a that ar« wt forth La U«J uncliraified J
U.«. DcparUwafc of Xtat«« advisory opinion, datad October
2), 1992 and oxrkaa u Exhibit Ho. 6. Tfc* uadarsigaed finrtc
that Exhibit So. . 6 rc&saric** the cltesULod «tJri«ory
opinion- Adfrgoatalr to provid* tb« applicant vitb an
cpportenity to of fax opposing
ttw uxtd«rxigpMd LatoaaoA ttw paztias oa
20, Zff93 tb»t Ut« clasvified docwwt will act b*
part of tk* *rld4oc» that tin wdonlynod con*id«r« is
a decision la tttit oa««. Tbv r*zvirvMot* of *
d 236.3(0(4) &"• b«fl trt, ifl th*t,
r Ut« arpl leant has b«va gir0n aotio* of ttw robstanov of such
through Ww STttnarr proridod la tba
prori*ioo vtat««s
Ttw Trial ^ttom«y for tb«
•rldcao* for tba r*cora, inclndiag iotccMtion
clanififd odor I.O. H36t (2 CVK, 1902 cocp., p. 16€),
peovidod th> Inrnlgratioa Jodys or tb» Board has
that •ufli |flfffrnrHrlmi* jralArasfc to
tlw Xaai^ratioa J««lg«
Bctioa, b« clwll lafo*« th*
tbst pro7idu tba eU*cif i«d Infotwtioa to
ZoaigrttiOD JMf* «ay prorid* aa
tontxy of tl» iaformtttoa for relocaa to tlta
it dctcraiaM it CCA da *a eoa«ijtt«tttly vltk
boti tb* el«««ifUd natnr* of tb*
iaf«na«tion cad it« twirc*. Tb* raastty Blxwld be M
d«tail»d «• po««iblo, la erdar that th« applieaet
bairt aa opportunity to off«r oppociAf a-rid«ae», A
dtoitjcm baMd la wbol* or in part on «uea clanlfi«d
inforoctloa «hall ctat* tliat ouca infonorcion L»
mt«rial to ta« d*cition.

X25 7S3 750


M3R-16-1993 15: Z3 FRCM IKE SQPR< LLflS TO RDCDU P.09

U.S. D«p«rta«at of States advitory opinion

tf*t«d Octob«c 21, 1992 and urfcod a* exhibit Ho. i, and tW
applicant hu b*«n tfLran tha opportunity to offer oppo«it>9



In liro of txclu«ioa tad dcportctioo* tho applicant

a*yln» *a4 wi.tW>oldt»v of dwportrtUw, fey^
eectiorw 208 utd 24) (b> of th« A<rt. Owi«T «*ctioa 2 OS of
the Act, t-b« Attornoy C«n«ral, through «fl ImndTTttion Judge,
o*r »* • »*tt«r of di»cro-tion, yir»nt axyltaa to «J> individaii
who orrt« th« dofinition of & "rafugoa, " u provided in
101(4) (42) (X) of th« Act. This prtnricioe <3efin*« *.
who Lm
or QDviillz>9 to rvturn to, vad !• c&tbl* or
A to cvxll hlscolf or bert«lf of the
protection of» that ooontry b«cu»« of parovoatioa
or a v*Ll>foa»4ed f««r of p*r*»ccrtion oa account of
r*c«, rtll^ion, n«tiontlity, n«ab€r<iiip in a
p*rtiealtr coaicl group, or political oplaioo...Th«
t*xs 'r*ft>9«*r do** sot laeltxd* aoy p«r*on vbo
octtervd, incit*d, as«i*t*<5r or otherwise
pcrticipatod is tba p*r«*outlcn of any parwoo on
in a particular «oci«l gronp, or political opinion.
101(a)(<2)<X) of ttM Mtr 0 0.6,C. $1101(t}(42)(A);
fltt lltS TK8 T. qtrooM-FQB*«ot. 4dO U.S. 422, 423, 428, a.C
(1»»7). Ondtr thi* definition of "rofu^M" tho 4li*a «o«t
•how pact p«rt«<nitioa or * v«ll~fo9no:«a ft«r of rotur*
p«r*ecixtian in a p«rtioul«r oountty on coooact of r*c«,
nationality, wmfevrrttip in a particnlar
yiuup, or politic*! opinion, flflf »«ction« 101 (a) (42) (2) And
209 of the Aot; I»B llfla tt»t*«f of Ch*p. Zat*ria D«ci»ion
3104 (BXA 2VI9)
tba *li*a betrs toe bcrdta of proof of «*tabli»hiag -m
MU-eonndM f««r of pcrMotitloa. u« * c.r.ju
(1992}. M cppiiotat for tsylttft hM tst^Ufbttf m
w*ll-foond«4 f**r of fetttea p«r*«o«tioti if be «bovt ta*t A
r»**ot>«bl« p«rf«a ia Hi« eirevnuaotf voold f«*r
i p«r«*CQtiea oa ta« bnia of on* of ta* fir* ground*
rp*cifi«d in th« Act. Xttt*r of *c«fti*Tr*i>l,r 13 ItH 0«e. 439
. (HA 1987). rtw •well-fooztted fsex* «tud«rd r*quirei •
nhowing that U» fMr of p«r»«ctitioa i« ha**d oa a
•roasonabl* ponlbility* tlurt «ueh b*ra will occur. IBS y.
r»fi v. gtirrlg» pqprm. Thin
i* wax* co.tacoua than tht clear probability
*pplicabla to withholding of d«port*tioa.
Roard of In»rJ gr»tion Appeal* in
A29 753 750
. WR-16-1993 16:45 ,(

MPR-16-1993 15:24 FRCM IhS N30PR< LLfiS TO RCODU P. 18

Kffttgr of Kogharrtbi. 1» Z«f Dec. 4S» (BJA 1967} » that *

reasonable person 047 fear porsecotiori even if tJ»e
llVallhood that persecution a*y occur 1* •Ignificastly !•«•
than a clear probability. Ttr* Board of J*«ioT*tlon Appeal*
delineated tne vell-foanded fear standard thtt tb« alien
uurt «h<M la mtt>r of Xoc^t:^. 19 ZOT D*c. 2U
end nocU_fi»<l tb« itindtrd la ffrttcr pf
1) tha alloa matt powwc* « balivf or cb*r*ctttrJL*tic •
n«ks to ovtifcaao &y e»iuis of proiifcnwnt/ 2
could bwcooe «vmn» tbac tba alien povM**
belief or ch*r«ot«rijrtio; 3) tb« pcrvccvtor bc« tji*
of pMnl«hlog tti« ftllmr tod 4) tb*
tho inclisation to punish tb« aliaa.
if th« wldeooa indicate! that tba
cppliaut •ordarod, incited, ax*ictad, or oth«rvif«
p*rtioipat»d in tbo perffooutioo of any pervoa oa •cooont of
r«oar railpLon, Mtionaaity, mnfi»r«bip ID a p«rtioul«r
social yiuup/ or politiocl opinion*, bo shall h*rv tb«
burden of pzxnrlng by a prvpoodercao* of the •vid*oc* that h«
GiG not TO act. fififl e C.f.X.
Ordinarily/ f MT b«
object ivo erifeaov Bu^u-tiag «itb*r an lnf*r*aa* of
p«CT»cwtion or a rivk of fuUu« pai'Miutl-otu Ooorta
prefor docoaontory rridvao* «b«o eeacldartaff ttt* cridcnticrr
rc^oirvaant^ In Boa* in*taae**, homr*r, a rtfqo»* is in no
petition «o gather docoaeutary . *ri(t««e* and tud«r iadb
oirooercaao** tb« rvroow* own t*cti»o&7 will b« t2w ooly
aT&ilabl* «Tid«ncr», Tb«r«<QC«, aa ali*a'« own tm*tiaoaff
vittoot oorrooorativ* «yid«ac*f «»y auffieiwitlx prova a
f«ar of ptr*«outioo vfaar* taat t««ti»ony i«
oonBi*t«xt, and mf fiei»atly doeailod to provide
a plaaalixle aad co&^rmt «ccwwot for ttw b«*X» of tbe r»«r.
of J(ogh«rr«I>i. guora. Objectir* faeta ••tabllxlMd
}» er»dibl« aad pervoasir* testinony of tb«
Oo«v sot saica tbo»« facta law objvctiTa
74) r.2d s« (Ttb Cir* ISM);
767 F.2d 1277 <7th Cir. 1W4).

trta if t&« applicant ncta bi« bordaa of proring fer «

prtpoodaraoca of eradiblat aad peobatira a^-ideao* that ba La
•otitlod to reliaf pormaxtt to **etioa 209 of ttw *ot, ttM
r»7Ulttiooa prorido for tb« naodatary denial of as aaylan
•ppUottioo if -,..tba«« am raaaooabU grooad« for
recaiMLafl the aliea ac a «ltng«r to the acoority of tha
TJait«d «t«ta«.v 8 C.T.R.tJO»,14(o}(3>. furtlMraara-, a
grant of a*ylua ic ovwr naodatory. The Inntgratica jodge
may daar Mylow ia too •x«rci*« of discretion to aa alien
vno ectabliabea etatutory eligiaility for relief. IKS y.
.s. 421
Tb* re<3uiro»«nt» for asylom and witaboldiao of
deportation are similar, bat not identical. Before

753 750

.f«?-16-1993 16:46 FROn \L COUNSEL EASTERN TO GEN. COM. HO P. 11

M3R-16-199G 15:24. FRCM 1^6 t&£&(. LLPS TO RDCDU P. 11

for withholding of deportation, tho ali«n «o«t

•how that MJ "iif« or fmdos would to* Uur*«t«n*<l La <nwfe «
country on account of race, r*lLgLon« nationality,
noabojrahip in • particular tool*! group, or political
apLnLoa." MT 6«ctloQ 243(h)(l) of tb* Act. Za contrast to
«licibLlity for withboldlng of doportrtlon roquirw*
tb* «pplle«At 4«0oft*tr*.t« •• ei*«r p>.utmbillty* of
on Ao^ouot of OM or aorv of «» groiaxU
•znxaeritad La th« Zxalgrctioo tad JUtioajOlty Act* U« T.
gtrrie. 4(7 0.8. 407 (19*4) • Tb* «ppllc*nt vut <S«oKmatnrt«
u»t «it 1* torv IDccly ttua not" b« would b« nbj«ot to
per**ecti<m if r«qutr*<I to rvtnira to til n*U.v» l*M, wHioh
IB & con rtrtniy«it rt«ad*rt tb«s that nxjolretf for
eligibility of txylua. Ii. *t 425*30. Once an ilioa h*f
tttftJLbliBfeod that bo <jw*lifi«B for relief u»l«r the
provision* of Section 243 (h) of tbe Act, rallctf La ttifiditory
unl««« tfav tpplio&ct Lc b«rrwd by *a «zolu<io&ary provijioa
LA section 2O(b)C) of th« Act.
, r»U*f to notloa 2O(h)(l) of tixj Act
oo«« cot tpply to KQ If th» Attoraay c«Qcr«l
tb* a)1mi order*!, Locit*dr u«i«t«4/ or otbervLM
p&rtLoipAt*d La th« pcrmcntlea of «ur per«oa oa
account of rtc*, rtllclotif a«tioo*lltr, aaobershlp
La * p*rtieul»r >ocLal group, or political
noa-politicAl criffl* oottLo* tb* Uaitwl prior
to tb* *rrir»l of tb* «li*a la the
«t*t««/...or tb*r* «r* r**«oa*bl* gravaim for
r*c*rding tb* alLan «• c. d*ag*r to tb* »«curi.t7 to
th« Uoitod

*«t«blL*hLBg the rcqaireaoot* c«t forti in

sccticm 2«(b)(l) of tb* Act doe* cot «nta*Atic*lly «atitl*
u vpplLcut to vithholdiag of d*port«tLoa r*li*f .


Tb* AodcircigiMd b*ld «a vrldcatluy bcarlag oa

TO, 1993 to *odr**« tb* a*rlt« of «pplio«nt»« acy
wltauoMLog of d*port«tiaa reqacctc* Ttw «ppllctnt ««• tb*
Only pvrcoa t*«tlfylog «t *ttcb b**rLn«j. A •mstrr of
applicant «• t*«tL«oay «ad tb* cridcac* pr«««ot*d by feotb
p*rti«* i« set forth below.
Xb« applLcAat «pp«rvntly ba*** his utyltoi and
vltbboldLo? of (UportatLoo elaLo* on hi* political
opposition to aAd criticin of tb* XgyptLaa ootaximaut.
cb« applieaat «>f*rtt tb«t h« f«»r« for his
7S3 750
MPR-16-1993 16:46 FROM ^ .<£G10Nflt_ COUNSEL EASTERN TO GEN. COM. HQ P. 12

MPR-16-1933 15:24 FRCM IhE tGJPOC LIPS TO RXDU P. 12

lit* bvcauce hi cxiticixwd the Egypt*-*** Co»T«iu»wt throacfc

lectures, unlvtorBity synposiaa*, the news joediojB, and
at •Msjids* («o*qu«»»}. (gjtt txhibit Ho. 5, esylua
at Pert C, p. 2.) la him esylHa aj>pUeatioar
the applicant usorts tint he openly criticised tba

th«y do not «ff»ctn»t« th« Xvloic L.*v (SburUh),

though Kgjyt i» «a I«l«al<r couJiUy; corruption L«
raopvxtf criiM 1« ipCMUlizag •« iv tlw n*« of drag*,
alOOhol, pTTTTtitUtlAfl «Ad tlMLTyj th* gOTBTTUBBat
do«« not follow us iod*p*od*nt policy in its
qq-rmrolng polici«», th*y oiasply follow tha
injrtructiono of por* jjifluaatial pow*r*f and tb«
qotajtuaant i» wartiiv? XQTpt'* finaacUI<
acd •coaoeic reoourco*.
uscrtfl th»t b« fMT* for bin lif«, «r«*oao and
shonld IM rwtnza to hi* boo* country, and «•'•'«*« that
arrvrb«d MA for political x«a«o«c em aix
N oceaiioat , altboogh to* w«* n*r«r oonriot^a of anj crl«e.

During tb« pro««*41noi, tb« «pplicaat

follow* , ragmrdia^ h < » fix |qrr*rt« In t^Tpt, which fora tbo
b**i* of applloaat'K oLai«« for r*li*f.
that bi« firtt arr««t occnrr«d oo October 17, 1970
by tb« c«cr«t fftooritr Volio«> B* ««• d«t*ia*d for *tgbt
aontkc, vltltovt knovioa tb» c»a*oji for hi» dttfofcioa or
r«l*aiM». 8« «t«t«d tbat dnriag- Uii» d«t«ntioOf IM was
Q^M*Monadt baxton, tortnr«d asxl denied food and Mdlcins to
rait hi» haalUi -*ita*tioa. B« rtit«d that b* wac Dot
e&irg*d with -any crim «nd rwt broo^bt b*(onr a tribws*!.
Tba court cotas that tb* ajiplicaat. noaiatd t r*ald*at La
a£t«r thi* Incident.

Tb« applicant testified that h-J-» aocood arrest _oecarr*d

is October of If SI, vfaan polio* •uvrouadad his hooJM, took
hia aw«r and i«pi?i»oo«d nia for thrM r»*rf, witboat
initially *t*tiog th« r»*«oa«' for bU •rr*«t. Owriag his
incaxoorxtioa, th« tfovatoncut ch*ro»d tb* «pplicaat with two
ordering « *£«twabfi/,* or r«lloloo« opinion, ta
•ffoeto&t* th« «s*«stia«tloo of Pr»«id«Jt Juarar Ci4«t| tad
in ormrthrowtng too oiritttng «!•. Tba
tb« proo*«dj«gmr tb* described a
by «t*tio<jr

A porsoa coiws aad Mk« qoOTtioo* oo reUgteo aad X

annwsr...r* certain p«r»oa la a certain condition would
approach as an **k a« «bottt a certain subject...(Tor
•Cample, ] a peraoa «oald say, 'Z swore by divorce aoet I
carry it out?'...a frtvaa coocerna * private or personal
thing that happens to a person is act poesible [for
a Tatvah to be isrovd to tho public *t laroe].
A27 733 730 11

MPR-16-1993 15:25 FRO1 1KB hEL4=R<. LLflS TO ROCCU P. 13

{ applicant *«««rt« that both charg«i frara di«mi«««U &od bo

1 v»« released froa Incarceration after • trial on ttra
oorits. The court notes that the applicant contained a
r«si4ont in Icypt after this incident.
Th* respondent t*«tifl*d that hi* third arrest occurred
in Jaly of 19S5 by tb* Secret Police, and the police did not
dlcolova vby h« %n« »rr«rt*d. Althovsh bt w»« d«taifi«4 for
threa month* , b« vu o«r*r Jcraallj- cbtrQtd with t eriae.
Tb* court not«fl that th« appllotot r«Mia«<l * r«*U*at in
aftor thio inci4*at.
Th« rcKpoadoot AfMtrt* that hi* fcmrth arrcct
in Au?a«t or 9*pt«aib«r of 19*6 in Mv&a. (Szhihit Ho. 5,
Affidarit of Dear Xhsed Mi* pert. 7). B« rtitn that thi*
arr*«t: ooeorr*d b*caao« applicant eada a rvligioqt «pM^i in
th* »o«9^«f and »«vonty other*, who att«ad«d hit l*ctcr«,
v*r* al*o arrt*t«d. Ba tcttifi^d that ha vzs <S*t4in*d for
or*r a Bonth. Vhiltt hie apyiioatiofl ftlt*> that h*
va« not pr»*«Jt*d to a JTrfgw, th* applicant t««ti£i*d that
th* "acetic* for Ao9rivr*d r*rcoc*v ral*u*d Applicant,
da»pit:« th« Xiaiitar at Xntariar'i objvaticm. Th* court
notsc that the applicant rwoalaod a rraitat ia kgypt aft«r
Th« «ff«ext* th«t hie fifth arr*«t occorr«d ia
April of 1989, after applicant bad delivered the Triday
tch. (Xxhibit Ko, 8, Affidarit of Coar ttn*4 All,
8). Be s**«rts that th« polio* took MJB by forct, and
h* was detained fro*. April 1989 through Aocnst 1999
t* tll*y«dly incited anti-qorex nmont riots in
*o. 5, Affidarit of Ooxr Ahnad All, para. 8). The
assarts that altnouoa bo vs* officially charged
with arrsnginy a denoostration in the strevt, the Coort
ordered that tha charces be disaistod. The coort cotes that
tb« applicant r*aain*d a resident in Brypt after this
rin*llr, tppucant d««arib** his sixth arrest as a
•boas* arrest," The applicant as*«rta that during his
•boos* arrvtt,* which oocurr*4 b*tv««a Septstfbtv 1991
1990, hi* BOOS* wa* Birroonded cad ha could not lam, or
hatr* friends, or xvl&tir** ricit. n* oooct note* tatt tb*
applicant lest departed from cgypt in 1990, daring this
•boas* arrest.*
In addition to his tvstisttny regarding his six arrest*,
between 1970 and 1991. It appear* that sine* 1970,
applicant traveled to seed! Arabia, th* united state*,
Denmark, London, Sudan and Pakistan for "pilgrimage* and to
attend conference*. • Th* specific facts r*9*rding
applicant's travel outside of Egypt are not clear froa
A2? 753 750

MQR-16-19S3 15:25 FRCM INS LLflS TO ROCOJ P. 14

applicant'* teatiaotty oV tbe docu»«nt» o£ nuutil. The

applicant te*tUi«d that 5 be la*t left tgyyt la April 1V90.
by obtaining A •*!•« to eafcAr ftaodi Arabia. Tbe applicant*»

11 J intended to it*T* for 8«udi Arabia on an CKRA

<pllOTi»Age) Ixjt VM oot permitted to lerrw within
the tin* prorld«d (OS La tb« rl**. Tb*r*fora, Z
Witt to CwUn «nd z«A&l&*d tb«r« tec about 1
•ontli. JTotn tb«r« Z Mat to y«)rt «t«n for I
H tb«n to BvadL Ar*bL» for two dty» pUoriKU?
«xi th«a o«»* to the tT&lted |t«t*« cm July 18, 1990.

(Exhibit No. S, AffLdarit of Omar Aimed All, pan. 10.)

rtctc* th«t h*
tb* tJnit»d 6t*t«« on Jolt "» i*90 °° • Tlaitor'* ri«*,
il «igr«t«<l to th« Dait*d stAtM by «ajtt«t»a«nt of «tAtn« la
AprU of 1991. Tb« District Dirtctor r««ointed thin etatoe
I oa lUrcfa 6/ 1992 boc*ui« tb« ipplicmnt v4* •xclndabl* at the
tin* cf- tatry *a^ Mid* mi*r«pr*««nt*tLon« CD hi* «4jartB*nt
Tbe cppllcBit twrtiIi«Kl tha£ la October 1970, t>*
•th* Pait*d *t*t«* for London, cad tb«a r»tura*d to
Oolt*4 «t«t>M oo tb« ••»• TlM la KovMfMf of 1940. Be
rtated «Mtt b« left the Tto4t«4 «t*t«« iA Deoeaber 1590
trmreled to Denmark for on* w»«k, «ad appereotlr rwtnrned to
the Oait«d:et*ta» en t4»e Mn* vi»*. Zh* Applicant tMtifiwi
tnatf before fttteaptln? to eater the Dalt*d £t*t*s la July
of 1991r IM iMt Mtcrod tb* United 8t«t*« on P*eeobtt 16,
1990 AS A visitor foe plAAAttr*. Tb« applicant »a*ert< that
b» ba* not retttraed to »3ypt tic«* lAA-rtn^ la 1990, aad
f»>r« ti*t Lf be «rtwrn« to Xgypt, 'tbey [tbe oo»eraaeat)
will *«t op cb«ry«« AO^lnirt 0e to pot aw In privoa or kill

In Addition to mntirfering the applicant •• twtinony,

fc tni« court Colly cad carefully -con«ld«r«d auaaroua pl«c«c of
r oridoacv •pocificAllf cvlctiag ta the Applicant aai tbft
ot«t« of •££Airs in Xojptf InclodingZ/i Ikatic* to ..

I OQ JAOoAiy 20, 1993, tb*

cttoa tad iaclod«d la t]»
wcdotd foe
ef proct«diag«
ft, V, 0 Wd D, bQVtTttf, tbe
parti** that each
loch «xBlM.te Are tdeatlflad AS followit Ivttor
from Jans Xlolcfalello, Barrloe TrlAl AtVwmij, dated October
27, 1992, nqoecfciag thAt tbe uodflrwlooed Accept A
clAAYifiAd report into tbe record, pormAat to 8
C.F.B.««0«.ll A0d 23«.3(c)(4) (Xxbiblt A ) j Applicant'*
Xotlcm for XntatcroffAtorle* 6 ftvqa««t for Production of
Oocu»«at« (Xxhibit 8)7 fArrlCA xaaorafldnai la C5ppo*ition to
Applicant '« Notion for InterrogatorLM c y*qa«*t for

A29 753 780


tTR-16-1993 15:2£ FROM IhS hBJ5R< LLPS TO ROCDU P. 15

> Applicant tor Mai •§ Ion D*t«ln«d for R*trlns 8«foro

Xjnalgration Jud?» (fora 1-122) (Sx&Ibit Ho. I)/
p*p»rttKJot of Justice, Immigration «nd JUturaliMtion
Tom I-UO (Exhibit *fo. 2)f paekaa* of docmx»lt«,
Motion to T«mUt«t« r*clu*ton prod**diatf«,
counsel's lettar of Joo« 9, 1972 Indicating applicant's
desire to «ub«tJLtat* .eoan>«lf ooun*«l'* l*ttur of Jttae 10,
1992 «ddr»«»*d to applicant'* forvcr COOAMI, <s*ci>Loa
cmtorvd by th« aod«r«lgto«d on July t> W2 orantiJD7
•pplicaot'v r*?u**t to »ob«tJ.tut« cotm««l (Exhibit Bo. 3);
ajrylca cppllettion [roca I-M9) tiled on Jttn« 11, 1932
(Exhibit Ho. 4); tcylua application [fora I-SM) filed on or
Aayurt 27, 1992, counsel's lett«r of Ao^utt 25, 1992
th*t a Etatfi Department Advjjiory opinion be
aad applicant'* affidavit fil*d on Awgrast 13,
inin^ It*a /33 o£ FQCB* J-B89 (rchibit So. S)|
uaclM«lfi»<S D.f. Dopcrtaoot of fft*t« aflrLtory opinion dated
Ootob«* 23, 1992 (Exhibit Ho. <}£/; . Kotle* of Diitrtct
Director'* Xntont to Rasolad Statox, d«t*d Jauuary 16, 1992
(SxMbit Ho. 7); District Director'* rinal Onlar Rescinding
fftatvw M ?*nMuMmt iu»aidaat, dated Xarcb €, 199
Ro. 8); cooaMl'c lectarr dated January 12, 1992,
fcror report* oa tb« hmain riflbta situation in ttfypt, threa
docuavetv reaarding applicant's court ca»es La Soypt and

four o«>r»p«v«r article* reUtiac to tbe epplicant; (Exhibit
Ko. t}r C30uas«l'» letter, dated January IS, 1992, eaolosia?
teaoaty mterrntional^Retiert* far 1986, 3«67, 19W aad 1990
(RxfrLbit Ko. 10); Application for F*raaa«at Kosloence filed

>l oa January 31, 1991 (TrMbit Bo. 11); eooBlttees on Poreigo

K«l«ttoos cad roreiott affairs, 102d Coog., 1st S««8.r
, 1985.
lf9Q aad 1221 ( Bo. 15 J; er articles

2/ (ooot.) Prod^otioa of Oocoxwnt* (Exhibit C)j

Xaooraodua of L*w to Support Zsoigncctioo Jodoe's Aothority
to Vacate District Director's "R*«ci*«ioa issues* in
JUdttsioa Bft4rin7s (Xxhibit D).
At en iadlvidaal ocleodar b#«riog held on octob** 27,
3992, applicant's attorney objected to tlw iaolotio« «{ tb*.
caclaaslflad XJ.». pepartatot of 8t«tt ~
dated October 23, 1993 (exhibit *o. «), into the record of
prooe*4to7» oatil counsel CUrf isterrooxtorie* t» be
•asveged by tba- CT.f. Depai'tiaaut of state, the TOd*r*igo«d
orernle<[ counMl't obJeCttoo, and accepted Xzhibit Io. €
into tfte rtoord, stAtlng ti*t tbe «pplU»nt «U1 be cinm
tbe opportunity to rebut the infotnactloa oaotalned tboroln.
The undersigned' • refus*! to persd-t tbe applicant to suboit
ifit«rro7ctories to tb* Dspectatat of lt*te in oonooctiPn
vita en advisory opinion does not coastltnt* • <Uslal of doe
' 18 X « H Dec. 276 (KZA 1982),

M9 7S3 760

£• grown
fW-16-1993 16 = 43 FROM* <£G IONflL COUNSEL EASTERN TO ^ GEN. COUN. HO P. 16

MPR-16-1933 15:26 R=CM ISG S&PFK LLPS TO ROCDU P. 16

c \(
raLrtlng to tha ApplicurtS (Exhlfiit Ho. 13); aeaarvxluni
from tb« U.S. Esbtscy Ln Cairo, d*to<J toptoabor 29, 1791,
r*g«rdiJ>9 lkwuit« «7U-art the applicant foe cbecfc tccyury
(Exhibit Jfo. 14); Court of AppcilJ Verdict rrroiJjiy chargso
«7i±nrt th* Applictnt regarding ch*cV for7*ry (Xxhibit HO.
15); ftad *U ottutr otrml and written erLd8n««Ifi/<
rtitoojantj, testLmonjr uid juroroMatt »«t forth bf «M on
b«h«If of th« *pplLc*at «ad C«rvio« daring th* Mrur*« of


Xftor cu»fal e«n«i4«rfttioa of

on bcbtlf of tb« tppliaut «nd th* S«rvlc«,
\ conclude* that it treat dsny applicant'* request* for
in tha United *t*t«v «nd withholding of deportation to Bgypt
aoveral reaaon*.
first, this court sort <J«xy 4pplio*nt'« rwjxwrt for
relict boauiM th« «pplicact hu not iMt hi* burdcs of
prorin? «t*tntory eligibility foe either «eyltn or
withholding of deport^tioa. kppUeact'v tevtiaonr i«
irtsufficiautly detailed, coatisteat, bcliorxble tad credible
to provide « plrocible «ad coherent b«*i> for hla fe«r of
per»«oatioEi. The Bo«rd ctete* th*t Terr
fftttoaotttc of f*»r wiU ia asct case* not vaffioe. in
Toaor&l, the a*«9««Dent of the application for ««rtaa eboald
b« qpialitatiTe* not- tiaantltxtive.- Kooharrabl. tnrpra at 446.
Che applleant a**ert*-that be feer* petreecutloa beeasae
he criticiiad the Egyptian governaeot throagh lectore*,
nnivaraity ayapociumar nev* nedioa, and through veraona at
• Baa*jida" (Bo*qo«). The court note* that tha Egyptian
Penal cod* prohibit*: a place of worihip to be «ted tot
antl-^ovmrnjaect *peedJ*«. PPflffttfY. ^Bgfflfltf fof ^91- tt
13S3. IThile iapliedly p^ooedioff thtt »«Ch a law prnontly
exist*f the applLeant *tat»d dorlag croe«-*rMi< nat-jrnw »thi».
lav v&a enacted by the vuietpaaat to stay U» power.*

i/ Tba Trndcraigoed ha* gives o*>«ap»par article*

evidentiary weight than other evidence contained ii.
record of proceediagv b*c*x»e of the valve of the probative
evidence contained therein*

The imd«r>l9a«d «cc«j»t«4f ft* mmreoord eri<Jenc«f *a

j«tf •••crtf «nTtlop« eontUnlas « eUttlfitd U.S.
D«p*rta«Tt of stAt* *drLiocy opinion. M pr«Ylo««lr
forth, the rw^iircaeat* of e C.r.]t.SS20$.Il(o)

A29 753 750 13

MfiR-16-1993 16:49 ,r.
n=R-l&-1933 15:Z7 FRO1 ihE I-€UW< LLfS TO RXOJ P. 17

I \ ! th« applicant a*y tsar bouo« arrest ox m«n future

the Xgyptian yu»ei:iwieat lor po»il_biy
Jsryptian i»w, this court Ooee not belt*™ that
•j*r»*c«tioa" and •pro««cutloa" are on* and tha M**.
Prosecution, a* a legitimate exercise o£ oortkrn»»itt, Is not
por*«etxtlon. fifif Kattgr of A-0-. 15 I t R D«c. 502 (BIA.
1787) , aff^q rub jjfla^ ?..X. v. I.H.B., 858 f.3d 210 (4th Cir.
1990) (m base). TriWAl* of th« Onitod Ct«t«« do act
9«n«nair «ralnat« thA political juctificctionf Of tb«
action* of tcrviga g^ranxMist*. Id. at 608, citing
KaY*h'BtofaigY T> t.g.s.. 78 J F.M 1321 {9th Cir. 1M6J.
rha court. fi£di that ti* tpplioaat fallM to *»tabllab
that be ffturs *pen»cntlon" •• dafia*4 by the Act. The
applicant tuu £ail*d to «KtablL«h a fear of p**t p«rs«cution
or t£at hi* f*«r La v»ll-fowxJ«d. Tor •xo^lc, tha
c^llczct failf to sbov that th« OorerttMst has Che
incHnrtjea to praiafe bin* Oodar th« Ia>«j.u<mqT I-**r vhich
baa t*«a In wffMt cootlnaOQilr «lno* ta« a»Mt»Bia*tloti of
Pmldont Aowar Sadat In 19B3., a p«rxm aay ba b*ld
without chary* or due proems vhlla an
1* conducted. Ccnxaltt*os on rorvloa Halation*
and Torviga Xf fairs, 102d Ooaf., lirt Cess., Couatrr
1411 (Joint
1M2 1 < •

court <jut*tico* vbrthor th« •pplleaat** Mar !•

or wh«th4tr h* Lt janruly claiming snob f«*r to
attftopt to otty in th« U&lt*d Stot*c> Ste applicant now
bit** hi* f«ar of persacutioa on his vix arrests, vhlcfa
otcorrwA froa 1970 tbre«)n 1990. Tha coort note* that tte
applicant first vifitad tha V&itvd' State* la 1990, Mt Old
not apply for axylua la tha TJnltad «t«taa until tb* nmnar
of 1992, a couple of month* «ft*r the District Director
rftscljidad •cppllca&t't paroa&eat rwidaoce vtctos. IndetO, a
fa*r of past parsacotioa, doa to tb*«a six prior arrwrts,
vould hara been apparent to the applicant in 1990, whao tha
applicant last departed fro* Xgypt. OaspLfcc th* applicant's
trtrol to fire or six foreign ooxottrie* bat»a«a 1990 aod
tha applicant first alleged a fair of percacotioa In
of 1992. * -

tha procaadiogt, tha Mrrlo* Wkad th* applicant

i! Vbathez h« kaav that h« tppllad to ba « panwoant resident
beocQs* ha Is caeaaotad with tha 01«ryr «s a •paolal
AiAistar, which bad nothing ta do with asrloau Kafora
TOill« tba on Hgnata Itlnhts Tr
for 1390 Is not a cootroUiac score*, it Ls halpfol in
evtahlishlag tba ttaca of afTair* in *7ypt, a« 1009 *• tha
applicant I* prorldad with an opoortonitr to iaapaot,
explain, sad rabvc tha satarial, ttnltr** «h« s«ta«lal i*
classified ood«r X.O. 12356. 6 C.f.R-

129 7S3 750 16 r '•*.-• • »

-•:. •('.'•-'• •'•" '.'.':'•. '*'':':''.:.

MPR-16-1993 15:27 FROM ISB hEU*5< LLPS TO RCCOJ P. 18

narrating about 'tiixunv fr*«doa i» th« oait»<l stat«»', tho

an«v«r*d, 'yes*. Ta» applicant ao«« not «ll*g« or
that b« -flod» In 1990 b«caa«« of part

Tb* applicant baa al»o failwd to «wtablirt a f*ar of

parafrculioc. 7M applicant baa not »iwwa, through
hi» t**tinooy er th* doeueMAtary evidence of rwcorfl,
r«W«i«bl» p«r«aa in bi« oLrwaai*toBo«« voold
p«r**cistion on th* b4aL> of on* of tbe UTB
«p^jLft»d In tb* Act. Furtb«rj»or«, th* «vplictat do*« not
ost«blicb that eLrottectinevi b»vw cbaogod in
1990, to javtify « tmtf of ftftant persecutioa.

• I In for
of pr»«Kl«rt juaru- S*<Ut In
th» exittiog rwl*. th«
H« did not leant to «*«k m*yloa out«Ldo of
1986, after bciag »rr«it*d by th« Egyptian cm
thrw» occasion*? tbo applicant l«ft Xgypt and
tb* Calt*l r&at»a for *pyruxinat*ly tvo to
att«od 4. OOOf«r«Dc«. Tba appltoant did aet fil«
application la tba United St*t«a at that tiae.

Tb* aTplLeant t*«tttled that in 19*7, aftor bcia?

arT**to4 by th* Zoyptlan yoTarnfMiit on appzoxittatdy four
ooea«ioo«« tb* avplieant l*ft Igypt aad vixit«d tb* United
8tat*«. Tb« applicant did aot fila an vrjl.'am agpl Icatton in
tba Unit*d Statti at tbat tin. vhon qo*«tloa«d about hi*
fallvr* to apply -for wylm in 1587, tb* applicant atat*4
that b* did not apply for fcaylwa «t tlwt ^iaa b«c«s*t b* va«
th«3 allomd to l**r» tgypt. Aftor tb* terriet axted UM
apylicant «b*tb«r JMJ *«* afraid of r*tumlng ta Xgypt La
tb* applicant *tat*d that b« vai alvay» afraid that b«
b* charged or arr**t*df hat ha

Tb* applicant ta«ti£i*d that b* last d«part*d fro* Kflypt

la April of 1990, by obtaining a ri»a to trard to Saodi
Jirabi* for "pilfriaao**. jatboogb b* «t«t*d that b* was
und*< •bog»* arr**t* at thi* tto*« the polloa allowed fain to
loa-r« for **qdi Xrabi*, aad b* vtui **oort«d by four c*r»
frota his boe*« to tb* aicpocb. Za applicant'! aaylaa
appUoation (TxMbit no, C, «t Part D)r tb* applicant vtata*
that hia lavt dvpartoz* Croa Inpt wu in Xay of ISM, and
applicant traveled tbroogh AtdaA and ft&ivtan after l**viog
Zfypt. Tb* applicatlott Cttrtb«s «t«t*« that applicant
romaindd in Sudan for oa« aooth vitb frianda. Tb* court
not«« tbat the applicant did not £11* aA a«yl«a application
in Sudan at tbat tl*». Applicant '• a*yl«a applieatioa
farther a*cert« tbat tb* applicant ttayod la rakivtaa £o«
on* aontb with fzrl«ada. rh* court not** tbat tb* applicant
did not f il« *n ««ylom application in Pakictan at tbat time,



The applicant t««tlfi«d that h* vi»it»<l the\d

Itatet in Jttly Of 1990, yet be did not file an' avyliA
application in tiro Qnlt^l 8tat«e «t th«t ti*e. tbfl
applicant teetilied that be loft ttow o»it«4 ctatea in
octob«r of 1990 tad rUited London. B« testified th»t be
did not file en JLcylna application La Crvat Britain at that
tl»*. Th» applicant testified that h« KKXBMA to th« Btat«« on Horoabor IS, 1^90 end rvnalAad tor about
one vonth, htrt. b« <lid not «pply for Myltza tt
Tb« applicant t«ttl£i*d tbict b* Iftft th* United 9t«tcs
for «pproxie<it«l ooo wa«k in D«c
bat b« did not f ilt tn Acyltm application in D«x>axk 4t th*t
tina. TIM *ppl leant t«rtifi»d that be cvtar&*d to the
United rtatw OQ D«c«ab«r 16r 1990 tnd M»» adaittad to
twain ontil Julr IE, 1991. B* did not til* ux aJtyln*
application in th« naitwd «tat«» at that tia«, dfi«pi.ta Hi*
Kix prior arr«BtK and trwMsdon* ti»« apaut la <J«t*ntioar
which form tha bciis of hi* aayloa *nd withhold in?
To wujowarit*, th« applictnt l*ft Xftypt on mwcroac
b*tv*«a 1970 ar>d 1990, after «i^ arrtcts, four
«nd foor month* total ti»» in goTcroMot drtaatioo^
and oa« 7*ar and tnr*« eonthfl total ti»t vadar hooca
armt. Tb« applicant twctified th*t b* fixat vUited f«adi
Arahix in 19S7 and Tiiit«d Saudi Xrabta, alon«, oa cix to
•iotit oeeavionc for piigria*<j«. d» applieaat TiJtited
Pttd»nf PuXirtan/ Cavdi AraM*, I<ondoot Dvavark aod the
TJaitod Btctea ait*r ha cteptrfccd £roa Bgypt in 1*50. Owpita
th« tc«a*adoac ti»* «p«tt IA cor*roa«»t co«tody b*t^aan 1970
a&d 1990« and tr**aaoco« tl*» ipcot tr&valiag ootsid* ol
teatv^on 1990 aad 1992, th« upplicant did not £il« an
cpplleation in th« Otxit*<3 Gtat«« orrtll th« ammm; of

Hb«a avkvd vhy b* f*ll*d to file «a ajyloa applicatioa

in Band! irabit r*th*r thsa rctamiag to X>jypt» tho
applloant «t*t«d, 'ftcodi Xeabi« is ww* oppctMiv* ttea
Kgypt.' Tb« *pplicact th«a *aa«Wfte*d that **•*• ar» BO
coozrtries ia which XiloUc t*v I* practiced a* ttrictl; aa
th« applicant b+liorw it »heald kw praotlotd. Thjt
aalcod th« vpplio«Bt «hy h« k«pt ntocniag to
b* va* bvittQ p4J!Mcot*4 thcr^« Zbt
'z c*Ua.u»d tQ r^rpt ia an «tt««pt to
prcwurt oa M to I ova «t«y ia Xg^pt*..Z tbouyUft th« tiTft
aod •acoad (arr**t«] might b« itoUtvd - b«t wb*a tb«
oppr»««iott inoroaMdf Z appLLod bo «t*r i« tho Qnitad
«t«tt*.' CM applicant did not dvfia* or •laborct* oa the
* ia rgypt that initiated bis dMira to «t«k
th* Oait*d
s«cond, «v«n if aa alLra caecMd* in estahliibiav *
f«ar of p«r»*«utioo, b* will not b* or«nt*d «cyl«tt
unites .ha »rt«blJjRhei -that- the ^ feared porcecutioo woold be
' natipoality, Ts
".Mf*-16-l993 16;50 FROM f IGIONfiL COUNSEL EASTERN TO \3GEN.
15:29 FRO1


a particular tocial group, or political opinion. ifl. at
447, Tb« applicant did not a«t«rt ot that b<*
e o u . of n*tionalLty, nor
doo* th« rvi4«nc« of record land itaalf to such a claix.
Tb* applicant does not assert or establish that be fears
P««*CMtioa on aoctroot o« »«ib*r«iap l» » p*rtLc«l«
group. In f»ct, tb« applicant i^»ciiic*lly
in *or orgvnlxxtloa, «ltho«9b tb
•dri«9C7 oplAioo (SxU^it Ro. t),
(XxMl>it Kc. 12), and n«w*pap«r urtioles
KO. 11} all*7« ctb«rtri«*. tt» applicant did oot uicrt or
th*t h« ftara p*r«eoutioa on •ccoont ot
b* «p»cUiC*lir tntifibd tb«t bo oppow*
U»t Rcjjrtian Oov*£meot for aot otrictly tpplyieg
tb* I«l*aio t«y,l2/ ttMT«tonr tiw only crgr&Mat that tba
AppLictat »U*7«*, aod O4A prtvtil on, i* hi* alleyed few
o£ p»z-**euUjan oa account of political opinion.
Th« court fiM» tb*t th« «ppllc*nt hu net wtahli«t»d
that b« £«r» p*r»*Otttioo on .. •occmnt ^_of bi* poU-tlcal
: J opinion. Tb« cpplictat tMtifivd tb*t b* twgan
ao an ••tictant ptatttmor at th« ocrr«rn»«nt run
TTniwrvity ia 1973. E* mtmtmrn tb*t la 19«U, vfaen c«l**»«d
frcm « tbr*« yaar tar» of incatc«ratioQf be v»« ttanafmzuU
to • another job* witbin th« oniT^rcity, vb«r« b« 'prayftd to
Ood nod t*ach [*io) at any plaa*.m TtM applicant »6nltt*d
th*t tb« Zoyptlaa Comment raa AI-JUb*r QnlTcnity tad the
cogaraaoat paid «fplicaat a aalazy xtutil th» *nd of
1989. Zt *MO« iaorvdiblft to tba ooort, that to* cgyptian
would prr tb« applicant a salary ftoa 1973
through tha aod of 1988 to har* th« cpplloast teteb and
porvo* r*Uoioa« aotiriti«i a« to* applicant »«w £txr and ate
tb* Mfi« tift*, pariocuto th« applleaat for his political
Tbo applicant t««t_Ula4 r«pmit«dly that tba XayptJLaa
court* dlsoUff«d all ehaxo** «r*r %ro«ght aotifi«t
D«»pita his noaaroov urvttt* tb« apnlloaot has aartr
ceorlotad of ortninal ch«C7»»* * With thi* ia miad, it
that tit* tgyptlaa triboaalv. Which arm part of tb«
• Oovmcm*at, ar» fair ia th« •dainlctratioa of juiticv, awt
do not p«r*«cata- or dlaoriainat* oo aecoaat of a da£«ada«tr*
political opinion. Thlc ooort thacvfttr* ra«l« that th«
Oocrts «U1 lltely gira the applicant a fair trial/
•hoold charges b* lodo«d •gaiast hl« la Bgypt.
tba applicant assarts that b* ««s btttan and
pbymically aboaad by th* VoyptLaa polio* and Oorvrnaant* tb*
applicant mutt show »or« thta nlstrs«tast(t to establish
parsvcotioa oador tha Act, *(X]n order to prow
'on «cocunt of' env of tb« «nvpvrat«<l 9zwid«f an alian
Tb« tgyptiaa CoftStlttttlOfl .«stabllmh«w Islam as
Btato raligioa. conatry
" ' flaportsJf 'or ^1991 1174, 1S81 (Joint

MflR-16-1993 16:51 FRQH(



do aor* than ' •nov oi«tr»«to*nt by th* <f

\t or
particvljur v*°"P«* Hatter . ef r-. Int»ri» D*oi*ton O167,
p.10 (BIX 1)92).

Additionally, to th« extant that th* applicant f«ara

rwtriburtioa or«r panoa*! di*4$r**n*at* with th* Xgyptian
7r*aid«nt, Xin<at-ar of t&t Zotvriori oz th« like, th*
Applicant, oannat MtablUh that h* £«*r» p«r»«cation on
account of hit political opinion to aatisfy «toticaa 20t or
243 (h) of tba Aot« Aa alien fwceiag rvtribvtioa orsr
in tJMlr country weoin not qualify for aaylva, b*oau«« thftir
v«ll fourtdad f»*rf would not b« on BCCQUTTC of
raliylocx, cation*litr, aemborabip in a particular
yioup, of political opinion, fi*^ y^^^^y of ft7^*» £22C&*
!Tt>* applicant O)0*a aot ap*^ifically *atahliah whAn^ why*
ho*, or who p*r**cat*d hia in th« pa«t« or vill pacooout*
him in th* futur*, on accou&t of hia political opinion, Urn
•iaply «laborat*d on bit tlx prior arr**t«r c«n*rtllted of
Oovuxiuuviit &latrv*ts)OQt« aad vtat^d th* isau*a upon vhion h*
criticizes th* OoraranKtb. Mcaut* th* applicant
f*il«<l to e*t*bLijih p*»t p«r««Ctttioa ox * wall-founded
of fotTire p*r«*cQtlera oa account of cn« of
uamei*t^d in Ut« Act, b« h*s fnilod to
tlwtt b« 1* vtatotacily viiglbla for asylwn r«lief por»u*at
to toctioa 20S of ti>* Act.
Third, to CM wctcnt that ti* applicant cannot
d«aoa«trat* vt&tctory ali^lbllity for aaylna, it follow*
ttutt h* oaaoot t*t*Sliso vtctutor? «lio^bilitj- Eor
vithbolding of d«portt£ioa» nattmr pf T-. pqnr*. citing
848 ?.2d BM, 1007 (9th Cir.
Th« appliemat sa«t daoooctrat* tbxt "it i« nor* likely than
not* b« vould b« rabjoct to parBocotioa if r»nuic*d to
r* tut ft to hi* filtir* la&d, Mhicta ia a JBOT* vtri&gaat
than that r«q«ir*d for •legibility of aayliau nffl
467 U.S. 407, 429*20 (1984). Xovrrer/ «r«a if
tb« applicant cas «*tablish that th« gtatotary rvqoiraoente
for asylwa bara boon »«tr tbt «rid«twt ia thia oaa« do*a not
dacoa»tr»t» that it ia •oat* litaly than oat that; UC th«
appliowrt; oo« imUtoad to tgrpv ta would b*
wi-tbin tbt mnslat of th« Act. mil* the ayplicw* «ay
acr%»t or vra« future iaprisaoAtst by tin
tbi» ooort Oov* not btliar* that it
Uk»ly U«a act that th« v°T«rna«ttt woald •pBrvcoot** within
tb« •ftaala? of th« Act. th« Xgypciaa way •proMOttt*" m* a
Ifrgitiaat* excrciv* of goymrajMmt. H rtqmrt for meh
tfflOlof «art tborvfor* b« d«ni»d. fififl ««(li)(l) oC tba Actj
TKS v. Ctrric, 467 D.S. 407 (19«4)| t C.IMU $208.16 (1992).
Fourth, «YTO if th« Application aatablifhtts that fa* haa
• w«14. fooad«6 f*«c of p*r*«oatloo oa account of hi* raca,
religion, n«.tioa*lltjrr Diecaberahip ia -a particular
or politic*! opiniottf hit asylua application «nai:
A79 753 7SO

MPft-16-1993 15:29 R331 IKS KO*PR< LLflS TO ROCOJ P. 22

because tb* applicant has failed to artablUh tfc»t be C <=?O

raerite itrylvn relief as a iutter of discretion. Throughout Q / '-_>
the proceeding*, the applicant failed to tnever questions
specifically and directly, doepite e^reral re<jneet« froa tb*
under* lo^Md. Tvrthexxer*, tbe court finds that tbe
applicant nade one or *or* nisr*pr*fentations in bis

In a«ddl»7 applic«tion« Cor

conciter natcrUl proridBd by tha Dlctrict Dirvctor. 8
C.r.K. $20B.11(«)(1973>. on ttorob C, 1992, th« BLrtrlct
Director mcisd«d th« «pplic»nt'« p»ra*o«frt r**id«i-t *t*tue
b«cca«« the appllcutt v»* «xclud«bl« *t tbo tifi* of rate?
purvukAt tot (*ction il2(»)(«)(c> of th» Aot, for
ml>r*pr«tftfit«tioe cf • cJttarial ftct, oajnaly, for C&illag to
hla yriof »*rrl*go oo hif adjoctasnt of it*tua
Bwctioo 2I)(it)(Xl> of tb* Act, for FT»ctioir>g
l3(fc)(2)(X) of th« Act for * coarlct^»
of a cria* ivrolvin? "Ctrtl tcrpitud*, in tint, Applicant W*fl
fOQfid Guilty Of tlur** OOttlTt* OE f*lttflO*tiOfl Of • prlTCt*
not* -cb«qa«,« (or wbitfls It* vti Mac«aot4 to thrvt natrthi
i*prl*oranaat for th* coorLctloo*; «aa ClaiOly/ pornuit to
••ctloo 213(a)(6){C) of ti» Aotr Cor failing to di»clo«o
•neb «rr»«ts aod ooorictlon* ct tit* tifi« of &U Leterriow
court pzorio«d th« •pplioiat witi> en upportanity to
«cpl»iay *ad r»bot tb«- satcrlal. TlM applirmfc, in
faotr «xrv«r*o: la hit «CJcstawnt of rt»tu» Applioctioa.
(Xxhlbit Ko. 11} d«t«S J*imary 30, 1991, that h* btd oarer
boon B*rri*d b»for». tfloa ZxbibU 11, p. 1, Q. 20).
nirtbux, tb* »pplio«rt tn«w«r*d in bis to^wtawst of ctctiui
application tbct b* i« not * polyfoolct and Oooo not
advoott* poLy^ooy. (fitj. bbibit U, p. 2, Q. 26(O)>.
c»wpit« tb*M affirMtioos, turn appli<r*nt tcrtifiad tb«t
Ayccba vu hi» wifo vfaoa b* «ppli«d for «djn«ta«at of
»a<l b« mrri^l b«r oo JTO* 30, 1972 in *9ypt> B*
t*«tifUd that h* «aerUd 'T«tW b«£ort October 22,
1984, bat be •orrivd h*# after be »trri«d >y*«U. Tb«
epplloast testified tb*t b* au»v«r*d •»>• to tJM polygony
oharg* b*«caM be only b*d one vift «t tbt tU» of
applioatioa, and tbet b* diroccM Vttta ftt tb*
•fid of 1989 07 tbe b«7lcftinc of 1990. It tppetzs tJut tbe
applioaat m*, in f«et, twrrlvd to both fty**ba end fatea
tbe 1980' •.
Additionally, tbt applieaat turvcrvd in bis »d}it«tjaeat
of etxtae eppUo4tioa (todiibit Ko. 11) that be bad nerer
b««a arrrested, eited, ebcrged, ooorictcd, or ioprittaed for
breekiag or rioUting *ay lav or. or<lln»nra, and bad a«T«r
b«*a tba Dvoefioiary of a pardon, •oaesey or otter »ct* of
olooency. (£££ Zxbibit 11, p. 2, 0. 24) Tb* applicant now
ba**« bis avylua and withboldiag applieatioas on biM nix
arr«sxff and detention* in <9ypt b*tw««a 1970 aad 19?0, which
occurred baforg th« appllcaiit fil«d fotr-ad)urt»«at of etatu*
A2? 753 7SO

MPR-16-1993 15:30 PRCM 1KB KBJ^RK LLPS TO ROCOL) P.23

to not ttnt*ral«b«d. TT* cowt th«c»for»

applicant'• candor in testify!*! daring th« procwdiiigB and
ansv*ring tb* <pi*«tion» »at forth In oi« application for

Th* record contain* littla or no atexr«Uiag ag^ltioa

to orftrcoo* th* ncgatlv* diacrvtioaary factor* pr**«at. roc
«itmpl«, tb« applicant' • vpoott tod trr. cbil«r«a «r« not in
tire Onit«<l St»taa. Tberefac*, vrta i£ th« cpplicaet aaet*
tho »t«t\jtor3r e«qalr«aMitm £or a*ylua r*LL«f, tb«
not ««tablUb<xI hi* burdca of proring that h« nuritc a
ftvorabl* di«er«tioQ«ry flodioo. Th« oad«r»i9at4 will
«tt7 &pplio«Atr« r«^}*fft for tvylta in tte
ae a aattar of djjicrntlon.

flzyj« that th*r* ax* r*«ionabla

for dMaiog tb* applicant to b« • Oaaot? to tk*
of tba Dnlt»d ttafaa. Th« r*gul«tio&f and tb« lew
proridt foe a aaoditorj «l*nial of both ajrylua and
vithboldi&7 aypltcatiorw If there are r*a*o*ubL« uzouada for
tho allea «» a dang** to th« t*curity of tb«
«t%i*. 2aa & C.T.R, S208.14(c}(3)(lS$2) and
S343(h){2]n>) of tb« Act. «»r«for«f «nm If applicant i»
to «Mkt hl4 bordta of prorio^ rtitatory and
«ligtbUity for tb« r»U«f r*qo««t«d, «ha
cenirt mtct uadatoorilr d«ny a grant of both ajylna and
of doportatlodf jmrvruitt to 8 C.F.R.
reacon* ctt forth bolov,

la th« oa«« at- bart tb* oeftlanifi*d «t«t« O«partaMat*>

advisory opinion (Zxhibit to. 6} alll?** that U» applicant
I* tb« tvtoA«ae at UM wttraairt TTOOP, XlHlaaa'a
tl-lalaaijrya CIO"), aad U alto kaova »» Uw "aafti9 of the
group, Al-sTihad. Tb* adTi*ory opinion ypacifically gtat«>
that the applicant ba* a f*w thouaaad followr* wfao bar*
raopeecihl* for eo&dttccino tpectacolar terrorist

(coat.) ia 1751. ttw ajpltotoc admit* that it i « »

riolKtioa of Xgyptica Lt» to «t« « placo of noraWp for
antl-gotara»aat «pa«ob«i, aad »teita that b* critieixad tte
COT«iun«at through «p»«oh*< in tb*

Tinally, th« tpplicaat amrarvd ia hi* «djoatM«t of

tppUwttion (Trtirpit Vd. U) that te bad had not
ao>ee»t*d. oe taogbt« by pvrtoaal vttaranc*. by vritton or
prints natt«r* cr through affillatioa with aa organixatloa,
cppotition to org«ait«d get+rattenl. t«Sft ftrttihlt 11, p. 2 r
Q. 2€(D)(1)). Doepit* thi* affixjutioa, tha applicant, ia
fact, aaMxti ia hi» tvrtiaooy aad a*yiua application that
It* roiood oppoaition to aad oritieiMd »• Egyptian
govoi-nuMint throogh anir«raity aYBpoainate and aava aeditm,
aad: throagb •ornxm* • «t ••a*)U«* ^lao^a**). CESS rxTiibit Ko.
5, atylun application, at Fart C, p, 2.) . .

753"' 75'B-
fttR-16-1993 FRO!


including: the assassination of President An*ar

(1961); U» «JM«»Ln»tioo o£ the Cpockar of the
?»opl«'a Assembly, Xife't Al-Xahgoob (1»»0| «»» 'i™
coBpenlaaaj attacks *<y«J.Qjrt Egypt's Christian Coptic
cmuauaity; and attacks on symbol • of the tgfptUa
ULrrrmcxftt. (Xxhihit *>. 6). otber publiottion*.
fpoytt *°& uo««p*per yjt-Lcl>«r refer to
by nua, ud •.••ocL&t* bin with fcfc* grouy*
totiYiti*« id*ntLfi«d in tb« opinion.

Zh* U.&. D«p«rt«cat of Ctctv «p«oUio«lly •xxaizwd

applicjutt't trylua oltSa Vitb tb«
rubaittod tod inforattLaa »Y«il»bl« to ttw Pop«rczwot. Th*
adritory opinion (Kihibtt Ho. 6) ««»*rt« th*t «pplio«nt b&a
p*rticlp«ted dir»ctl7 LD »ct« of viole&cfl agiinrt others/ or
«Mirt*d or eircoar»9«d oth«r« to cooolt acts of rlolwur*.
wbich Bake Ma ineligible for tha grunt of tjrjlm. The
st«t« Departcent anerti that it ntc iaforxutloa rtfl»r<ling
*tbe contleal&g inrolxrmswct of AMtti KthaaA to tecrorUt
ectiritie« v&ich would bar« d«triacnt«t focttga policy and
o«cttrity coo«*<r3«Bc«« for the U.5. aoreraaest.* (Szhihit
Ko. 6, U«B» D«pwrtJDot of *t*t* adrivpcy oplnioo, *t p.

che opinion froa the 0.8. Peputavat of

I* adrlsorr La artnre, the BJOQSX i* re«pon»lbl« for
knowing the xta.te of affaire in foreign oottatriee, Xatter
of R-. lot, Dec. /31S5 (KXX 1992) it «, a.4. The X8XS*.
•peoifimUly eralnatad avplicmt'e erideoee re^ardiag hie
a*ylua tnd withholding cltia*. In riev of the knowled?*
that tnaoh *o«aqr poeceseee re^vrdiog XgTPt nd the lalaaio
people, the edrieory opinion in thie ease is voctby of
•ezion* ooaeideratioa ia the cbveace of tacts to the
contrary. M.
Tbo ahore-vMntLoiMd pobliomtion* were identified during
the 'proceeding* aad the ccrrt prorided the «pplie«at with «3
opportunity to incpect, explain^ And robot tit* mcteri*!.
Xpplieaat'* cttecoty noted thvt applicant ba« dUcooraged
act* of Tioleooef aod eitee aewepaper artiolee, Hrked m*
exhibit Jto. 9. Althpogti the eppUcaat ainfeicaad
oue^aahip in *oy org*niwtiOft« «od denied tree iasciag e
•fctwmh" cgainet aayooe, the court doe* not find that the
•ppliomot'i tvctiaooy i« soCCiolentl; detailed, coherent or
wholly bolierable.
Thai ooort doe* not flntl thet the cpplicant tdaqoetely
eddreeeed or rebotxed the above Mentioned Allegations. When

X« stated in Exhibit Ko» 6, each aotiritin ere

in the elanif led adrleocy opinion that U now pert
of the erid^tc* in applicant'* c«ve. Tbe Bo*cd aad hioher
tritemAls nay cotuider cuco eri.d«no»f ahOBld aithar party
appe*I froa this d«ci*ioo. . -

A29 753 7W 23 /

___ .^^-.-- -,«w«»~»—««J-.-»^—-.•*-»»——-•-«>--—•—»•. 2^jM'««:



atkad if Xgyptian l««<J«r* should b« rwwr*d fro» l*ader«bip

if tb«y (to not apply Iilaaic I*v, tb« applicant affiroed,
'y*« - %r« *ak* th* p*opl« understand tba i«port*ac« and tho
-raltt* of tb« lalaaic Churl' L« and tbwy vould CWKTTB tba
l«*d«r- ' Tb« applicant teas thtm a^kod wbotbvr tb« p*opl«,
wbo nox7v« UM l«adcr«, <So mo «Ctar li«t«fiiag to «ppUo*nt'«
*4rio«. Th* «ppl leant r«pli»d, 'aTt«r Uvtvning to tbo
. adrlco of r«li^io«f I««d«rar *B4 I an on* of ti>«a.r TCma
p «t)wi If it i« pormi«iLhl» for p«opl« to r*aov« tb» Utxteri
{: by foroo, th« applicant r*plL«d, 'th« pwjpls ar» frft* in
their action*, *w5 Uw» rvrolotlon* of t£* world tfid tic
UBit*d (tat** t»k« placa in thie v*y.» i&rt a«k«d what tl»«
applicant thoaijtrt of tb« gcTerment «-rrd polio l«« of tb*
XJoitad 8tat*«, th« •pplieant r«pliod, 'of course, it is not
in accordant* with Klaaio pcinciplv*. * L*t«r la th«
yu.ucc«lLngaf wb*n aakad if lalcadc I^V rUtftfl tfc*t « iMder
who does cot ml* according to cod'« ordina^c* vhoold ba
•Iittin*t«d, tb* applicant «t*CO4, 'Che Islaaic ttnt «*?* tbat
«ny-p*r»on wbo coltt* «o»J-ft*t tt» word of Cod L* «A cppr*i»or
and cocrupt p*r»oa «nd »n .&t&*lvt - thi* It vritt«n in ti>e
Toran.* Wh«n a«]c»d i£ thi» jottlfit* th«ir a*«A««ijj«tioii or
•nro«rr th» applicant »t<t»d, 'tM.» jtiit-Lfiw th« riMj of
tht p0op!0 Egilnzt «ncb 4 roicr.'

Additionally, th« &*?rlc* <ju«rtloa*d tb» xppllcaat about

aa ali«tf%d iirt«rYl«if with tbm ffall ttr^*t ^<?^nvlr on or
«boot January 6, 1993. Tb« 8«rvic« coatvads that tba
applicant v*4 axkad «h*th«e he plt*m*d to Lfro« a. •fctwah"
agiinst Xr. Koi>ar«Ck, Tb« fterricp contend* th*t tb«
appltcartt rwpllAd,.. »oa th« w»y." Tb» applicant d«ai»d «ocl>
zvply and stated, -thiji didn't happen - aad thL» can't be
ooasidered • fatwmh - if*tocprMwingan

a rvrivir of tb* cntlrv record. «ad applicant'*

£ira dorlag tbt proc**dic<y«, tb» court find* that
tbtr* «r* r«a*cn*bi« grotmdc for dAoaiog tb« applicant to be
a d«ag«r to the Mcortty of tb* Uait*d ctatMf «cd
th*r«for«, will «*odatari4.y d«ny oi* «p5lic»tion« for uylon
in tb« Da4t«d <t«tM tad withholding of d*portation to
to tba
H> ooaclu«ioar tb« «pj>lto*ot*» **j-l«« application will
b» dsaiwl b«c«iBe ttw tppULcant hu £ cilsd to wtablldi tbtt
th« «ta.tutut/ r*<20irvMntai for BOCA rvliaf hsv« b**n tat,
Iran if tb« xppliont *8t«blisb*« that tba ctxtatocy
raquiracnti for asylwi rallirf bar* b««n aet« th* applicant
b«« fftil^S to evtsbli^fa th*t «. ftrortbl* di*er«tioaary
finding i* warrcotad* Tb* uad«r«ioa«d wlU tberefoc* dony.
th* a*ylca applicjrtJjon BB • Bvttvr of discretion. Bvw» if
tb* »pptic»At bas a«t«hllsb«d th«t tb* ntatuUay and
di«cxtrtion«ry r*4jair«a*nt« for aaylom b<rO b«on cwt, tb«
mxierwicttod hag reavoaabl* Ground* for deesiag tbo applicant
to bm » d*ng«r to th« »«o«rity of tb« Onitod 6ta.tM, aod

- MfiR-16-1993 16:54 FROtlf
MSR-16-1993 15:31 FRCM IKG N3JRR< ILfG TO ROOXI P.2S

. „._ , will n*nd»torily dsny bio t^pllcAtixsa for

in tha Onit«d 5t*t««, purruuxt to th« r«7vl.&tion«.
CM Kppllcan't'* withholding of deportation cpplicrtloa V^h3
thtt th« »t«ttttory r*<TBir»**at« for such r«li.«rf h*^w bw»n
not. XT«I if U*) tppliotnt «ot«bll$h<« th*t tb« rtotntory

to tb« KfCTirl.tT of tit* Unitwd

for wlthboldlag ol d«port«tlon to KVTPtf par«u«nt to the

IT ZS £oe
Ln tb« t7nit*d sti.tM, to wurtioa 208 of

XT 79 fUXfWHl OPJJWO tiv«t th* «pplle*fit'a

for vithboldiag of Ovportxtion to
to •wrtloa 243(h) of th« Act, if barebr DZKIZO.

ZT 18 rdKTHER OKULRfA th*t tha Cppllcust b*

and d*port*l froo tlt« United «t«t«« oa th« s«t
forth, in th« rorm 1^


A2S.7S3 750


TOTnL P.26

RG: 148 Exposition, Anniversary, and Memorial Commissions

SERIES: 9/11 Commission, Team 5


BOX: 00025 FOLDER: 0003 TAB: 6 DOC ID: 31198600


The item identified below has been withdrawn from this file:

FOLDER TITLE: DOS Documents - NIV [1 of 5]

DOCUMENT DATE: 07/10/1992 DOCUMENT TYPE: Memorandum

FROM: Assistant Director in Charge

TO: Coordinator for Counterterrorism

SUBJECT: Omar Abdelrahman

This document has been withdrawn for the following reason(s):

9/11 Classified Information
9/11 Law Enforcement Privacy