inferring punishment on account of religious beliefs because Salvadoran conscription policy allows no exemption for religious reasons
How later courts described this case
- inferring punishment on account of religious beliefs because Salvadoran conscription policy allows no exemption for religious reasons
- the “requirement of evidence should not be.too strictly applied in view of the difficulty of proof inherent in the special situation in which an applicant for refugee status finds himself’
- government’s conscription efforts generally do not constitute persecution
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
LEAVY, Circuit Judge,
special concurrence:
I concur in Part IV.B of the opinion which holds that the Cañases are qualified for withholding of deportation and refugee status based on an imputed” political opinion. We have held that persecution “on account of” political opinion includes persecution not only on account of political opinions that the petitioner actually holds, but also on account of opinions that the persecutor falsely attributes to the petitioner. See Rivas v. INS, 899 F.2d 864, 867 (9th Cir.1990); Hernandez-Ortiz v. INS, 777 F.2d 509, 516-17 (9th Cir.1985).
I cannot agree with the majority’s analysis of religious persecution, however, because it treats as irrelevant the motive of the persecutor. Rather than stating that the persecutor’s motive in persecuting is insignificant, the cases cited by the majority support the opposite proposition. See Lazo-Majano v. INS, 813 F.2d 1432, 1435 (9th Cir.1987) (petitioner persecuted “for her political opinion”); Hernandez-Ortiz, 111 F.2d at 516 (“persecution” is oppression inflicted on individuals “because of a difference that the persecutor will not tolerate”). The majority’s conclusion also conflicts with the statutory “on account of” language, which clearly refers to the underlying motives or reasons behind the persecution. See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1101 (a)(42)(A), 1253(h)(1).