|
OPINIONS / COLUMNS
(September
8 – September 14, 2008) Immigration Guide Atty. Emmanuel S. Tipon Was Joc
Joc’s asylum claim treated as a joke? “The wicked fleeth like a chicken, the righteous fight like a lion.”
- Bible, Emmanuel Version Filipinos
have a penchant for amusingly
repetitious nicknames like “Bong Bong” and “Noy Noy”. But who is Joc Joc? His real name is Jocelyn Bolante.
Fertilizer scam
architect The
U.S. Court of Appeals which rejected
his appeal from the denial of an asylum claim on August 27, 2008, said that
he was the “architect” of the “Fertilizer Scam”. While Undersecretary of the
Department of Agriculture, he allegedly diverted government money for the
purchase of fertilizer and had it transferred to the reelection committee of
Arroyo. He later resigned.
The Senate investigated charges of corruption within the Department. It
issued a report that Joc Joc
was the “architect” of the diversion of funds and recommended that he face
criminal charges, together with Felix Montes, the Assistant Secretary of
Agriculture. During the
investigation, Joc Joc
was subpoenaed to testify. He refused. The Senate issued a warrant for his
arrest. He left the He arrived in the He sought asylum and
withholding of removal. The Immigration Judge (IJ) denied him relief, holding
that the “vague threats and opaque predictions of harm were insufficient to
establish” Joc Joc’s
claim. The IJ also noted that the Senate’s issuance of a subpoena was to
investigate and eventually prosecute him for violation of Philippine
laws, not persecute, him on account of political
opinion or membership in a particular social group. The Board of Immigration
Appeals (BIA) affirmed. Fear of prosecution,
not persecution The
Court of Appeals pooh-poohed Joc Joc’s claim that he feared
persecution upon returning to the Rather, noted the
court wryly, Joc Joc’s
fear was “fear of prosecution for his alleged role in a corruption
scandal.” The court indicated
that “though prosecution can become persecution, courts uniformly
recognize that a foreign state’s prosecution of its citizens for
violating its own laws does not automatically equate with persecution.” “Prosecution
for activities that would be illegal under our own laws is not grounds for
asylum. . . Similarly, being suspected of a crime does not necessarily render
an asylum applicant eligible for asylum.” The court observed
that Joc Joc “does not
presently face prosecution. No charges have been filed against him, and
although the Senate Committee has recommended charges against Bolante, they have also recommended charges against
Montes, who has yet to face prosecution. Other members of President Arroyo’s
government, including Montes, have testified before the Senate Committee on
the Fertilizer Scam and have not yet been physically harmed or unjustly
prosecuted.” Montes even testified before the IJ. (Bolante
v Mukasey, No. 07-2550, 08/27/2008, CA7) Practice tip. Almost all deportation cases are lost due to the
ineffectiveness of counsel. An excellent strategy when an alien loses a
deportation case is to change lawyers, claim ineffective assistance of his
first lawyer by showing that the result would have been different but for the
lawyer’s errors, and ask the court to reopen the case. “Change” has become a
buzzword these days that Obama and McCain are
clamoring for change. Unfortunately most aliens don’t change their losing
lawyer. It is like the man whose doctor mistakenly amputated his good right
leg when his bad left leg should have been amputated. He went back to the
same doctor to have his left leg amputated. What if the doctor had made a
mistake again and amputated his third leg? If Joc Joc had changed lawyers
immediately after losing before the IJ, could he have won? You bet, if he had
hired an excellent attorney with a thorough knowledge of immigration law and
a winning streak, selected the best witnesses and prepared them for trial,
and knew the situation in the Another relief is
provided by the Convention Against Torture. Did Joc
Joc’s counsel show that he would be tortured and
even killed if he returned? About 3 million militant farmers who failed to
get fertilizer had organized a manhunt to get him, there were hired assassins
out to silence him, and scores of bounty hunters vying for the P200,000 reward for his capture would kill him. Why did not Joc Joc’s counsel present
specifics or details, instead of “vague threats and opaque
predictions,” of harm? Why did Joc Joc’s counsel present Montes
as a witness when, like Joc Joc,
he was recommended for prosecution but nothing happened to him, thus
convincing the court that nothing will happen to Joc
Joc? Comment: The tragedy for Joc Joc is that he has been in jail for more than two years.
If he had remained in the (Atty. Tipon has won all deportation cases he handled and
obtained approval of all visa petitions he filed. He is from Ilocos
Times copyright 2008 |
Opinions / Columns Was Joc
Joc’s asylum claim treated as a joke? Spirituality in education: An
imperative of the times Ananda, is Marcos a hero or a
villain? |