Kaptsov

Kaptsov v. Ashcroft

Good Law
64 F. App'x 84
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 1, 2003No. 02-70755; INS No. A78-678-867California2,547 words

Opinion

Dissenting Opinion

Paez, J.

dissenting.

The majority concludes that Kaptsov is ineligible for asylum and withholding of deportation because “the record lacks evi *87 dence that persecution on account of political opinion, or imputed political opinion, is a reasonable possibility.” I cannot agree with this characterization of the evidence in the administrative record, nor do I agree that Kaptsov was required to verbalize his political opinion to those he believed would persecute him in order to establish that his well-founded fear of persecution is “on account of’ his political opinion. Instead, I would grant the petition and, like the dissenting Board member, I would conclude that Kaptsov is eligible for a grant of asylum because his desertion established his political neutrality. As expressed by the dissenting Board member, Kaptsov’s desertion “was a clear manifestation of his desire to avoid participating in the atrocities which were being committed by the Russian troops” and, in my view, there is a reasonable possibility that Kaptsov would suffer persecution on account of his neutrality if he is forced to return to Russia.

In order to establish eligibility for asylum, Kaptsov must establish that he…

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Konstantin Vladimirovich Kaptsov (Kaptsov) petitions for review from the dismissal of his appeal by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) denying his request for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture. We have jurisdiction pursuant to INA § 242, 8 U.S.C. § 1252 , and we deny Kaptsov’s petition.

I

Kaptsov argues he is eligible for asylum because of a well-founded fear of persecution in Russia on account of his desertion from the Russian army over his opposition to Russia’s military involvement in Chechnya. While Kaptsov’s subjective fear that he will be persecuted is genuine, the record shows that he simply stopped showing up for work without telling Russian officials why he had done so. There is no basis for concluding that the Russian military would have perceived, or would classify, his desertion as an expression of political opinion or as a desire to stay politically neutral. Although Kaptsov testified that the military came looking for him at his parents’ house, officials sought Kaptsov to require him to complete his *86 military commitment. Kaptsov lived and worked in the area for five years without difficulty. He…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.