Dukuray

MEMORANDUM **

In this petition, Jalka Dukuray challenges an order of removal and the denial of his applications for asylum and withholding of removal. Dukuray argues that he is eligible for asylum based on his imputed political opinion and his tribal affiliation. We review the BIA’s asylum eligibility determination for substantial evidence. INS v. Elias-Zacwrias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 , 112 S.Ct. 812 , 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992). Under this deferential standard, Dukuray “must show that the evidence not only supports, but compels the conclusion that the BIA was incorrect.” Al-Saher v. INS, 268 F.3d 1143, 1145 (9th Cir.2001). We conclude that the BIA’s decision is supported by substantial evidence, and we deny the petition.

Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s finding that Dukuray is not eligible for asylum based on past persecution. The evidence does not compel the conclusion that the rebels’ atrocities were committed “ ‘on account of one of the statutorily-protected grounds.’ ” Navas v. INS, 217 F.3d 646, 655 (9th Cir.2000) (citation omitted). With respect to the tribal affiliation claim, Dukuray presented scant evidence that he and his family were targeted because they were Mandingo.…

concurring.

I concur in the result.