Inference alone cannot support denial of asylum
In Singh v. Gonzales, the Ninth Circuit that mere inference is insufficient to support a denial of asylum. Singh is an Indian Sikh who claims he left India after being detained and beaten several times by Indian police. He entered the U.S. through Canada, where he had been briefly detained. While there, he was fingerprinted and sign some documents.
Investigators attempted to obtain the Canadian file, but Canada would not release it without Singh’s permission. Singh refused to release the file, claiming he feared his family in India would be killed if the person who had helped him get to Canada learned of it.
The Immigration judge denied the application for asylum because of Singh’s refusal to release his Canadian file. The judge acknowledged the file could confirm the claim of persecution, but also noted the file could contain contradictory.
The Court held that the evidence did not support the denial, where the IJ did not make any finding of lack of credibility in Singh’s testimony, but instead, relied only on the fact of Singh’s refusal to release his Canadian file.
