US Court of Appeals rejects Bolante's latest asylum plea

CHICAGO, Illinois – It was an unsolicited birthday gift Jocelyn “Joc-Joc" I. Bolante is better off without. On the eve of his 57th birthday last August 27, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit based in Chicago, Illinois, denied his petition for review of his asylum claim. The court also affirmed the judgment of the Chicago Immigration Judge (IJ) as supplemented by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). In a nine-page opinion written by Circuit Judge William J. Bauer for the three-court panel, the Seventh Circuit ruled that Mr. Bolante, the former Philippine Agriculture Undersecretary, “cannot meet his burden of proof on his asylum claim, withholding of removal (deportation) claim must fail a fortiori." “Bolante’s fear of persecution is objectively unreasonable. Bolante has not produced enough specifics or details about the fear of persecution that he faces in the Philippines to carry his burden," the court added. The lawyer of Bolante did not respond to an email message seeking comment on the latest ruling. Bolante turned 57 on August 28. Bolante can delay his deportation if he files a petition for certiorari before the United States Supreme Court in Washington, D.C. if he wants to appeal the circuit’s ruling. If not, he is in line to be deported to the Philippines and end his more than two years of detention at the Kenosha County Detention Center in neighboring Wisconsin. Court records show that Bolante was appointed as Undersecretary for the Philippines Department of Agriculture by Philippine President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo in 2001. In 2004, Bolante resigned to become a member of the Board of Directors of Rotary International. Following his resignation, the Philippine Senate formed a committee, alleging that President Arroyo diverted funds from the Agriculture department to fund her reelection committee and investigated claims Bolante took direction from Arroyo to divert the funds in what became known as the “Fertilizer Scam." The Committee found Bolante as main architect of the diversion of funds and recommended that he face criminal charges, along with Felix Montes, the Assistant Secretary of Agriculture. Bolante’s son, Owen, flew from the Philippines to testify at the hearing of his father. The young Bolante stated that “he and his family have received numerous threats, including a threatening text message. One such warning involved a threat of kidnapping. He further stated that he and his family have seen suspicious cars near their home." Bolante’s son could not state who threatened him or elaborate on how the threats related to his father. A witness, Montes, who testified before the Immigration Court in Chicago, said “President (Gloria Macapagal) Arroyo’s enemies are using Bolante as a tool to get to the President. He also testified that Bolante’s life would be in certain danger if he returned to the Philippines, but could not give specific details about the threat, and used equivocal words such as ‘might,’ ‘could,’ and ‘may’ to describe the harmful consequences of Bolante’s return." Another witness, Adolph Estrada, a retired Major General with the Philippine Air Force, testified about the nature of the danger facing Bolante upon his return. Though Estrada insisted that Bolante would be harmed, he, like Montes, could not give any specifics on the nature, source, or motivation of the threat facing Bolante. On Feb. 9, 2007, the Immigration Judge denied Bolante’s application for asylum although it found Bolante “credible" because Bolante “failed to meet his burden of past persecution or well-founded fear of future persecution." The IJ ruled that because “Bolante failed to meet the lower burden of proof of asylum, he could not meet the higher standard for withholding of removal." The BIA affirmed IJ’s decision and issued its own decision and order. Bolante filed an appeal before the Seventh Circuit, saying “he has met the standards for both asylum and withholding of removal." He argued that he has a “well-founded fear of persecution upon returning to the Philippines, and that the central reasons for persecution were on account of his political opinion and membership in a particular social group." In denying Bolante’s fear of persecution, the Seventh Circuit said, the “testimony of Montes and Estrada that Bolante would be in danger upon return also fails for lack of specificity, particularity, or substantiality. Bolante points to the bounty (of 200,000 pesos or about US$4,651.00 reward money raised by the Philippine Senate for Bolante’s capture) as support for his fear, but the details of the bounty, and the use of bounties in the Philippines in general, lack any real clarity. “Even if the bounty still exists, it does not show any threat of long-term harm to Bolante; the sole purpose of the bounty is to secure Bolante’s testimony before the Senate Committee." The Seventh Circuit said, “Bolante may be correct that he is but a pawn in the opposition party’s efforts to oust President Arroyo. But if he concurrently acted to further a scheme to defraud the Philippine public trust and divert funds to a political campaign -- activity that would certainly be illegal under our own laws -- then facing prosecution for his acts would not be ground for asylum. “A more fundamental problem for Bolante is that he 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 been physically harmed or unjustly prosecuted. “In short, the record does not establish that any harm will come to Bolante on his return; it is not even certain that he will face arrest or have to testify before the Senate Committee, given that Bolante has contested the validity of both." - JOSEPH G. LARIOSA, GMANews.TV