Faustin Mukadi Ilunga v. Holder

Democratic Republic of the Congo citizen Faustin Mukadi Ilunga (plaintiff) was a member and employee of a political party that opposed Congolese President Joseph Kabila in the 2006 elections. After Kabila secured reelection, police and Kabila loyalists threatened Ilunga’s life and damaged his home. The Congolese intelligence agency eventually kidnapped Ilunga and imprisoned him in a small cell with Jean Nkongolo Kalala. While imprisoned, Ilunga was tortured daily, including being stabbed, whipped, and raped. After about a month and a half, Ilunga and Kalala escaped and fled to Zambia. The Congolese government retaliated against Ilunga’s family. After a year and a half in Zambia, Ilunga and Kalala fled to the United States, and Ilunga’s family fled to a Zambian refugee camp. Ilunga told United States immigration that he was seeking asylum because of political persecution. An asylum officer concluded that Ilunga had a credible fear of persecution. At Ilunga’s subsequent removal hearing, both Ilunga and Kalala testified. Because Ilunga claimed to be fluent in French, French translators were used at the hearing, one translator for each of the two days. Ilunga initially testified that he was inside his cell when tortured but later stated he was tortured inside the prison but outside his cell. During the questioning, Ilunga expressed difficulty in understanding the translator’s questions. Kalala later testified that Ilunga was whipped in the same room where they spent their nights and that Kalala was present. On redirect, which was handled by the second translator, Kalala explained that confusion had arisen because the first translator used the word for jailhouse rather than cell. When questioned about prayer practices, Ilunga and Kalala gave consistent statements, but there was some hesitancy in their responses. The immigration judge (IJ) denied Ilunga’s asylum application, concluding that Ilunga was not credible for various reasons, including the inconsistencies and hesitancies in his testimony. The Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed the IJ’s decision. Ilunga appealed.