On the board's finding that Khattak has not shown that the Pakistani government is unable to protect him from the Taliban attacks, Lynch wrote, "although … military action indicates that the Pakistani government is willing to take on the Taliban, such action does not show that the Pakistani government is able to protect its citizens from Taliban attacks."
Lynch noted that the board correctly concluded that Khattak has the burden of proving that relocation to Islamabad would be unreasonable, but found that the board failed to address whether it would keep him safe: "Here, neither the [immigration judge] nor the [board] addressed evidence in the record indicating that the Taliban's reach may extend as far as Islamabad."
Khattak's lawyer, Bill Joyce of Boston's Joyce & Associates, said this case is "very important in setting out some of the evidentiary rules in asylum cases for the immigration court, particularly in countries where the government is supposed to be our ally."
The Justice Department did not respond to a request for comment.
Subscribe to The National Law Journal
