Nepali man allowed to stay in country while appealing deportation because government report says country not as safe as government lawyers claim

Federal lawyers counting on the tender mercies of Maoists now in the Nepali government to protect a member of a rival party who fled here should perhaps do a better job of reading State Department reports, according to a ruling by an appeals court in Boston that will let the man stay here while he makes a formal plea for permanent asylum.

The federal Board of Immigration Appeals and an immigration judge had justified expelling Madhav Prasad Dahal, a former member of the Congress Party in Nespal, based on a 2016 State Department report on Nepal that said the violent Maoists who had threatened and beaten him and held him hostage had signed a peace deal with the government and that the country "held free and fair elections in 2013," so Dahal was no longer at risk in his native country and should no longer be allowed to stay here.

But in a decision authored by retired Supreme Court Justice David Souter, the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit noted that while the BIA had accurately quoted sentences from the State Department's "country report" on Nepal, it left out the sentences that followed them:

[A]lthough the 2016 Country Report did describe the 2013 election as "free" and "fair," the BIA and the Immigration Judge failed to mention the very next sentence in the Report, which indicates that Maoists continued to persecute their political opponents during the election: "In an effort to obstruct the 2013 elections, a breakaway Maoist faction, the Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist, committed acts of political violence and intimidation." ... Thus, far from undercutting Dahal's fears, the Country Report on the elections recognizes a remaining threat of Maoist persecution.

The ruling continues:

[T]he BIA and the Immigration Judge did not explain why the promulgation of a new constitution in Nepal diminished the risk of political persecution. In fact, other evidence from the Country Reports suggests that the risk is still present. As the Immigration Judge acknowledged, the Country Reports show that Nepal "continue[s] to suffer from human rights problems"; that "there are reports of the government or its agents committing arbitrary or unlawful killings"; and that the government "has essentially abandoned its attempts to bring to justice those insurgents who committed atrocities . . . up until 2006."

The Immigration Judge tried to deflect these findings by noting that this evidence of human rights abuses "has limited significance" with respect to Dahal himself. ... This assertion, however, ignores the record facts that the Maoists are now active participants in the government and have held key leadership posts, facts that limit the efficacy of the peace agreement, elections, and constitution to mitigate Dahal's specific fears of persecution at the Maoists' hands. The BIA, in the course of the appeal, sought to downplay the evidence favorable to Dahal by noting that the Country Reports do not demonstrate "systematic or pervasive persecution of active members in the Nepali Congress Party." ... But the Country Reports plainly indicate that the Maoists have continued to persecute their political opponents,

The court also noted that some of the threats against Dahal and his family came after the Maoists and the government reached their accord in 2010.

Dahal came to the US on a business visa in 2010, didn't leave, then applied for asylum.

The ruling does not mean Dahal can stay in the US permanently, but it does mean he can stay here while he appeals the deportation ruling in court.

The ruling does not say where Dahal is living now. The appeals court covers New England and Puerto Rico.