MOZEB

15 I. & N. Dec. 430
CourtBoard of Immigration Appeals
DecidedJuly 1, 1975
DocketID 2422
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 15 I. & N. Dec. 430 (MOZEB) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Board of Immigration Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
MOZEB, 15 I. & N. Dec. 430 (bia 1975).

Opinion

Interim Decision #2422

MATTER OF MOZEB, et al. In Exclusion Proceedings

A-20104497 A-20097838-9 A-20105846--7 Decided by Board August RO, 1975 ' (1) Since the law applicable in the Yemen Arab Republic is Islamic law which does not recognize the practice of adoption, relationships through claimed adoptions in Yemen cannot be established for immigration purposes (Matter of Ashree, Ahmed and Ahmed, 14 I. & N. Dec. 305 reaffirmed). The informal relationship termed "adoption" in the Yemen Arab Republic is merely in the nature of a charitable act to needy children and does not c-eate a legal status comparable to that of a natural legitimate child. (2) Hulce applicants are not entitled to immediate relative status on the basis of claimed adoption in the Yemen Arab Republic, the Service is not estopped from excluding them from admission under section 212(a)(20) of the Immigration and Nationality Act as iinmigranti without valid immigrant visas, notwithstanding visa petitions according them immediate relative status by virtue of the claimed adoption in the Yemen Arab Republic were approved by an American consular officer, and immigrant visas issued to two of the applicants, prior to the decision in Matter of Ashree, Ahmed and Ahmed, supra. Not only is the Service empowered to make a redetermination of an applicant's admissibility upon arrival at a port of entry with an immigrant visa, it is under an absolute duty to do so (sections 204(e) and 235(b) of the Act). EXCLUDABLE: Act of 1952—Section 212(a)(20) [8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(20)]—Immigrant—no visa (all applicants) ON BEHALF OF APPLICANTS: ON BEHALF OF SERVICE: Omar Z. Ghobashy, Esquire Paul C. Vincent 730 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2007 Appellate Trial Attorney New York New York 10019

In a decision dated February 20, 1975, the immigration judge found the five applicants inadmissible to the United States under section 212- (a)(20) of the Immigration and Nationality Act and he ordered their exclusion and deportation. All of the applicants have appealed from that decision. The appeals will be dismissed. The five alien applicants are natives and citizens of the Yemen Arab Republic. The issues presented in these cases are substantially identi- cal, and all of the applicants are represented by the same attorney. 430 Interim Decision #2422

Each applicant claims to be an adopted child of a United States citizen by virtue of an adoption that took place in the Yemen Arab Republic. In each case, a Form 1-130, Petition to Classify Status of Alien Relative for Issuance of Immigrant Visa, was filed with and approved by an American consular officer in the Yemen Arab Republic pursuant to 8 CFR 204.1(a). Thereafter, on March 30, 1972, we rendered our decision in Matter of Ashree, Ahmed and Ahmed, 14 I. & N. Dec. 805 . (13 TA 1973), holding that there was no system for legal adoption in either the Yemen Arab Republic or the People's Republic of Southern Yemen (now known as the People's Democratic Republic of Yemen). Two .of the applicants had been issued immigrant visas prior to the decision in Ashree, and all of the applicants arrived in the United States with immigrant visas between April and June of 1973. The immigration judge concluded, on the basis of Ashree, that none of the aliens were entitled to the status which they claimed, and that therefore all of the applicants were excludable under section 212(a)20 as immigrants with- out valid immigrant visas. Counsel's primary contention is that there is no legal basis for our decision in Ashree, and that adoption does in fact exist in Yemen. Our decision in Ashree was based upon a 29-page report on the Yemen Arab Republic and the People's Republic of Southern Yemen, prepared by the Near Eastern and African Law Division of the Library of Con- gress, dated March 9, 1973. 1 The report states that there is a scarcity of materials dealing specifically with Yemeni law, and' that therefOre the best approach to understanding Yemeni law is through standard works on Islamic institutions and legal procedures. The "selective bibliogra- phy" at the end of that report indicates that at least 26 sources pertain- ing to law in the Middle East and Islamic law had been consulted. The report from the Library of Congress points out that the Constitu- tion of the Yemen Arab Republic, adopted on December 30, 1970, stated that Yemen was an Arab Islamic state, thatthe Islamic Shari'ah was the source of all laws, and that no one should occupy judicial posts except scholars of the Shari'ah law. 2 The sources of Islamic law, in the order of their weight and priority are: (1) The Qur'an (which is the word of God); (2) The traditions or Swum of the Prophet (which is his behavior and sayings during his lifetime); (3) Ijm5', or consensus of opinion of scholars; and (4) gigs, or analogy.

' There are several other published decisions in which we have held that there is no system for legal adoption under Islamic law'. Matter of 131tegami, 15 L & N. Dec. 299 (BIA 1975); Matter of Boghdadi, 12 L & N. Dec. 666 (BIA 1968). 2 The report states that the word "Shadah" means "the Islamic way of life of a Muslim, who must follow its precepts in his daily life."

431 Interim Decision #2422

The report quotes the Qur'an's prohibition of adoption which is con- tained in verses 4 and 5 of Chapter- XXXIII, entitled al-Ahzab (the Clans): • .. 4. God has not made For any man two hearts In his (one) body; nor has He made your wives whom Ye divorce by Zih5r ' Your mothers: nor has He Made your adopted sons , Yoursn.Schi(ly) Your (mariner of) speech By your tr ouths.But God Tells (you) .the truth, and • He shows the (right) way. 5. Call them by (the names ' of) their fathers: that is Juster in the.sight of God. But if ye inow not Their,father's (names, call Them) your Brothers in faith, Or your Maulas. Rut there is no blame On you if :re make A mistake therein: (what counts is) The intention of your hearts: And God 13 Oft-Returning, Most Merciful-3 , The report also quotes the following interpretation of the passages quoted from the Qur'an: If a man called another's son "his son," it might create complications with natural and normal ,relatiosships if taken too literally. It is pointed out that it is only a facon de parler in menu mouths, and should not be taken literally. The truth is the truth and cannot be altered by men's adopting "sons." "Adoption" in the technical sense is not allowed in Muslim law: Those who have been "wives of your sons proceeding from your loins" are within the Prohibited Degrees of marriage; iv. 23: [footnote omitted] but this dues nut apply to "adopted" sons. Freedmen were often called after their master's name as the "son or [of .1] so and so." When they were slaves, perhaps their fathers' names were lost altogether. It is more correct to speak of them as the Maul3 [a freed slave] or [of ?] so and so. But Mania in Arabic might also imply a close relationship of friendship: in that case, too, it is better to use the right term instead of the term "son." ."Brother" is not objectionable, because "Brotherhood" is used in a wider sinse than "fatherhood" and is not likely to be misunderstood. What is aimed at is to destroy the superstition of erecting false relationship to the detriment or loss of true blood relations. It is not intended to penalise an unintentional 3 Abdullah Yousuf Ali. The Holy Qgr'an: Text, Translation and Commentary, Vol. II, pp. 1102-1103 (Cambridge, Massachusetts 1940). •

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

MARCAL NETO
25 I. & N. Dec. 169 (Board of Immigration Appeals, 2010)
FAKALATA
18 I. & N. Dec. 213 (Board of Immigration Appeals, 1982)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
15 I. & N. Dec. 430, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mozeb-bia-1975.