Matter of Francis Kodwo

Cite as 24 I&N Dec. 479 (BIA 2008) Interim Decision #3606

引用为 24 I&N Dec. 479 (BIA 2008) 临时决定 #3606

File A99 245 589 - Fairfax, Virginia

案卷 A99 245 589 - 弗吉尼亚州费尔法克斯

Decided March 26, 2008

2008年3月26日决定

U.S. Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration Review Board of Immigration Appeals

美国司法部 移民审查执行办公室 移民上诉委员会

While a court order remains the preferred method of establishing the dissolution of a customary tribal marriage under Ghanaian law, affidavits executed by the heads of household, i.e., the fathers of the couple, that meet specified evidentiary requirements may be sufficient to establish a divorce for immigration purposes. Matter of Kumah,19 I&N Dec. 290 (BIA 1985), modified.

虽然法院命令仍然是证明根据加纳法律解除习惯部落婚姻的首选方法，但由户主，即夫妻双方的父亲，签署的符合特定证据要求的宣誓书可能足以在移民目的上证明离婚。Matter of Kumah, 19 I&N Dec. 290 (BIA 1985)，修改。

FOR PETITIONER: Charles Okyere, Esquire, New York, New York

申请人代表：Charles Okyere 律师，纽约州纽约市

FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY: Jason Raphael, Associate Regional Counsel

国土安全部代表：Jason Raphael，副区域法律顾问

BEFORE: Board Panel: PAULEY, Board Member; MANN and GUENDELSBERGER, Temporary Board Members.

审理：委员会小组：PAULEY，委员会成员；MANN 和 GUENDELSBERGER，临时委员会成员。

MANN, Temporary Board Member:

MANN，临时委员会成员：

In a decision dated May 15, 2007, the Acting District Director (“Director”) of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) denied the visa petition filed by the petitioner on behalf of the beneficiary to accord him immediate relative status as the spouse of a United States citizen under section 201(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1151(b) (2000). The Director found that the petitioner failed to demonstrate that her marriage to the beneficiary was valid, concluding that the beneficiary was not eligible to legally marry at the time of their marriage. The petitioner has appealed from that decision. The appeal will be sustained and the record will be remanded for further proceedings.

在2007年5月15日的决定中，美国公民及移民服务局（“USCIS”）代理地区主任（“主任”）拒绝了申请人代表受益人提交的签证申请，该申请旨在根据《移民和国籍法》第201(b)条，8 U.S.C. § 1151(b) (2000)，赋予受益人作为美国公民配偶的直系亲属身份。主任认定申请人未能证明其与受益人的婚姻有效，结论是受益人在结婚时没有合法结婚的资格。申请人已对该决定提出上诉。上诉将获支持，案件记录将发回进一步审理。

The record reflects that the petitioner and the beneficiary were married on November 22, 2004, in the State of Virginia. On January 21, 2005, the petitioner filed a Petition for Alien Relative (Form I-130) on the beneficiary’s behalf. In order to establish eligibility for a spousal visa petition, the petitioner must prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that any previous marriages of both the petitioner and the beneficiary have been legally terminated.

记录显示，申请人和受益人于2004年11月22日在弗吉尼亚州结婚。2005年1月21日，申请人代表受益人提交了外籍亲属申请（I-130表格）。为了确立配偶签证申请的资格，申请人必须通过优势证据证明申请人和受益人的任何先前婚姻均已合法终止。

479

479

Cite as 24 I&N Dec. 479 (BIA 2008) Interim Decision #3606

引用为 24 I&N Dec. 479 (BIA 2008) 临时决定 #3606

8 C.F.R. § 204.2(a)(2) (2007). The beneficiary, a Ghanaian citizen, was previously married in Ghana according to local tribal custom. As evidence of the termination of the beneficiary’s prior marriage, the petitioner submitted a statutory declaration before the Superior Court of Judicature, of the High Court of Justice in Accra, executed on October 29, 2004, by the fathers of both the bride and the groom. The fathers declared that the customary marriage contracted between the couple on June 20, 1998, was dissolved on January 23, 2004, in the presence of elders of both parties.

8 C.F.R. § 204.2(a)(2) (2007)。受益人，加纳公民，此前根据当地部落习俗在加纳结婚。作为受益人先前婚姻终止的证据，申请人提交了一份在阿克拉高等法院司法法庭作出的法定声明，由新娘和新郎的父亲于2004年10月29日签署。父亲们声明，双方于1998年6月20日缔结的习惯婚姻已于2004年1月23日在双方长辈在场的情况下解除。

On May 16, 2006, the USCIS issued a Notice of Intent to Deny the visa petition based on the petitioner’s failure to provide acceptable evidence of the dissolution of the beneficiary’s prior customary marriage. The notice stated the following:

2006年5月16日，USCIS发出了一份拒绝签证申请的意向通知，理由是申请人未能提供受益人先前习惯婚姻解除的可接受证据。该通知陈述如下：

Proper documentation of the dissolution of a customary marriage is a decree, issued by a high court, circuit court or district court under the Matrimonial Causes Act of 1971 (Act 367), Section 41(2), stating that the marriage in question was dissolved in accordance with customary law. Affidavits or “statutory declarations” attesting to a divorce under customary law, even when duly sworn, do not constitute proper documentation of the dissolution of a Ghanaian customary marriage. See Matter of Kumah, 19 I&N Dec. 290 (BIA 1985).

习惯婚姻解除的适当文件是由高等法院、巡回法院或地区法院根据1971年《婚姻诉讼法》（第367号法案）第41(2)条发布的法令，说明有关婚姻已按照习惯法解除。证明根据习惯法离婚的宣誓书或“法定声明”，即使经过正式宣誓，也不构成加纳习惯婚姻解除的适当文件。见 Matter of Kumah, 19 I&N Dec. 290 (BIA 1985)。

It further noted that the divorce decree submitted by the petitioner from the High Court of Justice in Accra, Ghana, was “under the Statutory Declaration Act [No. 389 of 1971] and is therefore not acceptable as evidence that [the beneficiary’s] former marriage had been terminated when [the marriage of the petitioner and the beneficiary] was contracted.”

通知进一步指出，申请人提交的来自加纳阿克拉高等法院的离婚法令是“根据《法定声明法》[1971年第389号]作出的，因此不能作为受益人前次婚姻在[申请人与受益人婚姻]缔结时已终止的证据。”

In response to the notice, the petitioner submitted a new divorce decree issued by the District Magistrate Court in Koforidua, Ghana, under section 41(2) of the Matrimonial Causes Act of 1971 (Acts 367), indicating that the marriage was dissolved based on the joint affidavit submitted by the fathers of the beneficiary and his former spouse. The decree, which was executed on June 26, 2006, confirmed that the marriage had been dissolved on January 23, 2004, at Kumasi “and since that time any of the parties had the liberty to re-marry anybody anywhere and at anytime in the world and that such customary marriage and divorce are recognized under the laws of Ghana.”

作为对通知的回应，申请人提交了一份新的离婚法令，由加纳科福里杜亚地区治安法院根据1971年《婚姻诉讼法》（第367号法案）第41(2)条发布，表明婚姻基于受益人和其前配偶的父亲提交的联合宣誓书而解除。该法令于2006年6月26日签署，确认婚姻已于2004年1月23日在库马西解除，“并且自那时起，任何一方均有权在世界任何地方、任何时间与任何人再婚，且此类习惯婚姻和离婚根据加纳法律得到承认。”

In her decision, the Director considered the new divorce decree but concluded that the attempt in the new decree to backdate the divorce to January 23, 2004, would not be recognized. Therefore, the Director determined that since the valid date of the divorce was June 26, 2006, the beneficiary was not legally free to marry the petitioner on November 22, 2004.

在她的决定中，主任考虑了新的离婚法令，但结论是新法令中将离婚追溯至2004年1月23日的尝试将不予承认。因此，主任认定，由于离婚的有效日期是2006年6月26日，受益人在2004年11月22日没有合法自由与申请人结婚。

On appeal, the petitioner contends that the Board recognizes customary Ghanaian divorces, even when a court decree is unavailable, and that statutory declarations of the dissolution of a customary marriage, and a decree from the district magistrate court confirming that dissolution, should be sufficient proof

在上诉中，申请人主张委员会承认加纳习惯离婚，即使没有法院法令，并且习惯婚姻解除的法定声明以及地区治安法院确认该解除的法令应足以证明

480

480

Cite as 24 I&N Dec. 479 (BIA 2008) Interim Decision #3606

引用为 24 I&N Dec. 479 (BIA 2008) 临时决定 #3606

of the termination of the beneficiary’s prior marriage. In addition, the petitioner states that the decree she submitted does not attempt to backdate the divorce but rather confirms the nonjudicial divorce of January 23, 2004, in conformity with the rulings in Matter of Akinola, 15 I&N Dec. 359 (BIA 1975), and Matter of DaBaase, 16 I&N Dec. 39 (BIA 1976).

受益人先前婚姻的终止。此外，申请人表示，她提交的法令并未试图追溯离婚日期，而是确认2004年1月23日的非司法离婚，符合 Matter of Akinola, 15 I&N Dec. 359 (BIA 1975) 和 Matter of DaBaase, 16 I&N Dec. 39 (BIA 1976) 的裁决。

In Matter of Kumah, supra, we modified our previous holdings in Matter of Akinola and Matter of DaBaase and concluded that a Ghanaian court decree that either grants or confirms a Ghanaian customary divorce is an essential element of proof in substantiating a claimed customary divorce under the immigration laws of the United States. We relied on changes in the Foreign Affairs Manual, which instructed that

在 Matter of Kumah, supra 中，我们修改了之前在 Matter of Akinola 和 Matter of DaBaase 中的裁决，并得出结论，根据美国移民法，加纳法院法令授予或确认加纳习惯离婚是证明所主张习惯离婚的基本证据要素。我们依据了《外交事务手册》的变化，该手册指示：

the preferred documentation for the dissolution of a customary marriage is an application by the parties concerned to the appropriate Ghanaian court under the Matrimonial Causes Act of 1971(Act 367), section 41(2), for a decree of divorce, and that the affidavits attesting to a divorce under customary law provided by the heads of the respective families are of minimal reliability.

解除习惯婚姻的首选文件是有关当事人根据1971年《婚姻诉讼法》（第367号法案）第41(2)条向适当的加纳法院申请离婚法令，而由各自家庭户主提供的证明根据习惯法离婚的宣誓书可靠性极低。

Matter of Kumah, supra, at 294.

Matter of Kumah, supra, at 294。

In this case, counsel for the USCIS takes the position on appeal that Matter of Kumah, supra, was superseded by amendments to statutory Ghanaian divorce law and that the law no longer requires Ghanaians to register divorce affidavits with a court. As evidence of the new Ghanaian law, USCIS counsel submitted a letter from a Foreign Law Specialist of the Library of Congress.1 The letter explains the following in regard to Ghanaian law:

在本案中，USCIS 的法律顾问在上诉中采取立场，认为 Matter of Kumah, supra 已被加纳离婚成文法修正案所取代，法律不再要求加纳人向法院登记离婚宣誓书。作为新加纳法律的证据，USCIS 法律顾问提交了国会图书馆外国法律专家的信函。1 该信函就加纳法律解释如下：

The Ghanaian customary marriage and divorce registration law consists of the Customary Marriage and Divorce (Registration) Law of 1985 (P.N.D.C.L.112) and the Customary Marriage and Divorce (Registration) (Amendment) Law of 1991 (P.N.D.C.L. 263).

加纳习惯婚姻和离婚登记法由1985年《习惯婚姻和离婚（登记）法》（P.N.D.C.L.112）和1991年《习惯婚姻和离婚（登记）（修正）法》（P.N.D.C.L. 263）组成。

One important change that the 1991 amendment introduced was making registration of customary marriage and divorce, which was mandatory under the 1985 law, optional.

1991年修正案引入的一项重要变化是使习惯婚姻和离婚的登记从1985年法律下的强制性变为可选性。

The Customary Marriage and Divorce Law of 1985 required Ghanaians to register customary marriages. The 1991 amendment, however, made it no

1985年《习惯婚姻和离婚法》要求加纳人登记习惯婚姻。然而，1991年修正案使其不再

The letter from the Library of Congress included copies of several pages from a book entitled Family Law in Ghana, which included an analysis highlighting the changes effectuated by the 1991 amendments. William E. Offei, Family Law in Ghana 35-42 (1998).

国会图书馆的信函包括一本名为《加纳家庭法》的书的几页副本，其中包括对1991年修正案所产生变化的分析。William E. Offei, Family Law in Ghana 35-42 (1998)。

481

481

Cite as 24 I&N Dec. 479 (BIA 2008) Interim Decision #3606

引用为 24 I&N Dec. 479 (BIA 2008) 临时决定 #3606

longer compulsory to register a marriage contracted under customary law. Counsel for the USCIS therefore asserts as follows:

强制登记根据习惯法缔结的婚姻。因此，USCIS 的法律顾问主张如下：

The 1991 amendment . . . does not require Ghanaians to register the divorce affidavits with the court in order for the divorce to be valid. The amendment allows for the heads of the families (fathers of the husband and wife) to declare the divorce final following the customary tribal divorce proceeding. The declaration must confirm the date, place, and time of the divorce, such as customary tribal. See UK Border & Immigration Agency § 2: General Information Section, Section 30.42 on Divorce, subsection on Ghanaian divorce (3.3.2).

1991年修正案……不要求加纳人向法院登记离婚宣誓书以使离婚有效。该修正案允许家庭户主（丈夫和妻子的父亲）在习惯部落离婚程序后宣布离婚最终。声明必须确认离婚的日期、地点和时间，例如习惯部落。见 UK Border & Immigration Agency § 2: General Information Section, Section 30.42 on Divorce, subsection on Ghanaian divorce (3.3.2)。

In visa petition proceedings, the petitioner bears the burden of establishing eligibility for the immigration benefit sought. Matter of Brantigan, 11 I&N Dec. 493 (BIA 1966). When the petitioner relies on a foreign law to establish eligibility for the beneficiary, the application of the foreign law is a question of fact, which must be proved by the petitioner. Matter of Fakalata, 18 I&N Dec. 213 (BIA 1982); Matter of Annang, 14 I&N Dec. 502 (BIA 1973). We note that we have relied on expert opinions by foreign law specialists from the Library of Congress to establish foreign law when appropriate. Matter of Rowe, 23 I&N Dec. 962 (BIA 2006); Matter of Khatoon, 19 I&N Dec. 153 (BIA 1984); Matter of Dhillon, 16 I&N Dec. 373 (BIA 1977).

在签证申请程序中，申请人承担证明所寻求移民福利资格的责任。Matter of Brantigan, 11 I&N Dec. 493 (BIA 1966)。当申请人依赖外国法来确立受益人的资格时，外国法的适用是一个事实问题，必须由申请人证明。Matter of Fakalata, 18 I&N Dec. 213 (BIA 1982); Matter of Annang, 14 I&N Dec. 502 (BIA 1973)。我们注意到，在适当情况下，我们依赖国会图书馆外国法律专家的专家意见来确定外国法。Matter of Rowe, 23 I&N Dec. 962 (BIA 2006); Matter of Khatoon, 19 I&N Dec. 153 (BIA 1984); Matter of Dhillon, 16 I&N Dec. 373 (BIA 1977)。

In this case, it is the USCIS that presents evidence of Ghanaian divorce law, which was provided by the Library of Congress. The petitioner does not dispute this evidence on appeal. To the contrary, the petitioner’s arguments in the Notice of Appeal accord with the position taken by the USCIS.

在本案中，是 USCIS 提供了由国会图书馆提供的加纳离婚法证据。申请人在上诉中未对该证据提出异议。相反，申请人在上诉通知中的论点与 USCIS 采取的立场一致。

Based on the arguments of the parties and the evidence presented by the USCIS, we agree that the holding in Matter of Kumah, supra, has been superseded by amendments to Ghanaian law. Matter of Kumah is accordingly modified to hold that affidavits executed by the heads of household, i.e., the fathers of the husband and wife, may be sufficient under Ghanaian law to establish the dissolution of a customary tribal marriage. We note, however, that in accordance with the Foreign Affairs Manual, the desirable proper documentation continues to be a court decree, both because customary divorce is more difficult to prove and because polygamous marriage is permissible under the customary law of some groups, but not under civil law.

基于双方的论点和 USCIS 提供的证据，我们同意 Matter of Kumah, supra 中的裁决已被加纳法律修正案所取代。Matter of Kumah accordingly modified，裁定由户主，即丈夫和妻子的父亲，签署的宣誓书根据加纳法律可能足以证明习惯部落婚姻的解除。然而，我们注意到，根据《外交事务手册》，理想适当的文件仍然是法院法令，这既因为习惯离婚更难证明，也因为一夫多妻制婚姻在某些群体的习惯法下是允许的，但在民法下不允许。

In Matter of DaBaase, supra, we held that where a party seeks to prove the validity of a customary divorce, he or she must present evidence that establishes (1) the tribe to which he belongs, (2) the current customary divorce law of that tribe, and (3) the fact that the pertinent ceremonial procedures were followed. We also stated the following:

在Matter of DaBaase案（同上）中，我们认定，当一方当事人寻求证明习惯法离婚的有效性时，其必须提交证据证明：(1) 其所属的部落；(2) 该部落现行的习惯法离婚法；以及 (3) 相关仪式程序已得到遵循的事实。我们还作出如下表述：

To establish the current customary law of his tribe, the party may present evidence derived from reported cases, legal treaties and commentaries, and depositions of legal scholars. The evidence could also consist of advisory opinions from those

为证明其部落的现行习惯法，该当事人可以提交来源于已报道案件、法律专著与评注以及法律学者书面证词的证据。证据也可以包括来自那些

482

482

Cite as 24 I&N Dec. 479 (BIA 2008) Interim Decision #3606

引注：24 I&N Dec. 479 (BIA 2008) 临时决定第3606号

organizations traditionally recognized by the Ghanaian Government as possessing knowledge of customary law.

传统上被加纳政府认可为拥有习惯法知识的组织的咨询意见。

Id. at 40-41. Moreover, the parties must prove that the divorce was properly perfected. Affidavits should be specific and include the full names and birth dates of the parties; the date of the customary marriage; the date of, and grounds for, the dissolution of the marriage; the names, birth dates of, and custody agreement for any children born of the marriage; and a description of the tribal formalities that were observed, including the names of the tribal leaders, the name of the tribe, the place, the type of divorce, and any other relevant information.

同上，第40-41页。此外，当事人必须证明该离婚已适当完成。宣誓书应当具体，并包括当事人的全名和出生日期；习惯法婚姻的日期；婚姻解除的日期及理由；该婚姻所生子女的姓名、出生日期及监护协议；以及对所遵循的部落手续的描述，包括部落领袖的姓名、部落名称、地点、离婚类型以及任何其他相关信息。

The parties submitted a statutory declaration dated October 29, 2004, from the fathers of both the beneficiary and his first wife confirming the dissolution of the marriage on January 23, 2004. USCIS counsel asks us to consider the effective date of the divorce to be the date confirmed by the fathers in their affidavit, rather than the later date of the execution of the affidavit. We agree that January 23, 2004, is the proper date of the divorce and will therefore sustain the petitioner’s appeal.

当事人提交了一份日期为2004年10月29日的法定声明，由受益人和其第一任妻子的父亲出具，确认婚姻于2004年1月23日解除。USCIS律师请求我们将离婚的生效日期认定为父亲们在宣誓书中确认的日期，而非宣誓书签署的较晚日期。我们同意2004年1月23日为离婚的适当日期，因此将维持申请人的上诉。

Finally, the USCIS requests a remand in order to determine the validity of the fathers’ affidavit and to check its authenticity. We find that a remand is appropriate and will grant the request.

最后，USCIS请求发回重审，以确定父亲们宣誓书的有效性并核查其真实性。我们认为发回重审是适当的，并将准许该请求。

483

483