Former Chinese legislator claims she fled to Saipan for fear of persecution

A former legislator in China claims that she ultimately fled to Saipan after certain Chinese government law enforcement officials severely beat, threatened, and detained her due to her political opinions.

Heqian Ma has a pending application before the Saipan Immigration Court, asking the court to withhold her removal from the CNMI on the basis of her fear of being persecuted by the Chinese government on account of her political beliefs.

In March 2012, U.S. District Court for the NMI Chief Judge Ramona V. Manglona imposed a six-month prison term on a woman named Heqian Ma, who was convicted of luring Chinese nationals to the CNMI for non-existing jobs. The defendant pleaded guilty to two counts of fraud in foreign labor contracting.

Saipan Tribune contacted Ma’s counsel, Samuel Mok, to verify whether his client is the same person who was sentenced in 2012. Mok was not in his office and had yet to return call as of press time.

In Ma’s petition in federal court, Mok disclosed that the Immigration Court had tentatively granted Ma’s withholding of removal at a hearing last June 16 on the condition she complete her biometrics by Sept. 1, 2015.

The deadline prompted Ma to file Monday a petition for writ of mandamus in federal court against federal officials to force U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services to take her biometrics as she has already made three requests since February 2015 that have yet to result in a biometrics appointment.

Mok stated that if Ma’s biometrics are not completed by Sept. 1, 2015, the Immigration Court has indicated it will dismiss or deny her pending application not to be deported on the basis of “abandonment.”

Mok said the dismissal and/or denial of Ma’s application will result in her deportation to China where the Immigration Court has already found—during a prior hearing—that she would likely be persecuted by the Chinese government due to her political beliefs.

Mok asked the federal court to hear Ma’s petition on an emergency basis or before the Sept. 1 deadline.

Mok also asked the federal court to direct USCIS and Department of Homeland Security officials to immediately enter Ma into the system so that a biometrics appointment may be scheduled.

According to Mok, Ma was formerly an elected member of the national Chinese legislature and that during her time as a lawmaker she had investigated and filed reports of corruption on certain Chinese government law enforcement officials.

Because of such investigations, Ma was severely beaten, threatened, and detained, Mok said.

The lawyer said Ma ultimately fled to Saipan but he did not indicate the date when his client arrived on island.

Mok stated that in 2012, Ma filed with the Immigration Court on Saipan an application for withholding of removal—a petition not to be deported—citing her fear of being persecuted by the Chinese government if she was forcibly returned to her native China.

The Immigration Court denied Ma’s application on Feb. 12, 2013, saying she did not have enough documents to corroborate her claims.

However, on Dec. 10, 2014, the Board of Immigration Appeals reversed the decision and remanded Ma’s case to the Immigration Court so that Ma could file more documents to support her claims.

Mok said his client sent a biometrics request to USCIS in Nebraska last Feb. 11, but she never received a response.

Mok said Ma then filed corroborating documents with the Immigration Court to support her petition.

When Ma received on May 21 a notice from DHS that her biometrics and background checks were not complete, she sent on June 2 a second biometrics request to USCIS in Nebraska, Mok said.

He said Ma went to USCIS Office on Saipan last June 15 in an attempt to have her biometrics taken on a walk-in basis.

Mok said a USCIS officer told Ma that she could not have her biometrics taken because she was “not in the system.”

The lawyer said Ma went back the following day to USCIS on Saipan, but another told her that her biometrics could not be taken because there was no proof that she had paid the biometrics fee.

Mok said at the June 16, 2015 hearing, Immigration Court Judge Clarence M. Wagner tentatively granted Ma’s petition on the condition that she completes her biometrics by Aug. 18, 2015.

Mok said that last June 29, Ma received a letter from USCIS acknowledging receipt of her June 2, 2015, biometrics request and asking that she submit further information before her biometrics request could be processed.

Mok said Ma filed a third biometrics request last July 6 to USCIS in Nebraska.

To date, Mok said, Ma has still not received a response from the USCIS, let alone been scheduled for a biometrics appointment despite the passage of more than seven weeks since the third request was delivered.

Mok said the Immigration Court then scheduled a new hearing for Sept. 15, 2015, and warned Ma that if she failed to have her biometrics completed by Sept. 1, 2015, he would dismiss her case.

Mok said Ma’s failure to have her biometrics taken thus far are solely attributable to the neglect and wrongful indifference of USCIS and is not attributable in any way to her.