A Nigerian man’s bid for asylum in the United States has been denied after a federal appeals court ruled that his prior admission to marriage fraud cast serious doubt on his credibility, even though the fraud was unrelated to his claims of political persecution.

The Ninth Circuit panel on Thursday upheld an immigration judge’s decision rejecting Daniel Tochukwu Ani’s application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. The court agreed that Ani’s earlier deception undermined the reliability of his testimony about alleged persecution for his Igbo ethnicity and his role in the separatist group Movement for the Actualization of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB).

Fraud Past Shadows Asylum Plea

“When an applicant for immigration relief has attempted to defraud immigration authorities in seeking one form of relief, an immigration judge can disbelieve the applicant’s account when he is seeking a different form of relief,” wrote U.S. Circuit Judge Daniel A. Bress in the panel’s published opinion.

Ani, who left Nigeria in 2005 after police violence against MASSOB supporters, entered the U.S. on a six-month visa. He later married a U.S. woman and applied for permanent residency — but later admitted under oath that he paid her $6,000 in exchange for a fake marriage to gain immigration benefits.

After his brother sent him a Nigerian newspaper article linking him to a 2004 police raid, Ani filed for asylum in 2010, claiming fear of persecution if he returned.

Court Says Credibility Crumbled

Although an immigration judge initially found some of Ani’s testimony “believable and forthright,” the judge rejected his denial of marriage fraud and dismissed claims that he was coerced by immigration officials into signing the fraud affidavit.

Ani appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals, which ordered a rehearing, but the immigration judge again found no credible evidence of a future threat in Nigeria. The board later upheld the denial.

Judge Bress said the record contained “substantial evidence” supporting the judge’s finding. “Ani made the conscious choice to pursue a fraudulent path to remain in the United States rather than seeking asylum earlier,” the opinion said, adding that his deception justified disbelief of his persecution narrative.

Case Closed on Credibility

The court concluded that Ani’s conduct “raised legitimate concerns about his honesty,” finding no evidence compelling a different outcome.

Ani was represented by Emmanuel E. Enyinwa of the Law Office of Emmanuel Enyinwa, while the government was represented by Aaron Henricks, Sarah A. Byrd, and Jennifer Levings of the U.S. Department of Justice’s Civil Division.

Judges Milan D. Smith Jr. and Brian M. Morris joined Judge Bress on the panel.