withhold deportation of any alien within the United States (when) in his opinion the alien would be subjected to physical persecution” (Emphasis supplied.). This permissive language means that the Attorney General or his delegate may consider factors other than those directly related to an alien's claim of physical persecution in forming his opinion as to whether discretion would be exercised either in favor of, or contrary to, the alien's request for relief. The Attorney General is not required, as was the case under section 23 of the Internal Security Act (supra), to make a formal finding with regard to whether the alien will or will not be physically persecuted. We find no error on the part of the special inquiry officer in reaching a conclusion in this case that a withholding of the respondent's deportation is not warranted without first making a formal finding as to the respondent's statutory eligibility for such relief (Cf. Silvia v. Carter, 326 F.2d 315 (C.A. 9, 1963), cert. den. 377 U.S. 917).

We do not believe, after a careful review of this record, that the respondent will be subjected to "physical persecution" within the meaning of section 243 (h) if he returns to Formosa. There is a possibility that he may be prosecuted by a military court martial. It is alleged that if convicted he will be subject to punishment under article 93 of the Armed Forces Criminal Code for a maximum sentence of not more than three years. It is also alleged that in a similar case a Chinese Army Captain who refused to return with his military unit after completing his training in the United States was deported to Formosa, found guilty by a court martial and sentenced to imprisonment for a term of only six months (see Ex. 17 and 18). A prosecution before a military tribunal convened pursuant to the laws of a foreign state to try offenses committed by a member of the military forces of that country, cannot be construed to be physical persecution within the meaning of section 243 (h) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. Chao-Ling Wang v. Pilliod, 285 F.2d 517, 520 (C.A. 7, 1960).

Under section 243 (h) it is not a question of whether substantial evidence supports the exercise of the discretion granted the Attorney General or his delegate. The Attorney General or his delegate has wide latitude and the primary consideration is whether the alien has had a fair opportunity to present his case; whether the Attorney General or his delegate has exercised his discretion and whether there has been an error of law in the proceeding. We find no error as a matter of law that the special inquiry officer's decision rests to some degree on a political consideration, namely, the foreign policy

of the United States. The special inquiry officer exercised his discretion after affording the respondent a fair opportunity to present his case. Cf, U.S. ex rel. Dolenz v. Shaughnessy, 206 F.2d 392, 394, 395 (C.A. 2, 1953.) The appeal will be dismissed.

ORDER: It is directed that the appeal be and the same is hereby dismissed.

MATTER OF DE LOS SANTOS

In Bond Cancellation Proceedings

A-11577528-9

Decided by District Director January 15, 1965

Cancellation of the public charge bond posted in behalf of aliens upon their admission for permanent residence is warranted since, following their departure from the United States, they appeared before the American Consul, Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic, at which time they executed consular certificates of identification, surrendered their alien registration cards, executed sworn statements that they have abandoned their permanent residence in this country and plan to resume residence in the Dominican Republic, and a check of the appropriate public welfare files reveals no record of their having received assistance while in the United States.

This record relates to two aliens admitted to the United States as permanent residents on January 31, 1959, upon the posting, on January 19, 1959, of a bond that the aliens shall not become public charges.

A request for cancellation of the bond was received from Mr. Carlos De Los Santos, the obligor, who stated the bonded aliens were departing the United States to return to their native country, the Dominican Republic. The obligor was advised that since the permanent departure of the aliens had not been established it would be necessary for them to appear before the nearest American Consul abroad to execute a Consular Certificate of Identification, surrender their alien resident cards, Form I-151, and make a formal statement attesting to their desire to abandon their permanent resident status in the United States.

On November 23, 1964 notification was received that the bonded aliens had complied with the above. Their alien registration cards together with their sworn statements that they planned to resume residence in the Dominican Republic and had abandoned their permanent residence in the United States were forwarded to this office by the American Embassy, Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic.

As the bonded aliens had resided in New York City since their admission a request was made to The City of New York, Department of Welfare, to ascertain whether they had received public assistance. Information was received that a check of Public Welfare files revealed no record of assistance having been granted.

It is concluded that the conditions of the public charge bond posted in behalf of the above-referenced aliens have been fulfilled. ORDER: It is ordered that the public charge bond posted on January 19, 1959 in behalf of Angela De Los Santos and Carlos De Los Santos be and the same is hereby cancelled.

MATTER OF DI PIETRO

In Visa Petition Proceedings

A-13234670

Decided by District Director January 18, 1965

Urgent need of beneficiary's services as a foreign-automobile mechanic is not established within the contemplation of section 203 (a)(1), Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended, since considerably less than the alleged thirty-five per cent of petitioner's gross volume of business is derived from the repair of foreign cars.

The petitioner, Westchester Motors, 2030 Westchester Avenue, Bronx, New York, submitted a first preference visa petition under section 204 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended, in behalf of Antonio DiPietro, on June 10, 1963. The services of the beneficiary are sought as an automobile mechanic, to repair all makes of foreign cars. Such duties would include the disassembly and overhaul of motors, transmissions, clutches, etc.

The Bureau of Employment Security clearance order submitted in conjunction with the petition specifies that the position requires a person who has had at least five years' experience in the performance of the duties of the position to be filled.

Evidence has been submitted indicating that the beneficiary was employed as an apprentice automobile mechanic with Giuseppe Saya, Venetico Marina, Italy, from March 1951 to May 1953, and as a skilled automobile mechanic with Giuseppe Rundo, in the same city, from July 1953 to January 1956. He was a specialized automobile mechanic in the employ of the Finance Corps of Palermo, Italy, from January 1956 to November 1962. The beneficiary is said to be capable of performing major repairs such as the disassembly and overhaul of motors, and to have acted in a supervisory capacity.

The petition reflects that Westchester Motors is engaged in general auto repair. On April 30, 1964, the petitioner stated that 35% of his gross volume of business was derived from the repair of foreign

245-235-67-10