ISCR Case 12-09691.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 12-09691.h1

grantedJun 27, 2013· Hon. Richard A. Cefola· hearing

Summary

A U.S. citizen who fled Afghanistan in 1980 sought a security clearance, which was ultimately GRANTED. The case involved concerns under Guideline B (Foreign Influence), Guideline C (Foreign Preference), and Guideline E (Personal Conduct).

Allegations included the applicant's brother residing in Afghanistan, a cousin there, and his U.S. citizen son playing for the Afghanistan National Basketball team. The applicant also maintained contact with an Afghan lawyer and held three bank accounts in Afghanistan. Regarding foreign preference, the applicant possessed an Afghan identification card and resided in Afghanistan intermittently from 2008 to 2011 to address land disputes. Personal conduct concerns arose from discrepancies in his November 2011 e-QIP, where he denied dual nationality but disclosed two Afghan savings accounts and inherited land, yet omitted the ongoing land disputes.

The judge found that the applicant's foreign contacts and financial interests did not pose a risk of coercion or conflict of interest. The applicant formally renounced any Afghan citizenship, and his disclosures during the interview were deemed credible and timely. These mitigating factors led to the favorable decision.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant's foreign contacts were not deemed to create a heightened risk of foreign exploitation or coercion.
The applicant formally renounced any Afghan citizenship, mitigating concerns under Foreign Preference.
The applicant's disclosures during the interview were credible and timely, addressing concerns of Personal Conduct.

Conditions Referenced

Mitigating

AG ¶ 8(a)appliedMitigating Condition 1The nature of the relationships with foreign persons is such that it is unlikely the individual will be placed in a position of having to choose between the interests of a foreign individual and the interests of the U.S.
AG ¶ 11(b)appliedMitigating Condition 2The individual has expressed a willingness to renounce dual citizenship.
AG ¶ 15appliedMitigating Condition 3The applicant's conduct was found to be credible and in compliance with guidance.

Key Rule Quoted

“The protection of the national security is the paramount consideration.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedSep 14, 2012
Answer filedOct 30, 2012Originally requested a decision without a hearing.
Hearing heldMay 7, 2013Applicant returned from Afghanistan for the hearing.
Decision dateJun 27, 2013

Cite For

Mitigation of Foreign Influence Concerns Under Guideline B
Renunciation of Foreign Citizenship as a Mitigating Factor Under Guideline C
Credibility of Disclosures in Personal Conduct Evaluations Under Guideline E

Editorial summary generated for research. Not legal advice; not a prediction. Verify against the full decision before relying on any quoted language.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Relationship	Country	Response	Disqualifying (¶7)	Mitigating applied (¶8)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant’s brother is a U.S. citizen, but resides in Afghanistan.	For Applicant	Sibling in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Afghanistan	Admitted	—	—	—
1.b	Applicant mother’s cousin is a citizen of and resides in Afghanistan.	For Applicant	Extended Family in Foreign Country Extended Family	Afghanistan	Admitted	—	—	—
1.c	Applicant’s son, a citizen and resident of the United States, plays for the Afghanistan National Basketball team.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Immediate Family	Afghanistan	Admitted	—	—	—
1.d	Applicant maintains contact with a lawyer who is a citizen and resident of Afghanistan.	For Applicant	Business Associate in Foreign Country Business or Professional Associate	Afghanistan	Admitted	—	—	—
1.e	specific text not stated in this decision	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Other	—	Unknown	—	—	—
1.f	Applicant maintains three bank accounts in Afghanistan.	For Applicant	Foreign Bank Account or Investment Financial or Property Interest	Afghanistan	Admitted	—	—	—
1.g	specific text not stated in this decision	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Other	—	Unknown	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Relationship

Country

Response

Disqualifying (¶7)

Mitigating applied (¶8)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant’s brother is a U.S. citizen, but resides in Afghanistan.

For Applicant

Sibling in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Afghanistan

Admitted

—

1.b

Applicant mother’s cousin is a citizen of and resides in Afghanistan.

For Applicant

Extended Family in Foreign Country

Extended Family

Afghanistan

Admitted

—

1.c

Applicant’s son, a citizen and resident of the United States, plays for the Afghanistan National Basketball team.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Immediate Family

Afghanistan

Admitted

—

1.d

Applicant maintains contact with a lawyer who is a citizen and resident of Afghanistan.

For Applicant

Business Associate in Foreign Country

Business or Professional Associate

Afghanistan

Admitted

—

1.e

specific text not stated in this decision

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Other

—

Unknown

—

1.f

Applicant maintains three bank accounts in Afghanistan.

For Applicant

Foreign Bank Account or Investment

Financial or Property Interest

Afghanistan

Admitted

—

1.g

specific text not stated in this decision

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Other

—

Unknown

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶10)	Mitigating applied (¶11)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant does not consider himself a dual national with Afghanistan, but he did possess an Afghan identification card, in order to pursue the land disputes noted above. (TR at page 67 line 21 to page 68 line 10, at page 68 line 22 to page 69 line 6, and at page 100 line 12 to page 102 line 24.)	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Preference	Admitted	—	(b) dual citizenship is based solely on parental citizenship or birth in a foreign country, and there is no evidence of foreign preference	—
2.b	He also resided in Afghanistan, off and on, from February of 2008 until July of 2011, in order to address the land disputes noted above. (TR at page 74 line 11 to page 75 line 2.)	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Preference	Admitted	—	(b) dual citizenship is based solely on parental citizenship or birth in a foreign country, and there is no evidence of foreign preference	—
2.c	Most recently, Applicant has formally renounced his Afghan citizenship. (AppX F.)	For Applicant	Failure to Renounce or Surrender Foreign Status	Admitted	—	(b) dual citizenship is based solely on parental citizenship or birth in a foreign country, and there is no evidence of foreign preference	—
2.d–2.e	2 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant).	For Applicant			—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶10)

Mitigating applied (¶11)

Mitigation

2.a

Applicant does not consider himself a dual national with Afghanistan, but he did possess an Afghan identification card, in order to pursue the land disputes noted above. (TR at page 67 line 21 to page 68 line 10, at page 68 line 22 to page 69 line 6, and at page 100 line 12 to page 102 line 24.)

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Preference

Admitted

—

(b) dual citizenship is based solely on parental citizenship or birth in a foreign country, and there is no evidence of foreign preference

—

2.b

He also resided in Afghanistan, off and on, from February of 2008 until July of 2011, in order to address the land disputes noted above. (TR at page 74 line 11 to page 75 line 2.)

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Preference

Admitted

—

(b) dual citizenship is based solely on parental citizenship or birth in a foreign country, and there is no evidence of foreign preference

—

2.c

Most recently, Applicant has formally renounced his Afghan citizenship. (AppX F.)

For Applicant

Failure to Renounce or Surrender Foreign Status

Admitted

—

(b) dual citizenship is based solely on parental citizenship or birth in a foreign country, and there is no evidence of foreign preference

—

2.d–2.e

2 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant).

For Applicant

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
3.a	On his November 29, 2011 e-QIP, Applicant answered, “No,” to Section 10:Citizeship Information, averring that he was never a dual national with Afghanistan.	For Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseSELF-CORRECTED	Other	Denied	—	—	—
3.b	On his November 29, 2011 e-QIP, Applicant also answered, “Yes,” to Section 20, Item 20A: Foreign Financial Interests, disclosing that he held two savings accounts in Afghanistan.	For Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseSELF-CORRECTED	Other	Denied	—	—	—
3.c	On his November 29, 2011 e-QIP, Applicant also answered, “Yes,” to Section 20, Item 20A: Foreign Financial Interests, disclosing land that he had inherited and sold, but failed to disclose the two land disputes noted above.	For Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseSELF-CORRECTED	Other	Denied	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

3.a

On his November 29, 2011 e-QIP, Applicant answered, “No,” to Section 10:Citizeship Information, averring that he was never a dual national with Afghanistan.

For Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseSELF-CORRECTED

Other

Denied

—

3.b

On his November 29, 2011 e-QIP, Applicant also answered, “Yes,” to Section 20, Item 20A: Foreign Financial Interests, disclosing that he held two savings accounts in Afghanistan.

For Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseSELF-CORRECTED

Other

Denied

—

3.c

On his November 29, 2011 e-QIP, Applicant also answered, “Yes,” to Section 20, Item 20A: Foreign Financial Interests, disclosing land that he had inherited and sold, but failed to disclose the two land disputes noted above.

For Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseSELF-CORRECTED

Other

Denied

—

Loading case…

Case Profile

Summary

Why the Applicant Prevailed

Conditions Referenced

Key Rule Quoted

Procedural Posture

Cite For

Full decision

DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

HEARING

APPEARANCES

STATEMENT OF CASE

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

ANALYSIS

WHOLE PERSON CONCEPT

FORMAL FINDINGS

CONCLUSION

FOOTNOTES