Summary
The applicant, a 48-year-old linguist and U.S. citizen originally from Morocco, faced security clearance denial due to the falsification of his application by omitting two arrests related to domestic disputes. Despite having rebutted concerns under Guidelines B and C regarding foreign influence and preference, the applicant's deliberate omission under Guideline E led to the denial of his clearance.
Under Guideline B (Foreign Influence), Guideline C (Foreign Preference), and Guideline E (Personal Conduct), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: Applicant's mother is a Moroccan citizen and a legal U.S. resident, and she lives with Applicant about half the year and spends the other half in Morocco (1.a). One of Applicant's half-brothers is a citizen of and a resident in Morocco (1.b). Two of Applicant's half-sisters are citizens of and are residents in Morocco (1.c). Applicant worked as a freelancer for the Saudi Press Agency (SPA), which is affiliated with the Saudi Arabian Ministry of Information, from about 1983 to at least July 2003 (1.d). During this period, he had regular contact with SPA employees and contractors, identified in Exhibit 4, who are foreign citizens (1.e). He has made several trips to Morocco for family visits, and in 2003, he accompanied his mother on a trip to Saudi Arabia for a religious pilgrimage (1.f). Applicant deliberately omitted information about two arrests and charges resulting from domestic disputes from his security-clearance application (3.a).
The judge denied the clearance. The government raised disqualifying conditions E2.A5.1.2.2. The decision turned on the following: The applicant deliberately omitted information about two arrests on his security clearance application; The applicant's explanations for the omissions were deemed not credible by the judge; The applicant failed to mitigate the security concern stemming from his false statement.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant deliberately omitted information about two arrests on his security clearance application.
- The applicant's explanations for the omissions were deemed not credible by the judge.
- The applicant failed to mitigate the security concern stemming from his false statement.
Conditions Referenced
- E2.A5.1.2.2appliedDeliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant and Material Facts
Key Rule Quoted
“The decision to deny a person a security clearance is not a determination of an applicant's loyalty. Instead, it is a determination that the applicant has not met the strict guidelines the President has established for granting a clearance.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedMay 6, 2005
- Answer filedMay 23, 2005
- Hearing heldNov 9, 2005Applicant appeared with counsel.
- Decision dateMay 16, 2006
Cite For
- Deliberate Omission of Relevant Information Under Guideline E
- Credibility Issues in Applicant's Explanations
- Impact of Falsification on Security Clearance Eligibility