ISCR Case 04-11161.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 04-11161.h1

grantedJun 30, 2006· Hon. John Grattan Metz, Jr.· hearing

Summary

A 38-year-old naturalized U.S. citizen and defense contractor, originally from Zimbabwe, was granted a security clearance despite initial concerns under Guidelines B (Foreign Influence), C (Foreign Preference), and E (Personal Conduct). The Statement of Reasons highlighted that her mother, several siblings, and step-siblings reside in Zimbabwe. Among these relatives, two step-brothers were policemen (one now deceased), one brother is a retired, disabled Zimbabwean army veteran working in a medical clinic, and another brother serves as a local magistrate.

Further concerns arose from her undisclosed ownership of a $20,000 house in Zimbabwe, purchased when she considered returning there. Her mother lived in this house until 2004, when it was demolished under a government program. While Zimbabwe is a developing nation with a poor human rights record, it is not known to collect intelligence or economic information against the U.S.

The applicant successfully mitigated these concerns. She demonstrated that she legally lost her Zimbabwean citizenship upon naturalization and surrendered her Zimbabwean passport once she understood the implications of retaining it. Crucially, it was determined that her family members in Zimbabwe are not agents of a foreign government and do not present a point of influence. Based on these mitigating factors, the security clearance was granted.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

Applicant lost her Zimbabwean citizenship as a matter of law upon becoming a U.S. citizen.
Applicant surrendered her Zimbabwean passport upon realizing the implications of retaining it.
Family members in Zimbabwe are not agents of a foreign government and do not provide a point of influence.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

C1raisedDual Citizenship
B1raisedForeign Influence

Mitigating

C1appliedLoss of Citizenship
B1appliedFamily Not Agents of Foreign Power
E2appliedLack of Intent to Mislead

Key Rule Quoted

“The government has a compelling interest in ensuring each Applicant possesses the requisite judgement, reliability, and trustworthiness of those who must protect national interests as their own.”
— Department of the Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518 (1988)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJul 13, 2005
Answer filedAug 9, 2005Initially requested a decision without hearing.
Hearing heldFeb 23, 2006
Decision dateJun 30, 2006

Cite For

Mitigation of Foreign Preference Under Guideline C Due to Loss of Citizenship
Mitigation of Foreign Influence Under Guideline B When Family Members Are Not Agents of a Foreign Government
Lack of Intent to Mislead Under Guideline E in Security Clearance Applications.

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 mother, some siblings, and step-siblings are citizens and residents of Zimbabwe.	For Applicant	Sibling in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Zimbabwe	Admitted	—	(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely	—
1.b	Two of her step-brothers were policemen but one of them is dead.	For Applicant	Sibling in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Zimbabwe	Admitted	—	(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely	—
1.c	One of her brothers is a retired, disabled veteran of the Zimbabwean army, who now works in a medical clinic for veterans.	For Applicant	Sibling in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Zimbabwe	Admitted	—	(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely	—
1.d	The only other family member who has any connection to the government is a brother who serves as a local magistrate.	For Applicant	Sibling in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Zimbabwe	Admitted	—	(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely	—
1.e	She did not disclose that she owned a house in Zimbabwe that she purchased for $20,000 at a time when she thought she might return to live in Zimbabwe.	For Applicant	Foreign Real Estate Financial or Property Interest	Zimbabwe	Denied	—	(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely	—
1.f	Her mother lived in the house until 2004, when it was torn down under a government program aimed at destroying what it considered to be "trash" houses in the countryside.	For Applicant	Parent in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Zimbabwe	Admitted	—	(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely	—
1.g	Zimbabwe is a developing nation with a poor human rights record. However, it is not known to be a collector of intelligence or economic information against the U.S.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Other	Zimbabwe	Unknown	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Relationship

Country

Response

Disqualifying (¶7)

Mitigating applied (¶8)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant's mother, some siblings, and step-siblings are citizens and residents of Zimbabwe.

For Applicant

Sibling in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Zimbabwe

Admitted

—

(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely

—

1.b

Two of her step-brothers were policemen but one of them is dead.

For Applicant

Sibling in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Zimbabwe

Admitted

—

(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely

—

1.c

One of her brothers is a retired, disabled veteran of the Zimbabwean army, who now works in a medical clinic for veterans.

For Applicant

Sibling in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Zimbabwe

Admitted

—

(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely

—

1.d

The only other family member who has any connection to the government is a brother who serves as a local magistrate.

For Applicant

Sibling in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Zimbabwe

Admitted

—

(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely

—

1.e

She did not disclose that she owned a house in Zimbabwe that she purchased for $20,000 at a time when she thought she might return to live in Zimbabwe.

For Applicant

Foreign Real Estate

Financial or Property Interest

Zimbabwe

Denied

—

(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely

—

1.f

Her mother lived in the house until 2004, when it was torn down under a government program aimed at destroying what it considered to be "trash" houses in the countryside.

For Applicant

Parent in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Zimbabwe

Admitted

—

(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely

—

1.g

Zimbabwe is a developing nation with a poor human rights record. However, it is not known to be a collector of intelligence or economic information against the U.S.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Other

Zimbabwe

Unknown

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶10)	Mitigating applied (¶11)	Mitigation
1.a–1.b	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

1.a–1.b

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	specific text not stated in this decision	For Applicant	Unspecified Personal Conduct	—	Unknown	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

3.a

specific text not stated in this decision

For Applicant

Unspecified Personal Conduct

—

Unknown

—

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

CONCLUSION

FORMAL FINDINGS

DECISION

FOOTNOTES