SPEAKING
OUT
transparent and accessible record.
11. DS should not base security
clearance determinations on regulations that the employee cannot be reasonably expected to know. If rules are
unpublished, or otherwise demonstrably unavailable to the employee, failure to abide by them should not be
interpreted as evidence of dishonesty
or unreliability.
12. With rare exceptions for the
most egregious of cases, the department should choose only one path for
handling any given allegation. It
should decide either to treat the case
as a criminal matter to be referred for
prosecution, as a disciplinary matter to
be handled by HR, as a medical issue
to be handled by MED, as a suitability
issue to be handled by HR, or as a security clearance issue. Whatever route
it chooses, it should not seek more than
one bite of the apple.
The security clearance process is
vital both to the security of our nation
and the efficiency of the Foreign Service, yet it is also non-transparent,
poorly regulated and easily abused.
Because of the severe impact on the
careers and livelihoods of government
employees, it is imperative that adjudications be conducted fairly and equitably to protect the interests of all
concerned.
Daniel M. Hirsch, a Foreign Service officer since 1985, is the director of the
State Department’s Overseas Motor
Vehicle Program He has served in
Praia, Bamako, Maputo, Belgrade, Bissau, Tashkent, Abuja, Calcutta, Bish-kek, Ashgabat and Washington, D.C.
Mr. Hirsch is a founding member of
Concerned Foreign Service Officers,
an organization which promotes fairness and due process in the security
clearance function.
