# 2020-014 Careers, Procedural Fairness, Release - Compulsory

Case summary

F&R Date: 2020-10-30

The grievor requested that she be given an opportunity to be properly represented at the Security Screening Review Panel to ensure procedural fairness. In another grievance, she requested that her Reliability Status and Security Clearance be reinstated and that she be able to continue her career in the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF).

The grievor's spouse had been identified as a member of an associated outlaw motorcycle club. The grievor's chain of command submitted a Change of Circumstances Report to the Director Personnel Security and Identity Management (DPSIM), stating that she was suspected as having involvement with one or more organizations generally regarded by law enforcement and the CAF as having criminal ties. A Personnel Security Review for Cause was initiated and the grievor was interviewed by an investigator with DPSIM. Finally, the grievor's Reliability Status was revoked by VCDS, and the decision was based on the identified concerns with respect to the grievor's association with outlaw motorcycle individuals who are considered to be a security risk to the Department of National Defence and the CAF. The grievor was eventually released from the CAF under item 5(d) Not Advantageously Employable of the table to article 15.01 of the Queen's Regulations and Orders for the Canadian Forces.

Even though the grievor's conduct and performance in her occupation had been without reproach, the evidence provided from the investigation was assessed as sufficient to raise doubt about her reliability. Since the Security Screening Review Panel (SSRP) is the last step before a potential revocation of a Reliability Status, which is a fundamental requirement for remaining in the CAF, the Committee determined that it requires the highest standards of procedural fairness as it is the most severe administrative action that can be taken. In this case, the grievor was not represented during the SSRP, and she was not afforded meaningful disclosure to allow her to know the case to be met in preparing and submitting her rebuttal letter. Accordingly, the Committee found that, up until the end of the SSRP, the grievor was not accorded procedural fairness. However, the de novo nature of the grievance process has permitted the examination of more information than that which the grievor originally received, and the breach in procedural fairness has been cured by this disclosure and by the opportunity for the grievor to submit further comments at the Final Authority (FA) level.

As for the revocation of the grievor's Reliability Status, having reviewed all this evidence, the Committee finds that the decision to revoke the grievor's Reliability Status was reasonable in the circumstances and that the result would have been the same even if the grievor had been afforded procedural fairness through adequate and timely disclosure. Since a CAF member requires, as a minimum, a Reliability Status to remain advantageously employable in the CAF, once a decision to revoke a Reliability Status is reasonably made, a compulsory release is the only course of action available. Therefore, the Committee finds that the decision to revoke the grievor's Reliability Status was reasonable.

FA decision summary

The CDS agreed with the Committee's findings and recommendation not to afford the grievor redress. While the documentation and statements on file confirmed that the grievor's conduct and performance at work were by all accounts very good, the CDS also found that the evidence provided by the Canadian Forces National Investigation Service was compelling and sufficient enough to raise doubt as to her reliability. The CDS found that, based on the evidence on file, the grievor's release under item 5(d) of the table to article 15.01 of the Queen's Regulations and Orders for the Canadian Forces was reasonable and in accordance with the applicable policy. The CDS directed the VCDS to initiate the review of the SSRP process to ensure that it provides a sufficient level of procedural fairness.