What to do if a coauthor lies? My coauthor and I work at some organization. After I started working with him, people told me that he allegedly took some data (used in the paper) from the organization without authorization (He was let go from the organization.) 

I received a letter from the organization stating that he indeed took the data without authorization. He explained that if I finished the paper he will send the paper to the organization for clearance. I asked him to show me the document, but he only replied: “I am in good relation with that organization.” So, I gave him benefits of doubts and I did all the work, including every calculation.

While he had been claiming that “the data breach is a rumor”, I confronted him over the phone and he finally admitted that the data breach is a fact. I myself have acquired clearance with the organization regarding the data breach since then. However, he refuses to withdraw from the paper.

As for the paper, I have proved every single result, every single calculation, and every single sentence of the paper. He did not do anything. I asked him and he cannot define a very basic term used in the paper. He said: “But it is not honest to ask me to remove my name only by simple assumption like the one you raised.”

I would think of proceeding as


ask the coauthor to provide me the formal paperwork on this issue,
if the coauthor fails to provide me these documents then I would need to drop him from the paper.


Do you think it make sense? Are there any other procedures that I need to follow?
Criteria for authorship depend on the journal, but generally follow something along the lines of the ICMJE recommendations. To be an author, you should:


have made substantial contributions to the conception or design of
the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data
for the work; AND
Drafted the work or revised it critically for important intellectual content; AND
Approved the final version to be published; AND
Agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of
the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.


You don't mention who conceived or designed the study, but unless he made a substantial contribution to this he hasn't met #1, since you acquired and interpreted the data (if he initially provided the data but was not allowed to, that doesn't count). It doesn't sound like he's met #2. If you've showed him the final version he could claim he's met #3 and he would probably agree to #4 even though this would be misrepresenting his ability to follow the rest of the work.

Basically, you leave him off the author list but (potentially) acknowledge him.