±¬ÁÏÍø

±¬ÁÏÍøAT had before it three decisions of the Conciliation Committee: the first regarding the establishment of two inquiry panels, Panel One and Panel Two; the second in respect of the decision to place the Appellant on administrative leave with pay, and the third concerning the decision to separate her from service. As a preliminary matter, ±¬ÁÏÍøAT did not admit to the case file two motions submitted by the Appellant subsequent to the issuance of judgment No. 2015-±¬ÁÏÍøAT-531, as ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the documents that she sought to adduce would not assist ±¬ÁÏÍøAT with its consideration on the merits. By way of...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered seven motions submitted by Ms Rangel prior to a judgment on the merits. On the two Motions for Interim Relief, ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that Ms Rangel did not seek an interim measure for temporary relief consistent with the pronouncements of the ICJ Conciliation Committee, but rather she sought interim relief in cases where the Committee had dismissed her applications. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that since one of the two cumulative conditions under Article 9(4) of the ±¬ÁÏÍøAT Statute was not fulfilled, it did not need to further consider the second condition. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT denied the requests for interim relief. On the...