±¬ÁÏÍø

±¬ÁÏÍøAT considered an appeal by Ms. Banaj against Judgment No. ±¬ÁÏÍøDT/2021/030.

±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that a reallocation of duties pending the outcome of an investigation as occurred in Ms. Banaj¡¯s case is permissible as an interim measure in such circumstances, but not as the exercise of the general power of assignments available to the Secretary-General in Staff Regulation 1.2(c) [¡­] But, under Staff Rule 10.4 and the Framework relating to interim measures pending an investigation and disciplinary process, there is an alternative measure of reallocation of duties available in such cases where the...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT judgment was problematic because the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT's findings seemed to be based entirely on hearsay evidence, i.e., the findings in the OIOS investigation report. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT observed that the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT judgment failed to explain the evidentiary basis of its conclusion that sexual harassment was highly probable, and made no explicit or precise findings in relation to the evidence given under oath at the hearing. The failure of the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT to make findings about the testimony it heard made the appeal well-nigh impossible. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT noted that there was no transcript of the hearing, and...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the complaint of sexual harassment filed by the staff member against her former supervisors (FRO and SRO) led to investigations whose reports were the basis for disciplinary processes and sanctions against both persons, as well as an additional administrative measure against her former SRO. The Administration acted promptly, when unofficially informed of the wrongdoing, by placing the staff member on certified sick leave for approximately two months, before reassigning her at her request to a new workplace. The letter informing her of the action taken also contained the...

The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT agreed with the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT that the Administration had shown that Mr. Mirella¡¯s candidature was given full and fair consideration which satisfies the presumption of regularity, and that Mr. Mirella has not proven through clear and convincing evidence that he was denied a fair chance. The ±¬ÁÏÍøAT reviewed Mr. Mirella¡¯s contention that the ±¬ÁÏÍøDT erred in finding that his exclusion from the shortlist was in compliance with Section 7.4 of ST/AI/2010/3 (Staff selection system). Specifically, the ±¬ÁÏÍøAT evaluated Mr. Mirella¡¯s argument that the Hiring Manager erroneously found that he did not meet the...

The underlying reason behind the Applicant¡¯s FTA not being renewed was the fact that he could not obtain a visa to join his duty station. In the case at hand, the Applicant was not able to demonstrate that the decision not to renew his FTA beyond its expiration date was illegal, arbitrary or tainted by ulterior motives. As per the legal framework, an FTA does not carry any expectancy, legal or otherwise, of renewal, and shall expire automatically and without prior notice on the expiration date specified in the letter of appointment. In addition, obtaining a visa was, indeed, a condition sine...

Scope of judicial review In a remanded case, such as the instant one, the Applicant may not expand the scope of claims for remedies contained in her original application and, as such, the Tribunal will not consider her new claims or arguments unless they are essentially related to her original claim in the application. Whether and to what extent the Applicant is entitled to remedies The Appeals Tribunal found in Banaj 2022-±¬ÁÏÍøAT-1202 (see para. 1) that the temporary removal from the Applicant, and reassignment to others, of certain of her functions as Head of ±¬ÁÏÍøODC in Albania, was an unlawful...

Preliminary matter: the use of prior conduct evidence The Applicant argues that his due process rights were violated during the investigation, particularly by the irregular use of prior conduct evidence which allegedly created a bias against him and masked the lack of clear and convincing evidence in relation to the sexual harassment complaint. The Tribunal considers it is proper and not unlawful for the Organization to consider the staff member¡¯s background and behaviour towards others in the context of a disciplinary case, as long as it is relevant, uncontroversial and probative. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT...

Scope of judicial review and the contested decision The Applicant described the contested decision as a failure to implement ¡°measures to promote a harmonious work environment and protect personnel from prohibited conduct through preventive measures¡±. As remedies, the Applicant sought damages for moral harm and emotional distress resulting from the Administration¡¯s breach of its duty to ensure a harmonious work environment. Accordingly, the Applicant seeks to contest the Administration¡¯s failure to take appropriate measures to promote a harmonious work environment and protect him from...

Whether the facts on which the disciplinary measure was based have been established In determining whether the standard of proof has been met, the Tribunal ¡°is not allowed to investigate facts on which the disciplinary sanction has not been based and may not substitute its own judgment for that of the Secretary General¡±. Thus, it will ¡°only examine whether there is sufficient evidence for the facts on which the disciplinary sanction was based¡± (see Nadasan 2019-±¬ÁÏÍøAT-918, para. 40). As such, the Tribunal considers to be irrelevant the Applicant¡¯s submission that the facts on which the...

A false allegation of sexual harassment against the Applicant and the sensitive information regarding V01¡¯s medical history in the present case constitute exceptional circumstances warranting anonymity.

The Administration erred in concluding that the Applicant making inappropriate comments between February and May 2018 constituted harassment of V01 and that the Applicant¡¯s handling of V01¡¯s complaint against Mr. N. constituted harassment and abuse of authority. The Applicant¡¯s due process rights were respected during the investigation and the disciplinary process.

Although not constitutive...