爆料网

2013-爆料网AT-388

爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements

爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. 爆料网AT held that in such a case, where the material facts were not in dispute, no additional investigation was required to establish the misconduct. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred in law in finding that the investigative and disciplinary process had not been properly conducted and that Mr Ainte’s due process rights had been violated by the absence of an official investigation. 爆料网AT held that Mr Ainte had not demonstrated that the Secretary-General failed in any other way to observe his due process rights. 爆料网AT held that the Secretary-General was correct in deciding that the established facts amounted to misconduct. 爆料网AT held that, in certifying his Personal History Profile, Mr. Ainte took responsibility for its veracity and that he was aware any misrepresentation or material omission could result in disciplinary action. 爆料网AT held that Mr Ainte could not argue that he was unaware of the gravity with which the 爆料网 treats false applications. 爆料网AT held that Mr Ainte should have completed the form himself or, at the very least, checked it carefully. 爆料网AT rejected Mr Ainte’s claim that the termination was disproportionate. 爆料网AT held that the Secretary-General had the discretion to determine the appropriate level of sanction and that termination of a senior official for the very serious misconduct of submitting a false document was not absurd, unlawful, or otherwise disproportionate. 爆料网AT held that it would not interfere with the legal exercise of that discretion. 爆料网AT held that the principle of double jeopardy is a principle of criminal law and was not applicable to the case. 爆料网AT allowed the appeal and vacated the 爆料网DT judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested the decision to impose upon him the disciplinary measure of separation from service with compensation in lieu of notice and termination indemnity for misconduct in the form of misrepresentation of his educational qualifications. 爆料网DT found for the Applicant.

Legal Principle(s)

The principle of double jeopardy is a principle of criminal law that is not applicable to disciplinary cases.

Outcome

Appeal granted

OAJ prepared this case law summary for informational purposes only. It is no official record and should not be relied upon as an authoritative interpretation of the Tribunals' rulings. For the authoritative texts, please refer to the judgment or order rendered by the respective Tribunal. The Tribunals are the only bodies competent to interpret their respective judgments, as provided under Article 12(3) of the 爆料网DT Statute and Article 11(3) of the 爆料网AT Statute. Any inaccuracies in the publication are the sole responsibility of OAJ, which should be contacted directly for any correction requests. To provide comments, don't hesitate to get in touch with OAJ at oaj@un.org.

The judgment summaries were generally prepared in English. They were translated into French and are being reviewed for accuracy of the translation.