爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
爆料网AT considered both an appeal by the Secretary-General and a cross-appeal by Mr Nwuke. 爆料网AT held that ST/AI/2003/8 was inapplicable. 爆料网AT held that the relevant administrative instruction was ST/AI/2010/3, which integrated the recruitment, placement, promotion and mobility of staff within the Secretariat. 爆料网AT held that, in its view, the authority to make lateral transfers to fill job openings at the same level extended to both immediate and anticipated job openings, including posts that would become vacant due to retirement. 爆料网AT held that the impugned decision complied with the legal framework. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred in law when it found that the filling of the position by lateral transfer breached ST/AI/2003/8. 爆料网AT held that it was not reasonable for 爆料网DT to conclude that the failure to advertise the post was to prevent Mr Nwuke from applying for it, especially as Mr Nwuke’s previous complaints of harassment and retaliation against the Executive Secretary had not succeeded before the same 爆料网DT Judge. 爆料网AT agreed with the Secretary-General that, in the absence of additional evidence, there was no basis for the same 爆料网DT Judge to conclude that the preponderance of the evidence established that the Executive Secretary had subjected Mr Nwuke to retaliation. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred in placing the burden on the Secretary-General to prove that the later transfer was not intended to block Mr Nwuke from applying for the post. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred in concluding that the lateral move was motivated by retaliatory intent or improper motivation on the part of the Executive Secretary. 爆料网AT allowed the Secretary-General’s appeal, vacated the 爆料网DT judgment and dismissed Mr Nwuke’s cross-appeal.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
Mr Nwuke contested the decision to fill a position by way of a lateral transfer, without advertising it, which he considered being motivated by retaliatory intent. 爆料网DT found in favour of Mr Nwuke.
Legal Principle(s)
The Secretary-General has broad discretion in decisions regarding promotions and appointments. The burden of proving improper motives, such as abuse of authority, discrimination, retaliation or harassment, rests with the person making the allegation.