爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
爆料网AT considered appeals by both the Secretary-General and Mr Auda. Noting that the Administration had not failed to respond, albeit with inordinate delay, and then had set up a second fact-finding panel, 爆料网AT held that a decision may only be challenged in the context of an appeal after the conclusion of the entire process and that the step Mr Auda was challenging was preliminary in nature. 爆料网AT held that the contested issue, namely the decision of the first fact-finding panel to delay, withhold and not submit its report and records, ceased to exist when Mr Auda was notified of the outcome of the second fact-finding panel’s preliminary review of his complaint. 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT’s conclusion that the application was receivable is without legal basis, as was its award of compensation based on that finding. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred on a question of law and exceeded its competence in accepting the application as receivable. 爆料网AT granted the Secretary-General’s appeal, dismissed Mr Auda’s appeal and vacated the 爆料网DT judgment.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
Mr Auda contested the decision of the first fact-finding panel to delay, withhold and not submit its report on, and records of, the investigation. 爆料网DT found the application receivable and, noting the extraordinarily excessive delay of more than three years between Mr Auda filing his first complaint and a decision being taken, found this delay to be in violation of the promptness requirement of ST/SGB/2008/5 and Mr Auda’s right to be informed of the status of the first fact-finding panel. 爆料网DT awarded Mr Auda compensation for the harm that he suffered as a result of the breaches of his fundamental due process rights and human rights.
Legal Principle(s)
Tribunals should not interfere with matters that fall within the Administration’s prerogatives, including its lawful and internal processes, and the Administration must be left to conduct these processes in full and to finality. The final administrative decision that concludes the compound administrative process regarding the staff member’s complaint is the only challengeable one and absorbs all the previous preliminary steps.