爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT did not commit an error in procedure, such as to affect the decision of the case pursuant to Article 2(1) of the 爆料网AT Statute. 爆料网AT rejected the argument that the fact that the Appellant did not receive the recordings of the hearing or transcript affected the decision of the case. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant merely repeated arguments raised before 爆料网RWA DT. 爆料网AT accepted 爆料网RWA DT’s finding that the Appellant had ample opportunity to respond to allegations and provide comments on the investigation report and exhibits. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT made fundamental errors of fact resulting in a manifestly unreasonable decision, namely in assessing the credibility of the evidence of the Complainant and the Appellant and in dismissing the Complainant’s retraction without supporting evidence. 爆料网AT held that the evidential standards were not met to support the finding that there was clear and convincing evidence that established to a high degree of probability that the alleged misconduct had occurred. 爆料网AT found no merit in the Appellant’s argument that his due process rights were violated. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT erred in law in its interpretation of 爆料网RWA GSC No. 07/2010. 爆料网AT remanded the matter back to 爆料网RWA DT for a rehearing before a different judge for additional findings of fact.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
The Applicant contested the decision to impose on him the disciplinary measure of separation from service without termination indemnity due to serious misconduct in the form of sexual exploitation and abuse. 爆料网RWA DT dismissed his application.
Legal Principle(s)
The appeals procedure is not an opportunity for a party to reargue his or her case. 爆料网DT should ordinarily hear the evidence of the complainant and other material witnesses. Misconduct must be established by clear and convincing evidence. The due process rights of a staff member are complied with as long as the staff member has a meaningful opportunity to mount a defence and to question the veracity of the statements against him or her.