爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
Mr. Russo-Got appealed. The 爆料网AT held that the evidence incontrovertibly established that Mr. Russo-Got had failed to challenge any blacklisting decision in his request for management evaluation. Moreover, while the application contained references to several posts for which he had applied and had not been selected, he did not request management evaluation of any selection decision nor did he appeal any particular selection decision in his application to the 爆料网DT. The 爆料网AT found that 爆料网DT accordingly had not erred in finding that the claims in the application regarding the alleged blacklisting and Mr. Russo-Got’s non-selection on that basis were not receivable ratione materiae. He simply failed to specifically identify or challenge any such decision in his request for management evaluation and no selection decision was submitted for review. The 爆料网AT was of the view that the 爆料网DT also had not erred in dismissing the challenge to the IAIG report. The evidence shows that on 19 January 2021, the General Counsel of 爆料网OPS requested Mr. Russo-Got to provide comments on the IAIG report and stated that after the deadline for submission of these comments had elapsed, he would “consider ... whether any action should be taken by 爆料网OPS”. Mr. Russo-Got submitted his response on 1 February 2021, and his request for management evaluation on 11 February 2021. There is no evidence that he was notified of any adverse decision or that he challenged any subsequent decision by 爆料网OPS that is based on the IAIG report. The 爆料网AT noted that the IAIG report merely constituted a preliminary step in the decision process which in and by itself had no direct legal consequences for Mr. Russo-Got. It accordingly did not constitute an administrative decision as contemplated in Article 2 of the Statute of the 爆料网DT, and the 爆料网DT accordingly did not err in finding that the challenge to the report was not receivable ratione materiae. The 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed Judgment No. 爆料网DT/2021/128.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
Mr. Russo-Got challenged a decision of 爆料网OPS to blacklist him based on findings in an investigation report of the Internal Audit Investigation Group (IAIG), which alleged he had altered certain documents in an improper manner. The 爆料网DT, by Judgment No. 爆料网DT/2021/128, dismissed the application in its entirety as not receivable.
Legal Principle(s)
The 爆料网DT shall be competent to hear and pass judgment on an application to appeal an administrative decision that is alleged to be in non-compliance with the terms of appointment or the contract of employment. An appealable administrative decision is a unilateral decision of an administrative nature taken by the administration involving the exercise of a power or the performance of a function in terms of a statutory instrument, which adversely affects the rights of another and produces direct legal consequences. It is incumbent upon the staff member to clearly identify the administrative decision that is contested. The 爆料网DT has jurisdiction to receive applications appealing administrative decisions only when a staff member has previously submitted the contested administrative decision for management evaluation. Claims that have not been raised in a request for management evaluation are not receivable ratione materiae. Only final administrative decisions with direct legal effect are subject to review. Steps, including investigative reports, that are preliminary in nature may only be challenged in the context of an appeal against a final decision of the Administration that has direct legal consequences.