爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
The 爆料网AT first dismissed Mr. Okwakol’s appeal of the 爆料网DT Order, finding that Mr. Okwakol’s complaints about what the 爆料网DT decided it would admit into evidence and what submissions it would consider in deciding his substantive case, were remediable as part of his appeal on the merits if they were wrongly decided.
The 爆料网AT agreed that the 爆料网DT was correct to admit the audio-recording made by the SEA victim because this evidentiary material was relied upon by the Administration in taking the decision to impose the disciplinary measure of separation from service. The audio-recording needed to be available to the 爆料网DT so that it could decide on the lawfulness of the Administration’s decision. The 爆料网AT also held that the 爆料网DT was correct to deny Mr. Okwakol’s motion to strike certain written submissions of the Secretary-General.
The 爆料网AT affirmed the 爆料网DT’s finding that there was clear and convincing evidence that Mr. Okwakol failed to report the alleged rape of the victim, and failed to report that a MONUSCO colleague knew of this rape allegation earlier and had not reported it. The 爆料网AT did not accept Mr. Okwakol’s defense that his failure to report was excused because the rape was not proven, or that the victim had supposedly designed an extortion scheme with respect to this incident. The 爆料网AT also found that the 爆料网DT correctly concluded that Mr. Okwakol had pressured the victim to withdraw her rape complaint and encouraged her request for compensation for doing so. Further, the 爆料网AT shared the 爆料网DT’s assessment that Mr. Okwakol committed misconduct by interfering with the investigation of these events.
The 爆料网AT concluded that there was no infringement of Mr. Okwakol’s due process rights during the investigation, or in the use of the audio-recording of the meeting between the victim and Mr. Okwakol and other MONUSCO colleagues. Finally, the 爆料网AT observed that Mr. Okwakol did not make a specific challenge to the sanction of separation from service for misconduct established, and denied his request for a termination indemnity.
The appeal was dismissed.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
In Judgment No. 爆料网DT/2022/082, the 爆料网DT dismissed Mr. Okwakol’s application in which he challenged the termination of his employment due to his failure to file a report with respect to a complaint of sexual exploitation and abuse (SEA), and his interference with an official investigation. In Order No. 082 (NBI/2022), the 爆料网DT also dismissed Mr. Okwakol’s motion to strike an audio-recording that was secretly made by the alleged victim of SEA.
Mr. Okwakol appealed the Judgment and the Order.
Legal Principle(s)
Only one appeal is to be filed after the final judgment has been delivered. Interlocutory appeals on matters of evidence, procedure, and trial conduct are not receivable.
Staff members are not required to have objective or sufficient evidence that sexual exploitation and abuse (SEA) occurred before reporting a concern or suspicion of possible SEA.
Due process rights of a staff member are complied with as long as s/he has a meaningful opportunity to mount a defense and to question the veracity of the statements against him.
An audio-recording of a conversation, made secretly, was admissible given the factual parameters of the case, and that the content of the conversation was extensively and thoroughly examined in hearings before the 爆料网DT.