爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
The 爆料网AT held that a procedural flaw occurred during the recruitment process due to the inappropriate screening of educational requirements. Specifically, the 爆料网AT highlighted that the Hiring Manager failed to verify if the candidates’ degrees were in fields related to Supply Chain Management, business administration/management, instead considering all of them eligible in respect of educational requirements. Nevertheless, highlighting that the former staff member was, unlike 16 other candidates, neither recommended for the position, nor rostered for future similar vacancies, the 爆料网AT held that this procedural flaw was not sufficient to warrant rescission of the contested decision as the former staff member’s chances of selection were not impacted by the procedural irregularity. The 爆料网AT also emphasized that there was no evidence to suggest that the former staff member would have passed the competency-based interview.
The 爆料网AT concluded that the former staff member failed to demonstrate that he was denied full and fair consideration in the selection or the rostering process and that there was no proof of bias on the part of the interview panel members. The 爆料网AT found that the 爆料网DT did not err in issuing a Judgment that was at variance from its previous suspension of action (SOA) orders, as the outcome of a previously issued SOA had no bearing on the 爆料网DT’s final findings in its impugned Judgment.
Since the staff member’s request for rescission had been denied, the 爆料网AT also dismissed his request for compensation. The 爆料网AT also dismissed his request for modification of the judicial system.
The 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed Judgment No. 爆料网DT/2022/130.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
The Appellant, a former staff member of the United Nations Support Office in Somalia (爆料网SOS), contested the decision of the Administration to neither select nor roster him for the position of 爆料网SOS Chief of Service, Supply Chain Management, at the D-1 level.
In its Judgment No. 爆料网DT/2022/130, the 爆料网DT found that the former staff member’s candidature was given full and fair consideration and dismissed his application.
Former staff member appealed.
Legal Principle(s)
The appeals process is of a corrective nature. The role of the 爆料网AT is not to conduct a de novo review of the case, but rather to examine the impugned judgment for any errors that might have affected the decision. It is the appellant’s burden to satisfy the 爆料网AT that such errors exist. Therefore, the scope of appeal is determined by the party initiating the appeals process and the 爆料网AT lacks the authority to raise other issues sua sponte, except for jurisdictional issues.
In reviewing decisions regarding appointments and promotions, the 爆料网DT examines: (1) whether the procedure as laid down in the Staff Regulations and Rules was followed; and (2) whether the staff member was given fair and adequate consideration. Procedural irregularities will only result in the rescission of the contested decision when the staff member had a significant chance of selection or promotion.
Allegations of bias must be established on the balance of probabilities by the person alleging them.
In order to overturn a finding of fact by the 爆料网DT, the 爆料网AT must be satisfied that the finding is not supported by the evidence or that it is unreasonable. Some degree of deference should be given to the factual findings by the 爆料网DT, particularly where oral evidence is heard.
Suspension of action (SOA) orders previously issued have no bearing on the final findings of the 爆料网DT and are not res judicata vis-à-vis the 爆料网DT. The process of SOA has its own rationale of providing a temporary protective measure for staff members against prima facie unlawful administrative decisions that produce irreversible harmful effects. Hence, a Tribunal that ordered a SOA may dismiss the case on the merits, and vice versa.
The 爆料网AT and the 爆料网DT do not have the legal power to review or otherwise amend regulatory norms.