2024-��AT-1426

��AT Held or ��DT Pronouncements

The Appeals Tribunal dismissed the appeal. The Appeals Tribunal found that the ��DT correctly held that Mr. Qasem's application before the ��DT challenging the decision to place him on administrative leave with pay was filed untimely and was therefore not receivable ratione temporis. Furthermore, his application contesting the decision to conduct various investigations of him was not receivable ratione materiae in the absence of a request for decision review.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

Mr. Qasem contested the decisions of ��RWA: i) to place him on administrative leave with pay until further notice pending an investigation; and ii) to conduct various investigations of Mr. Qasem. By Summary Judgment No. ��RWA/DT/2023/010, the ��RWA DT consolidated the applications and dismissed both applications as not receivable.

Mr. Qasem appealed.

Legal Principle(s)

Strict adherence to filing deadlines assures one of the goals of the system of administration of justice: the timely hearing of cases and rendering of judgments.

However, there may be exceptional cases where the deadlines need to be suspended or waived or extended.

A request for decision review (similar to a management evaluation) is a mandatory first step in the internal justice system because it provides the Agency with the opportunity to reassess the situation and correct possible mistakes or errors with efficiency. The tribunals cannot waive deadlines for requests for decision review as set out in Article 8(3) of the ��RWA DT Statute.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed on merits

OAJ prepared this case law summary for informational purposes only. It is no official record and should not be relied upon as an authoritative interpretation of the Tribunals' rulings. For the authoritative texts, please refer to the judgment or order rendered by the respective Tribunal. The Tribunals are the only bodies competent to interpret their respective judgments, as provided under Article 12(3) of the ��DT Statute and Article 11(3) of the ��AT Statute. Any inaccuracies in the publication are the sole responsibility of OAJ, which should be contacted directly for any correction requests. To provide comments, don't hesitate to get in touch with OAJ at oaj@un.org.

The judgment summaries were generally prepared in English. They were translated into French and are being reviewed for accuracy of the translation.

Applicants/Appellants

Qasem Abdelilah Mohammed Qasem

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement