��DT/2022/023

��AT Held or ��DT Pronouncements

The Tribunal held that staff members�� obligations under staff regulations 1.2(a), (b) and (f) are not limited to the work environment but also apply in a certain way to their private lives. The Applicant��s actions constituted physical conduct of a sexual nature that might reasonably be excepted or be perceived to cause offence or humiliation to the complainant. There was no doubt that the Applicant��s conduct was unwelcome. The Tribunal found no grounds to review the level of the sanction imposed on the Applicant.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant challenged the Respondent��s finding of misconduct (for violation of staff regulation 1.2(a), staff rule 1.2(f), (and the provisions of ��ICEF��s policies in the matter) and the consequent decision to separate him from service pursuant to staff rule 10.2(a)(xix)

Legal Principle(s)

The general standard of judicial review in disciplinary cases requires the Dispute Tribunal to ascertain: (a) whether the facts on which the disciplinary measure was based have been established; (b) whether the established facts legally amount to misconduct; (c) whether the disciplinary measure applied was proportionate to the offence; and (d) whether the accused staff member was awarded due process in the disciplinary proceedings (see, for example, Abu Hamda 2010-��AT-022, Haniya 2010-��AT-024, Portillo Moya 2015-��AT-523, Wishah 2015-��AT-537). The fact that the recordings have been taken without consent does not lower their evidentiary value (see Asghar 2020-��AT-982 para. 51); the evidence was clear and did not need any forensic examination.

Outcome

Dismissed on merits

Outcome Extra Text

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

Tokhi

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement