2010-Ģ��ƵAT-001

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

Ģ��ƵAT affirmed the Ģ��ƵDT findings that there was no flaw in the procedure used by the Staff Management Coordinating Committee to select the staff representative on the IJC. Ģ��ƵAT also affirmed the Ģ��ƵDT judgments rejecting the staff member��s allegations of conflict of interest on the part of the Ģ��ƵDT judges. Ģ��ƵAT further rejected the staff member��s request that Ģ��ƵAT judges recuse themselves from the hearing of the appeal, noting the limited role of the IJC in the appointment of the Ģ��ƵAT judges and the lack of any professional relationship between the person appointed as a staff representative and the judges. As for the request that Ģ��ƵAT be dissolved, Ģ��ƵAT held that it lacks the statutory authority to dissolve Ģ��ƵAT which is a body created by the General Assembly.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The staff member contested a) the decision not to nominate him as a staff representative on the IJC and b) all decisions taken by the IJC which he alleged was illegally constituted. He also filed several motions to have the judges of Ģ��ƵDT recuse themselves on the ground that they all had a conflict of interest by having been recruited and recommended by the IJC for judicial appointment. Ģ��ƵDT rejected the staff member��s applications.

Legal Principle(s)

The judges of Ģ��ƵDT and Ģ��ƵAT are not appointed by the IJC, whose mandate is limited to identifying and recommending potential judicial candidates to the General Assembly.

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 Ģ��ƵDT Statute and Article 11(3) of the Ģ��ƵAT 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

Campos

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement