Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT Held or Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT Pronouncements
Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held, in agreement with Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT, that: the Appellant was properly subjected to a disciplinary hearing; the disciplinary procedures operated fairly; the Appellant disclosed his part in the events at a time when he had no option but to do so; the Appellant did not report the fact he received the hospitality from a vendor; the Appellant substantially admitted the allegations; the Appellant put at risk the reputation and standing of the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµ Procurement Division; there was sufficient material before the Secretary-General, after a fair and impartial investigation, and having regard to the Appellant¡¯s long service record, to reach a finding of serious misconduct; and the Appellant was given a full opportunity to make his case before a decision was taken as to the appropriate sanction. Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that the conduct was established and serious and that the sanction was not unfair or disproportionate. Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT noted that Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT refused to substitute its judgment in this case and that Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT must be deferential not only to the Secretary-General but also to Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT, which is charged with finding facts. Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT judgment.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT judgment: The Applicant contested his summary dismissal related to a single incident of lavish hospitality, including drinking, lap dances and prostitutes, paid for by a Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµ vendor. Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT dismissed the application, finding that the summary dismissal was justified and proportionate.
Legal Principle(s)
Left deliberately blank.