2017-Ģ��ƵAT-786

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

Ģ��ƵAT considered appeals by both the Secretary-General and Mr Auda. Noting that the Administration had not failed to respond, albeit with inordinate delay, and then had set up a second fact-finding panel, Ģ��ƵAT held that a decision may only be challenged in the context of an appeal after the conclusion of the entire process and that the step Mr Auda was challenging was preliminary in nature. Ģ��ƵAT held that the contested issue, namely the decision of the first fact-finding panel to delay, withhold and not submit its report and records, ceased to exist when Mr Auda was notified of the outcome of the second fact-finding panel��s preliminary review of his complaint. Ģ��ƵAT held that the Ģ��ƵDT��s conclusion that the application was receivable is without legal basis, as was its award of compensation based on that finding. Ģ��ƵAT held that Ģ��ƵDT erred on a question of law and exceeded its competence in accepting the application as receivable. Ģ��ƵAT granted the Secretary-General��s appeal, dismissed Mr Auda��s appeal and vacated the Ģ��ƵDT judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

Mr Auda contested the decision of the first fact-finding panel to delay, withhold and not submit its report on, and records of, the investigation. Ģ��ƵDT found the application receivable and, noting the extraordinarily excessive delay of more than three years between Mr Auda filing his first complaint and a decision being taken, found this delay to be in violation of the promptness requirement of ST/SGB/2008/5 and Mr Auda��s right to be informed of the status of the first fact-finding panel. Ģ��ƵDT awarded Mr Auda compensation for the harm that he suffered as a result of the breaches of his fundamental due process rights and human rights.

Legal Principle(s)

Tribunals should not interfere with matters that fall within the Administration��s prerogatives, including its lawful and internal processes, and the Administration must be left to conduct these processes in full and to finality. The final administrative decision that concludes the compound administrative process regarding the staff member��s complaint is the only challengeable one and absorbs all the previous preliminary steps.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed on merits; Appeal granted

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

Auda

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry