2019-Ģ��ƵAT-954

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

As a preliminary matter, Ģ��ƵAT declined the Appellants�� request for an oral hearing based on the length and complexity of the background of the appeal and that it was not persuaded that it was in the interests of justice to hold one. On the Appellants�� argument that Ģ��ƵAT had erred previously in establishing the criteria in permanent appointment conversion cases, Ģ��ƵAT noted that they were effectively requesting a revision of two previous Ģ��ƵAT judgments and held that they were time-barred from doing so. Ģ��ƵAT held that the criteria in permanent appointment conversion cases, as previously established by Ģ��ƵAT, stood and that Ģ��ƵDT had not erred in applying them. Ģ��ƵAT held that Ģ��ƵDT did not err in tying suitability to the availability of future positions outside the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and that it was within Ģ��ƵDT��s discretion to consider that the ICTY and the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals were temporary institutions with finite mandates, therefore, there were no posts to which the staff members�� skills could have been transferrable. Ģ��ƵAT held that Ģ��ƵDT did not err in refusing to grant permanent appointments to general service staff members. Ģ��ƵAT held that Ģ��ƵDT correctly found that in order to find posts for general service staff members who had transferrable skills but were locally recruited, such posts would have had to have existed at their local duty station and, in the absence of such posts, the Organization��s assertion that it would not be in its interest to grant locally recruited staff members permanent appointments was rational and lawful. Ģ��ƵAT held that Ģ��ƵDT did not err in finding that the contested decisions were lawful, noting that the general service Appellants did not have any legal entitlement to a change of their locally recruited status to internationally recruited. On the Appellants submission that Ģ��ƵDT erred in not granting permanent appointments to professional staff members, Ģ��ƵAT held that the Administration retained discretion as to how to assess the transferrable skills of the staff members and did not err in exercising it. Ģ��ƵAT held that Ģ��ƵDT did not err in finding that the contested decisions were lawful. Ģ��ƵAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the Ģ��ƵDT judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicants contested the decisions not to grant them permanent appointments after the fourth consideration by the Organization of their suitability for conversion to permanent appointments. Ģ��ƵDT found the decisions to be lawful and dismissed the joint application.

Legal Principle(s)

While there is no bar to the possibility of transferring a locally recruited staff member to another duty station, staff members do not have a legal entitlement to change their locally recruited status to internationally recruited.

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

Ademagic et al

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement