Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT Held or Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT Pronouncements
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT erred in finding that the established facts underlying the allegations did not amount to misconduct. It found that the former staff member's sustained participation in exchanges concerning the sharing of non-public information and his communications with M.R., an individual engaging publicly on matters pertaining to the Office of Investment Management (OIM), constituted unauthorized disclosure or, at minimum, participation in unauthorized sharing of non-public information.
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT erred in characterizing as too vague the allegation that the former staff member failed to report possible misconduct of other staff members.It found that the evidence established his awareness of activities by colleagues which, if proven, would have constituted a breach of the rules, and that this awareness engaged his duty to report them.
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT found that ABH¡¯s use of his personal e-mail account violated the OIM Policy prohibiting the use of personal e-mail for official electronic communications.
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT also concluded that ABH's communications regarding W01 extended beyond private expressions of workplace frustration and evidenced a concerted effort to target and undermine her.
Finally, the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT erred in finding that ABH¡¯s deletion of the WhatsApp application from his official phone on the day it was surrendered to the investigators did not constitute misconduct, as this conduct was inconsistent with his duty to cooperate with the investigation and supported an inference that the removal of the application hindered the preservation of potentially relevant information.
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT granted the appeal, reversed Judgment No. Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT/2025/039, and remanded the matter to the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT for determination on the issue of proportionality of the disciplinary sanction before a different Judge.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
A former staff member of the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund (Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵJSPF) contested the decision of the Administration to impose on him the disciplinary measure of separation from service, with compensation in lieu of notice and without termination indemnity, for serious misconduct.
In its Judgment No. Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT/2025/039, the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT granted the former staff member¡¯s application, rescinded the contested decision, fixed the alternative compensation in lieu of rescission at two years¡¯ net base salary, and awarded compensation for harm in the amount of USD 40,000.
The Secretary-General appealed.
Legal Principle(s)
Staff members shall exercise the utmost discretion regarding official matters and shall refrain from communicating non-public information without authorization or outside the normal course of duties.
Staff Rule 1.2(c) imposes a duty to report breaches of the Organization¡¯s regulations and rules to officials whose responsibility it is to take appropriate action, and a broad and affirmative duty to cooperate with duly authorized investigations, which includes the preservation of potentially relevant information on official ICT resources once a request has been made for their surrender.
Staff members are strictly prohibited from using personal e-mail addresses or other personal electronic communications for official use.
A party may not file an appeal against a judgment about a claim in which that party¡¯s position has prevailed.
An award of costs is an extraordinary remedy, awarded in exceptional circumstances.