2025-Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT-1521, Mahmoud Mohamad Zeidan
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT noted that the vacancy had been advertised for only ten days which violated the mandatory requirement of the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµRWA Personnel Directive, and this violation had been corrected by cancelling the recruitment process and constituting another one that met the requirement of the minimum posting period.
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that the staff member had not identified the alleged defects of the impugned Judgment but rather had reargued his case and, therefore, had not discharged his burden of satisfying the Appeals Tribunal that the impugned Judgment had been in error.
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT was of the view that, in...