UNAT held that the appeal was defective for failure to identify errors made by UNRWA DT. However, noting that the Appellant was self-represented, UNAT considered whether UNRWA DT erred in finding that UNRWA had properly exercised its discretion in transferring the Appellant. UNAT held that UNRWA DT did not err in jurisdiction, procedure, law, or in fact in dismissing the Appellant鈥檚 application. UNAT upheld UNRWA DT鈥檚 finding that the Appellant did not meet the burden of proving that the decision to transfer him to another post after the abolition of his post was exercised arbitrarily or...