¹ú²úAV

UNRWA DT Judgment: The Applicant, a former UNRWA DT’s staff member, contested the decision to abolish his post and transfer him to the Education Department, claiming that it was based on the personal bias by the full-time UNRWA DT Judge, who wanted to terminate his contract. The UNRWA DT Judge determining the instant case disclosed in the judgment that he knew the full-time Judge responsible for the contested decision on a professional basis and noted that, while he would ordinarily have recused himself from considering the case, it was not in the interest of justice for him to do so as it would mean that the Appellant’s case could not be adjudicated by the UNRWA DT or any other court and this would constitute a denial of justice. UNRWA DT found that there was no bias in the decision to abolish the Applicant’s post as it was a decision taken only in the interest of UNRWA DT, notably to meet the UNRWA DT’s need to recruit a translator with more seniority, responsibilities, and competencies than the Applicant. UNRWA DT rejected the Applicant’s claim that the decision to transfer him to the Education Department was unlawful. UNRWA DT also rejected the Applicant’s claim that the decision to place him on an OTI process was to ultimately terminate his appointment for non-satisfactory performance.