2017-UNAT-807

2017-UNAT-807, Rockcliffe

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

UNAT considered that at the time of the elections, there was no law that prevented the staff members from being elected to the UNSPC once they met the prerequisites for election, which they did. UNAT held that both staff members were duly elected members of the UNSPC and that as a direct consequence of their election, they had the same rights and privileges as other elected members, and which could not be restricted or denied. UNAT granted the appeals and ordered that the staff members be given access to all relevant Pension Board documents and be allowed to participate and function as an elected member in all relevant areas including the preparations for the Pension Board sessions, meetings of the Pension Board, and of its constituent groups, committees, and working groups.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

Two staff members of the UNJSPF were elected to the UNSPC. Following the elections, they were given two options: i) to remain on the UNSPC and accept to be moved to an appropriate post elsewhere in the Secretariat outside the UNJSPF; or (ii) to continue to work in the UNJSPF’s Secretariat and resign from the UNSPC and the Pension Board. The staff members rejected both options. The staff members were subsequently informed that the Pension Board had discussed the conflict of interest arising from the fact that they had been elected to the UNSPC while serving as staff members of the UNJSPF and that it had decided that they would not be given access to the Pension Board documents nor could they participate in any formal preparations for the Pension Board session and meetings until such time the conflict of interest had been resolved.

Legal Principle(s)

Staff members of the UNJSPF duly elected to the UNSPC have the same rights/privileges as other elected members.

Outcome

Appeal granted

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 UNDT Statute and Article 11(3) of the UNAT 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.

Full Judgment

Applicants/Appellants

Rockcliffe

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry :