2020-UNAT-1071, Krioutchkov
UNAT held that the Organisation correctly excluded the Appellant from the recruitment process for not meeting the minimum education requirement, as he had not entered his educational credential accurately. UNAT noted that the Appellant had had access to the Inspira Applicant’s Manual and World Higher Education Database, which was embedded into Inspira. UNAT held that the Appellant’s argument that UNDT failed to implement the UNAT judgment to carry out additional fact-finding on the issue of whether Inspira reflected the variety of the educational systems of all Member States equally in 2016 was without merit. UNAT held that the Appellant’s argument that UNDT failed to address the central issue of Inspira's adaptability to the Russian education system was without merit. UNAT held that UNDT did not make any errors of law or fact in dismissing the Appellant’s application. UNAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the UNDT judgment (UNDT/2019/185).
The Applicant appealed his non-selection for a position. In UNDT/2018/104 (first UNDT judgment), UNDT found that the Applicant’s job application had been erroneously screened out of the recruitment process and that that was unlawful. The matter was appealed to UNAT and remanded to UNDT for further fact-finding. On remand, in UNDT/2019/185 (second UNDT judgment), UNDT concluded that the contested decision of the Administration not to consider the Applicant’s candidacy was lawful on the basis that the Applicant had incorrectly entered his education level as below the minimum educational requirement (first-level university degree), which meant that he was automatically screened out of the process. UNDT dismissed the application.
The Secretary-General has broad discretion in matters of staff selection. In reviewing such decisions, it is the role of UNDT and UNAT to assess whether the applicable regulations and rules have been applied and whether they were applied in a fair, transparent, and non-discriminatory manner. The Tribunals’ role is not to substitute their decision for that of the Administration. Compensation cannot be awarded when no illegality has been established; it cannot be granted when there is no breach of the staff member’s rights or administrative wrongdoing in need of repair.