ąú˛úAV

UNDT/2010/156

UNDT/2010/156, Shkurtaj

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

UNDT found that the applicant had standing in both cases and that the appeals were not time-barred. UNDT found that the Organisation did not violate the applicant’s rights when it decided that the provisions of ST/SGB/2005/21 were not directly applicable to him. UNDT found that the applicant’s complaint of retaliation was adequately and objectively examined by the investigation panel and by the Director Ethics Office, who agreed that no retaliation had taken place. Thus, the applicant received appropriate recourse. However, UNDT found that the applicant’s rights were violated when the investigation panel issued its report and made adverse findings against regarding the applicant’s credibility, trustworthiness and integrity without making him aware of its concerns and providing him with the opportunity to comment on these adverse findings and provide his explanations. UNDT ordered the respondent to pay compensation in the amount of 14 months’ net base salary as compensation for violation of the applicant’s due process rights, damage to his career prospects and professional reputation, and emotional distress. In addition, UNDT ordered that USD5,000 be paid to the applicant for the respondent’s failure to consider the Ethics Office’s recommendation of compensation. Outcome: The Ethics Policy Case (UNDT/NY/2009/089) was dismissed. In the Compensation Case (UNDT/NY/2009/075/JAB/2009/032), the respondent was ordered to pay 14 months’ net base salary as compensation for violation of the applicant’s due process rights, damage to his career prospects and professional reputation, and emotional distress, as well as USD5,000 for the failure to consider the Ethics Office’s recommendation of compensation.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The applicant, a former staff member of UNDP, filed two separate appeals contesting (i) the refusal of the respondent to enforce the ethics policy, as set out in ST/SGB/2005/21, with respect to the applicant’s request for protection from retaliation (the “Ethics Policy Case”) and (ii) the respondent’s failure to implement the recommendation of the Ethics Office to pay 14 months’ net base salary as compensation for the violation of his due process rights by an ad hoc investigative panel set up to investigate his complaints (the “Compensation Case”).

Legal Principle(s)

Application of Secretary-General’s bulletins to separately administered funds and programmes: Pursuant to ST/SGB/1997/1, Secretary-General’s bulletins are not applicable to separately administered organs and programmes of the United Nations unless otherwise stated therein.

Outcome
Judgment entered for Applicant in full or in part

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.

Applicants/Appellants
Shkurtaj
Entity
Tribunal
Registry :
Date of Judgement
Language of Judgment
Issuance Type