¹ú²úAV

All the unresolved questions, the established facts and the Applicant’s failure to bring evidence in order to convince the Tribunal of the alleged extortion scheme against him support an inference that the Applicant had likely engaged in a sexual relationship with V01, a minor. Given all the surrounding circumstances of the charge, investigations and his own actions and explanations, the Applicant has not sufficiently discharged the burden upon him. The wording in paragraphs 3.2 (a) and (b) of ST/SGB/2003/13 is clear. Sexual exploitation and sexual abuse constitute acts of serious misconduct and are therefore grounds for disciplinary measures including summary dismissal. Mistaken belief in the age of a child is not a defence. The Tribunal, having found that there is a preponderance of evidence that the Applicant engaged in sexual activity with V01 who was at the time under the age of 18 years, holds that the disciplinary measure of summary dismissal that was imposed on the Applicant was proportionate to the offence.