AV

UNDT/2014/005

UNDT/2014/005, Terragnolo

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

The Tribunal found that the first part of the application was not receivable, since the Applicant lacked legal standing, and that the second part of the application, while receivable, was unfounded, since the Secretary-General, who has the duty to facilitate the holding of the elections to the UNSCP, had no power, whatsoever, to interfere in the actual conduct and results of the elections.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contests the decisions to grant time release and administrative support to “ineligible staff representatives” to the United Nations Staff Pension Committee (“UNSPC”), and the refusal, by the ASG/OHRM on behalf of the Secretary-General, to take action on the notification that one of these elected members allegedly had a conflict of interest and committed electoral violations during the polls.

Legal Principle(s)

Legal standing: If an Applicant has no stake in the contested administrative decision since his individual rights and terms of employment were not affected by it, the application has to be rejected for lack of legal standing. Staff members’ rights as a UNJSPF participant: It results from staff regulation 6.1 and staff rule 6.1 that a staff member who is a participant in the UNJSPF has a right to proper representation in the Fund’s governance structure. Therefore, a decision, on behalf of the Secretary-General, not to take action on a claim for conflict of interest and breach of electoral regulations at UNSPC elections constitutes an administrative decision under art. 2 of the Tribunal’s Statute. The Secretary-General's authority in election matters to the UNSPC: The UNSPC is an integral part of the administration of the Fund and its governance structure; accordingly, the eligibility of candidates to represent participants at the UNSPC, including any potential conflict of interest or length of term, is to be determined exclusively under the Fund’s Regulations and Rules, which is a self-contained regime, into which the Secretary-General cannot interfere.

Outcome
Dismissed on merits

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.