UNDT/2022/110, Fultang
The Tribunal recalled its observations in Fultang UNDT/2022/102 filed by this Applicant. The measure is provided in the interest of the Organization; and was fully justified by the need to preserve evidence and to avoid the risk of repetition or continuation of further acts similar to those the Applicant was accused of.
The Applicant challenged the Administration’s decision to extend his Administrative Leave with Pay (“ALWP”), pending an investigation into his conduct and any disciplinary process.
The receivability of challenging a decision to place or extend a staff member on administrative leave is directly confirmed by staff rule 10.4(e). Given the right of any worker to perform his/her job, the placement of a staff member on administrative leave impacts on their rights and causes concrete negative consequence for the terms or conditions of appointment. Proceedings before the MEU are not comparable to the mediation run by the Ombudsman (where the parties are bound not to disclose privileged communications related to mediation attempts), because MEU is still part of the Administration, and the ME process is like an administrative review of the administrative decision. Therefore, the Administration can lawfully take into account the behaviors of the parties during the ME process, given its administrative nature. Therefore, the documents exhibited in the ME are legally acquired by the Administration.