This judgment is confined to whether the applicant should have access to the report. The applicant was ordered be given access to the panel’s report, subject to an undertaking of confidentiality.
Article 18
Showing 11 - 14 of 14
The UNDT found that the decision was in violation of an express written promise of renewal for three months by the head of her mission.
Jurisdiction / receivability (UNDT or first instance)
Management Evaluation
Performance management
Performance evaluation
Rebuttal
Although the proceedings of the rebuttal panel had been completed and notified to the Applicant in July 2011, he did not move the Tribunal to waive the deadlines pursuant to art. 35 of the UNDT Rules of Procedure. The Applicant was required to submit a request for management evaluation but he did not do so.
Public interest, transparency, scrutiny and accountability are not impaired by the removal of the Applicant’s name from the public domain. Consequently, and taking into consideration the sensitive nature of the facts, which involve alleged “sexual exploitation of a vulnerable person”, the Tribunal grants the Applicant’s request for anonymity. The decision not to renew the Applicant’s fixed-term appointment, communicated to him on 23 September 2019, is not grounded on disciplinary considerations, which were the subject of the instant case, and constitutes an autonomous administrative decision...