As a preliminary matter, UNAT held that an oral hearing was not necessary and would not assist in the expeditious and fair disposal of the case as the Appellant had not provided grounds for an oral hearing beyond seeking to confront the witnesses and comment on existing evidence. Whilst UNAT held that the Appellant failed to identify any errors of law or fact by UNRWA DT as required under Art 2(1) UNAT Statute, UNAT did go on to consider his appeal as he was not represented. UNAT held that UNRWA DT had correctly applied the standard of review for disciplinary cases and that UNRWA DT’s exercise...
Rule 110.3
Showing 1 - 2 of 2
Disciplinary matters / misconduct
Assault (verbal and physical)
Due process
Separation from service
Termination of appointment (see also, Termination of appointment)
Standard of review (judicial)
Disciplinary cases
Termination (of appointment)
Disciplinary sanction
Discretionary authority
Disciplinary matters / misconduct
Disciplinary measure or sanction
Sexual exploitation and abuse
Due process
Right to confront complainant
Separation from service
Termination of appointment (see also, Termination of appointment)
Termination (of appointment)
Disciplinary sanction
UNAT held that the facts upon which UNRWA based its decision were established, in full respect of his due process rights. UNAT held that UNRWA DT did not err as there was clear and convincing evidence that the Appellant committed sexual exploitation and abuse against a beneficiary of UNRWA; neither did it err in concluding that the disciplinary sanction was proportionate and lawful. UNAT held that the Appellant, by having the complainant remove her pants and underwear and engaging in a such a sensitive and specific medical examination, which he did not have the required competencies and...