2010-UNAT-001, Campos
UNAT affirmed the UNDT findings that there was no flaw in the procedure used by the Staff Management Coordinating Committee to select the staff representative on the IJC. UNAT also affirmed the UNDT judgments rejecting the staff member’s allegations of conflict of interest on the part of the UNDT judges. UNAT further rejected the staff member’s request that UNAT judges recuse themselves from the hearing of the appeal, noting the limited role of the IJC in the appointment of the UNAT judges and the lack of any professional relationship between the person appointed as a staff representative and the judges. As for the request that UNAT be dissolved, UNAT held that it lacks the statutory authority to dissolve UNAT which is a body created by the General Assembly.
The staff member contested a) the decision not to nominate him as a staff representative on the IJC and b) all decisions taken by the IJC which he alleged was illegally constituted. He also filed several motions to have the judges of UNDT recuse themselves on the ground that they all had a conflict of interest by having been recruited and recommended by the IJC for judicial appointment. UNDT rejected the staff member’s applications.
The judges of UNDT and UNAT are not appointed by the IJC, whose mandate is limited to identifying and recommending potential judicial candidates to the General Assembly.