2010-UNAT-038, Adwan
UNAT preliminarily held that the appeal was time-barred. UNAT held that even if the appeal was not time-barred, it would be dismissed on merits. UNAT was satisfied that the established facts showed that the Appellant engaged in misconduct warranting a disciplinary measure. UNAT held that the imposed sanction was proportionate to the offence. UNAT further held that the Appellant did not demonstrate any violation of her due process rights. UNAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the impugned decision to demote the Appellant.
UNRWA decision: The Applicant contested the decision to demote her. The UNRWA JAB concluded that there was evidence that the Applicant had not complied with her job description and that she had committed misconduct. The Commissioner-General approved the JAB recommendation.
When reviewing a sanction imposed by the Administration, UNAT will examine whether the facts on which the sanction is based have been established, whether the established facts qualify as misconduct, and whether the sanction is proportionate to the offence. Demotion may be a proportionate sanction in response to a failure to perform that results in direct and important consequences for the functioning of an office.