Ãå±±½ûµØ

UNAT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. UNAT held that the reasons proffered by the Administration for not renewing Mr Pirnea’s appointment were valid, namely that he could no longer perform his functions in Somalia since his life was at risk there. UNAT held that the UNDT’s conclusion that the Administration had hidden reasons for not renewing Mr Pirnea’s appointment was based solely on speculation and that UNDT erred on a question of law and fact resulting in a manifestly unreasonable decision when it concluded that there was no valid reason for the non-renewal. UNAT noted that, under Article 11(1) of the UNDT Statute, UNDT was required to explain the reasons, facts, and law on which its award of compensation was based, which it did not do. UNAT held that there was no basis for an award of compensation on the grounds of an unlawful non-renewal. UNAT held that there was no legal basis for UNDT to address the propriety of any actions by the CSA since Mr Pirnea never sought management evaluation of such actions and they were not relevant to the issues before UNDT. UNAT held that the DSA claim was not receivable because it had not been referred to management evaluation. UNAT held that, in concluding that Mr Pirnea sought management evaluation of his DSA claim, UNDT erred in law and fact resulting in a manifestly unreasonable decision. UNAT held that UNDT exceeded its jurisdiction or competence in receiving the DSA claim and reaching its merits. UNAT affirmed the appeal and vacated the UNDT judgment.

Accountability Referral: UNAT held that UNDT erred in law and fact when it referred the conduct of the CSA to the Secretary-General for possible action to enforce accountability, as the issue of Mr Pirnea’s reassignment was never appealed and was not before UNDT, and there was no evidence showing the CSA had any role in the failure of the Office of Audit and Investigations to give timely written notice to Mr Pirnea of the closure of its investigation.