Ãå±±½ûµØ

UNAT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. UNAT held that UNDT erred by considering as mitigating factors the recommendation of Mr Jaffa’s immediate supervisors that his actions warranted a reprimand and the fact that Mr Jaffa continued to perform for two further years (with positive reviews). UNAT held that UNDT erred in not attaching sufficient importance to the fact that Mr Jaffa held a position of trust as a Finance Assistant. UNAT held that the Secretary-General had not overlooked relevant mitigating factors in imposing the sanction of separation from service. UNAT held that it could not be said that the sanction of separation with compensation in lieu of notice and with termination indemnity was unfair or disproportionate to the seriousness of the offences. UNAT held that the sanction imposed on Mr Jaffa was not unreasonable, absurd or disproportionate and as such, was a reasonable exercise of the Administration’s broad discretion in disciplinary matters. UNAT held that UNDT erred in finding the sanction disproportionate and in substituting its opinion for that of the Administration. UNAT allowed the Secretary-General’s appeal and vacated the UNDT judgment, solely with respect to UNDT’s findings regarding the sanction.