2016-UNAT-638, Maiga
UNAT considered the appeal by the Secretary-General. UNAT rejected the Secretary-General’s request for leave to submit new evidence since the Secretary-General had the opportunity to present the evidence before UNDT. UNAT further rejected the staff member’s requests in response and to conduct an oral hearing finding that the appealed issues had been adequately clarified. UNAT held that UNDT had not erroneously substituted itself for the Administration. UNAT held that UNDT’s findings were supported by evidence and would, therefore, not interfere with the determination as to the existence of bias against the staff member. Therefore, UNAT affirmed the UNDT judgment regarding the rescission of the impugned decision. UNAT, however, held that the compensation awarded in lieu of rescission, coupled with the award of lost salary at the upgraded P-5 level, was excessive considering that, even if selected, the chance for the staff member was to be appointed for one year. UNAT partly upheld the appeal and modified the UNDT judgment to reduce the compensation in lieu granted and vacated the award of compensation for substantive and procedural irregularities.
Accountability referral: The UNAT affirmed the referral for accountability.
The Applicant contested the decision not to select her for the upgraded post. UNDT found that the Applicant’s non-selection for the upgraded post and her subsequent separation from the Organisation were “motivated by bias, procedural breaches, retaliation, and other improper motives”. UNDT ordered rescission of the contested decision, the Applicant’s reinstatement and deployment in the next available P-5 country representative position, or a similar post, together with payment of salary at the upgraded P-5 level since the time of her separation. In the alternative to reinstatement, UNDT awarded compensation in lieu. UNDT also awarded compensation for substantive and procedural irregularities.
Under Article 9. 1(b) of the UNAT Statute, UNAT may only order compensation for harm, supported by evidence, which shall normally not exceed the equivalent of two years’ net base salary of the applicant. UNAT may, however, in exceptional cases order the payment of higher compensation for harm, supported by evidence, and shall provide the reasons for that decision. Similarly, Article 10. 5(b) of the UNDT Statute provides that UNDT may only order compensation for harm, supported by evidence, which shall normally not exceed the equivalent of two years’ net base salary of the applicant. UNDT may, however, in exceptional cases order the payment of higher compensation for harm, supported by evidence, and shall provide the reasons for that decision.