Ãå±±½ûµØ

UNAT held that the summary dismissal decision was unlawful because the due process rights under IMO’s Staff Regulations and Staff Rules were substantially violated. The Appellant had been charged with misconduct in the form of fraudulent activities undertaken to gain diplomatic accreditation, namely giving instructions to append an electronic signature to an official IMO communication without authorization or instruction by that colleague and misrepresenting his contractual status as internationally recruited in that communication. Noting that the Secretary-General of IMO considered the Appellant’s use of the official cell phone for personal or private use in reaching his decision on the summary dismissal, UNAT held that the Appellant was not put on notice and no formal written charge of misconduct was brought against him regarding is cell phone usage. Recalling that the original summary dismissal decision relied solely and entirely on the alleged misconduct with regard to the accreditation letter, UNAT held that the use of the cell phone for personal use (for which there was no disciplinary process) could not be a basis for the Secretary-General of IMO’s decision to maintain his earlier decision of summary dismissal. UNAT held that the decision of summary dismissal was unlawful. UNAT granted the appeal in part, rescinded the decision of summary dismissal, providing an in-lieu compensation amount of one year’s net base salary in the alternative, and dismissed all of the Appellant’s other requests.