2021-UNAT-1140, Fei Xing
The UNDT did not err in deciding that Ms. Xing’s candidacy was given a full and fair consideration, in finding that the administrative instruction on gender parity (ST/AI/1999/9) did not apply in this case, and in not granting Ms. Xing’s request to amend her application. The UNDT has not been shown to have erred in requiring credible evidence of a clear and compelling nature of Ms. Xing’s allegations of ulterior motives, which was absent.
UNDT/2020/120, in which UNDT dismissed Ms. Xing’s challenge to her non-selection.
It is incumbent on a staff member alleging improper motive to establish this and surmount the presumption of regularity. In other words, the extraordinary must rebut the ordinary by clear and convincing evidence. The appellate role is to determine whether applicable rules and regulations have been applied in a fair, transparent and non-discriminatory matter. If so, the Tribunal is not to substitute its decision for that of the Administration. The obligations on selectors, appointers or promoters of staff to provide a written analysis of respective candidates are mandatory so that a failure to comply with this will render the selection process flawed.