2021-UNAT-1177, Veronica Modey-Ebi
UNAT considered an appeal by Ms. Modey-Ebi. UNAT noted that the issues in the appeal were entirely factual, most of which were resolved on the evidentiary record which in most respects established a pattern of misconduct justifying dismissal. UNAT noted that while some of the proven allegations against Ms. Modey-Ebi were less serious than others, cumulatively they revealed a pattern of unethical conduct indicating that Ms. Modey-Ebi was not suited for the senior position she held. Her behaviour revealed a lack of propriety and integrity and her behaviour was inconsistent with her duties under Staff Regulation 1.2(b), Staff Regulation 1.2(f), Staff Regulation 1.2(g) and Staff Regulation 1.2(i). UNAT found that the UNDT did not err in holding that the disciplinary measure imposed was proportionate to the offence. The established misconduct revealed a serious lack of judgement and arrogance that was inconsistent with the ethos of UNHCR and the behaviour required in the elevated position she occupied; and in reaching his decision, the High Commissioner took into account the circumstances of the case, including aggravating and mitigating circumstances, as well as prior practice in relation to disciplining such misconduct. Ms. Modey-Ebi engaged in an egregious abuse of authority and violated the duties of independence, neutrality, and impartiality expected of an international civil servant and breached trust to the extent that the continuation of an employment relationship became intolerable and infeasible such that dismissal was the only proportionate sanction. The UNDT also correctly concluded that there were no procedural irregularities and that Ms. Modey-Ebi was afforded due process. Finally, the failure of the UNDT to rule on Ms. Modey-Ebi’s application for costs was inconsequential, since there was nothing on record which suggested that the High Commissioner abused the proceedings. UNAT dismissed the appeal in its entirety.
In Judgment No. UNDT/2020/185, the UNDT dismissed the application by Ms. Modey-Ebi challenging the High Commissioner’s decision to dismiss her from service pursuant to Staff Rule 10.2(a)(ix) for serious misconduct. The UNDT found that clear and convincing evidence established thirteen allegations of misconduct, that the investigation process had complied with the applicable legal framework and the disciplinary measure of dismissal was proportionate. The proven allegations included: the harassment or abuse of her subordinates; instructing subordinates to do her child’s school homework; abusing her subordinates by instructing them to do her personal chores or to prepare motivation letters in support of her various job applications; breaching the rules governing performance appraisals; instructing subordinates to carry out her academic work; using diplomatic channels and her status for her personal advantage and benefit; inappropriate communications with senior government officials in the host country; and disclosing official information to persons not entitled to it.
In disciplinary cases the Appeals Tribunal will examine: i) whether the facts on which the disciplinary measure is based have been established; ii) whether the established facts amount to misconduct; iii) whether the sanction is proportionate to the offence; and iv) whether the staff member’s due process rights were respected.