Ãå±±½ûµØ

UNDT/2009/021, Campos

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

UNDT preliminarily rejected the Applicant’s requests for recusal, holding that there were no longer any grounds for ruling on those requests since the UNDT President previously rejected those requests. Concerning the first application, UNDT held that the Applicant did not establish the illegality of the election of JC and that his application for the election to be declared null and void must be rejected. With regard to the Applicant’s request that all decisions taken by the Internal Justice Council be rescinded, UNDT held that it is clear from General Assembly Resolution 62/228 of 22 December 2008 that the General Assembly created a body that is purely advisory and does not take any administrative decisions that could be referred to UNDT. Thus, UNDT rejected the applicant’s request in this regard as well. With respect to the second application, UNDT preliminarily held that the application was not time-barred. UNDT noted that since JC was elected in due form and that the Applicant was quite rightly not declared elected, there was no point in the Applicant, as the defeated candidate, requesting rescission of the decision limiting the appointment of members of the Internal Justice Council to a period of four years; only the members themselves might have reason to contest such a decision. UNDT rejected the second application.

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

The Applicant submitted two applications. In the first application, the Applicant contested the decision to publish the appointment of JC as a member of the Internal Justice Council and requested that all decisions taken by that Council be rescinded. In the second application, the Applicant requested recission of the decision to appoint the five members of the Internal Justice Council for a period of four years.

Legal Principle(s)

Any Ãå±±½ûµØstaff member has the right to be a candidate to represent the staff.

Outcome
Dismissed on merits

OAJ prepared this case law summary for informational purposes only. It is no official record and should not be relied upon as an authoritative interpretation of the Tribunals' rulings. For the authoritative texts, please refer to the judgment or order rendered by the respective Tribunal. The Tribunals are the only bodies competent to interpret their respective judgments, as provided under Article 12(3) of the UNDT Statute and Article 11(3) of the UNAT Statute. Any inaccuracies in the publication are the sole responsibility of OAJ, which should be contacted directly for any correction requests. To provide comments, don't hesitate to get in touch with OAJ at oaj@un.org.

The judgment summaries were generally prepared in English. They were translated into French and are being reviewed for accuracy of the translation.