UNDT/2014/042

UNDT/2014/042, Aliko

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

The UNDT rejected the application. Scope of judicial control: In appointment and promotion matters the Tribunal's role is limited to examining whether the Applicant’s candidature was given full and fair consideration, whether the decision was taken without any bias against the Applicant, whether proper procedures were followed and whether all relevant material was taken into account. Elements prior to the selection process—such as a restructuring exercise, the transfer of the selected candidate to a given post—are normally not under consideration. Administration’s discretion to define the vacancy announcement (VA): It is the prerogative of the Administration to determine the terms of a vacancy announcement and except for cases of clear and evident abuse of discretion, the views of individual candidates in this respect are irrelevant. Conflict of interest: A Director of an Investigation and Audit Unit does not have a conflict of interest which would preclude him from sitting on an Interview Panel on the mere ground that a candidate to the post has been interviewed as a fact witness in an ongoing investigation conducted by that Investigation Unit. A person sitting on the Panel does not have a conflict of interest, either, simply because one of the candidates to the post had in the past sat on a Panel that had selected that Panel member to his current post. Technical expert: Even if the person who sat on the Panel as a “technical expert” did not have in-depth technical but only management knowledge required for the post, that requirement of technical knowledge can be fulfilled by another Panel member sitting on the Panel as a “client representative”.Request for production of documents: A request by an Applicant for production of the results of a written test on the grounds that another candidate allegedly might have had early access to the test will not be granted if the Applicant himself passed the written test and was, on that basis, invited to the interview.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant appealed the decision not to select him for a P4 post within UNOPS, on the grounds that three out of four members of the interview Panel had a conflict of interest and were biased against him, that the Hiring Manager had made arrangements to ensure the selection of the selected candidate well before the restructuring of the unit and well before the vacancy announcement was issued and that the person sitting as a “technical expert” on the Panel was not a technical expert for the purpose of the relevant UNOPS rules; finally, he noted that the selected candidate might have had early access to the written test and interview questions.

Legal Principle(s)

N/A

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.

Applicants/Appellants
Aliko
Entity
Case Number(s)
Tribunal
Registry
Date of Judgement
Judge(s)
Language of Judgment
Issuance Type