�山����

The Tribunal finds that, contrary to the Respondent’s submissions, the Applicant’s allegation that she was performing Administrative Assistant functions at the relevant time is supported by her 2016-2017 and 2017-2018 e-PASes, Personal History Profile and Letters of Appointment which were the relevant documents for purposes of the comparative review process (“CRP’). The Applicant has successfully rebutted the presumption of regularity by proving through clear and convincing evidence that the CRP was unlawful. The administration violated its own regulations and rules governing its conduct. The Applicant was unfairly reviewed in breach of the CRP regulations and rules and also although not a specific criteria for CRP review, the United Nations Secretary-General’s Gender Parity Initiative which sets targets for equal representation of men and women in the United Nations and also advises on recruitment and retention practices. The Applicant asks the Tribunal to refer certain staff members for accountability for abuse of authority. The Tribunal is not competent to make any determination on this request without affording the named parties their due process The Applicant has argued that due to the violation of her contract of employment she has suffered harm. She has not adduced any evidence to support this claim. This claim is denied.