Ãå±±½ûµØ

Judicial review in disciplinary matters is focused on how the decision-maker reached the impugned decision and not on the merits of the decision. The role of the Tribunal when reviewing disciplinary cases is to examine the following issues: a) Whether the facts on which the disciplinary measure was based have been established according to the applicable standard; b) Whether the established facts legally amount to misconduct under the Staff Regulations and Rules; c) Whether the disciplinary measure applied is proportionate to the offence; and d) Whether the Applicant’s due process rights were respected during the investigation and the disciplinary process. When the disciplinary sanction results in separation from service, the alleged misconduct must be established by clear and convincing evidence. This standard of proof requires more than a preponderance of the evidence but less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt. In other words, it means that the truth of the facts asserted is highly probable. The Presiding Judge has the power to assess the evidence on record and how it was gathered. Investigators have broad discretionary power to determine the relevance of evidence gathered during the investigation. Full due process rights come into effect only during formal disciplinary proceedings, whereas limited due process rights apply during the investigation stage. Staff members have a duty to cooperate during investigations and must share all information/evidence in their possession when interviewed. Consequently, confessions do not violate due process rights.