�山����

Scope of judicial review In a remanded case, such as the instant one, the Applicant may not expand the scope of claims for remedies contained in her original application and, as such, the Tribunal will not consider her new claims or arguments unless they are essentially related to her original claim in the application. Whether and to what extent the Applicant is entitled to remedies The Appeals Tribunal found in Banaj 2022-UNAT-1202 (see para. 1) that the temporary removal from the Applicant, and reassignment to others, of certain of her functions as Head of UNODC in Albania, was an unlawful exercise of administrative power. It thus set aside and rescinded the contested decision (see Banaj, paras. 52 and 58). In the present case, the contested decision concerns the temporary reassignment of some of the Applicant’s functions pending an investigation and the outcome of disciplinary proceedings. As such, the contested decision does not fall under the inclusionary clause of art. 10.5(a) of the Tribunal’s Statute. Accordingly, there is no legal basis to determine an amount of compensation in lieu in the present case. With respect to pecuniary damages, the Applicant does not specify what kind of pecuniary damages she suffered due to the contested decision, nor does she present any evidence for such harm. Rather, the evidence on record shows that during the temporary reassignment, the Applicant continued to receive a full salary at the same level and step as before the reassignment. Accordingly, the Applicant is not entitled to pecuniary damages. Turning to non-pecuniary damages, having reviewed the evidence on record, the Tribunal finds that the total award of compensation for damages to the Applicant because of the professional and reputational harm, as well as stress and anxiety she suffered because of the unlawful temporary reassignment decision, amounts to two months’ net base salary at the grade she encumbered at the time of the contested decision (see, e.g., Dieng 2021- UNAT-1118, para. 87).