UNDT/2023/034, YAGOUT
There was clear and convincing evidence that the Applicant engaged in entitlement fraud and received reimbursement for medical services that had not occurred. He falsely certified and submitted three Cigna claims; for which he was paid a total of USD17,171.26. He was not entitled to this reimbursement. As UNDP is self-insured, these funds represented a loss to UNDP.
The Applicant’s behaviour fell within what the UNDP Policy against Fraud and other Corrupt practices (approved in October 2018) defines as fraud. The established facts constituted misconduct.
As to proportionality of the disciplinary measure, the Tribunals have consistently ruled that misconduct involving intentional and deceptive conduct, particularly for personal gain, merit the most severe sanctions such as separation from service or dismissal.
The Applicant’s due process rights were respected during the investigation and disciplinary process.
In reviewing a disciplinary measure, the Dispute Tribunal should determine: (a) whether the alleged facts have been established; (b) whether the established facts constitute misconduct; (c) whether the disciplinary measure is proportionate to the offence; and (d) whether due process was respected.