UNDT/2013/127, Gehr

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

Jurisdiction over decisions of the Ethics Office: The work of the Ethics Office is delicate in nature and its functions have a direct impact on staff member’s rights. Therefore, in view of the case law of UNAT, the decision of the Ethics Office is an administrative decision and the Tribunal has jurisdiction to review such a decision. Duration for conducting a preliminary assessment by the Ethics Office: The nature of the work of the Ethics Office requires timely reaction for effective protection of any ‘whistle-blowing’ activity. Although the duration of 45 days mentioned in section 5.3 of ST/SGB/2005/21 does not appear to be a mandatory fixed time limit, it clearly acts as a guiding principle for the duration within which one can expect a decision from the Ethics Office. Hence taking six months to reach a decision is undue delay warranting compensation.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant is a former staff member of UNODC. He contested the decision of the Ethics Office which found that he had not engaged in protected activity and therefore there was no prima facie case of retaliation to warrant protection from the Ethics Office. The Applicant also challenged the duration taken by the Ethics Office in reaching its decision.

Legal Principle(s)

N/A

Outcome

Judgment entered for Applicant in full or in part

Outcome Extra Text

Only financial compensation

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

Gehr

Entity

UNOV

Case Number(s)

UNDT/GVA/2011/90

Tribunal

UNDT

Registry

Geneva

Date of Judgement

17 Oct 2013

Duty Judge

Judge Laker

Language of Judgment

English

Issuance Type

Judgment

Categories/Subcategories

Ethics office

Retaliation

Applicable Law

Secretary-General's bulletins

UNDT Statute

Article 2.1