91Â鶹ÌìÃÀ

2017-UNAT-782, Muindi

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

UNAT held that the summary dismissal decision was unlawful because the due process rights under IMO’s Staff Regulations and Staff Rules were substantially violated. The Appellant had been charged with misconduct in the form of fraudulent activities undertaken to gain diplomatic accreditation, namely giving instructions to append an electronic signature to an official IMO communication without authorization or instruction by that colleague and misrepresenting his contractual status as internationally recruited in that communication. Noting that the Secretary-General of IMO considered the Appellant’s use of the official cell phone for personal or private use in reaching his decision on the summary dismissal, UNAT held that the Appellant was not put on notice and no formal written charge of misconduct was brought against him regarding is cell phone usage. Recalling that the original summary dismissal decision relied solely and entirely on the alleged misconduct with regard to the accreditation letter, UNAT held that the use of the cell phone for personal use (for which there was no disciplinary process) could not be a basis for the Secretary-General of IMO’s decision to maintain his earlier decision of summary dismissal. UNAT held that the decision of summary dismissal was unlawful. UNAT granted the appeal in part, rescinded the decision of summary dismissal, providing an in-lieu compensation amount of one year’s net base salary in the alternative, and dismissed all of the Appellant’s other requests.

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

The Applicant contested the disciplinary measure of summary dismissal for serious misconduct. IMO Staff Appeals Board (SAB) considered that, while the facts of the case amounted to serious misconduct, summary dismissal was too severe and disproportionate to the offence committed. However, the Secretary-General of IMO maintained the decision of summary dismissal.

Legal Principle(s)

Charges are the legal conclusions that the Administration has reached on the basis of an investigation that asserts that an individual has committed misconduct. In a disciplinary process, a formal written charge of misconduct must be brought against the staff member by the Secretary-General of IMO. Summary dismissal cannot be based on a fact not established through a disciplinary process.

Outcome
Appeal granted in part
Outcome Extra Text

Reinstatement or financial compensation; Reinstatement or 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.