Judgment No. 1661
Decision
The complaint is dismissed.
Consideration 2
Extract:
"The complainant has applied for hearings to take evidence from several witnesses and from himself [...]". The Tribunal holds that there is no need for hearings or from the taking of evidence from the proposed witnesses and gives six reasons why.
Keywords
submissions; evidence; appraisal of evidence; testimony; oral proceedings; right to reply; refusal
Consideration 6(a)
Extract:
"Time and again the complainant broke customs regulations to the detriment of the host State under cover of privileges that the Organization is granted in order to carry out its mandate. His conduct was such as to undermine the trust it must enjoy and to compromise the attainment of its objectives. That there was misconduct is indeed beyond gainsaying, especially in someone of his position who went on breaking the rules even after a warning in 1975."
Keywords
organisation; serious misconduct; privileges and immunities; warning; organisation's interest
Consideration 6(b)
Extract:
"The complainant managed WHO assets. He was in charge of the resale of superannuated vehicles of the programme under written rules intended not just to protect those assets but also to put trust in the Organization through fair and open management. The complainant broke the rules on resale. [...] That was not only in breach of the material provisions but cast discredit on the programme and gave an impression of arbitrariness, favouritism and graft, even supposing that, as he says, he made no money himself out of it. Viewed objectively, such behaviour became intolerable for the Organization and amounted to misconduct." Dismissal was not disproportionate to his offenses.
Keywords
termination of employment; serious misconduct; organisation's reputation; organisation's interest
| 
