Judgment No. 179
THE COMPLAINT IS DISMISSED.
"The mere fact that one member of the Advisory Board was the son-in-law of the wife of a staff member serving in the same division as the complainant at a higher grade is not sufficient to constitute a ground for withdrawal. There is no direct relationship either by blood or by marriage between the member and the official concerned, and the latter [...] cannot [...] be regarded as his supervisor in the proper sense of the term." He was not required to withdraw.
internal appeals body; advisory body; challenge of member; family relationship; condition; composition of the internal appeals body
"[F]ailing any explicit provision in the regulations and rules, the officials [who may take or influence the decision] are bound to withdraw if they have already expressed their views on the issue in such a way as to cast doubt on their impartiality or if for other reasons they may be open to suspicion of partiality."
challenge of member; bias; condition
"Because of its purpose, which is to protect the individual against arbitrary action, [the rule on withdrawal] applies in international organisations even in [the absence] of any specific text."
challenge of member; enforcement; no provision; bias