Judgment No. 4619
1. The decision of Interpolís Secretary General of 28 May 2019 is set aside.
2. The case is remitted to Interpol in order that it may take action as indicated in consideration 7 of the judgment.
3. Interpol shall pay the complainant compensation in the amount of 10,000 euros.
4. It shall also pay her 5,000 euros in costs.
5. All other claims are dismissed.
The complainant challenges the decision not to place her on a roster.
complaint allowed; case sent back to organisation; selection procedure; roster
Under the Tribunalís settled case law, a decision to refuse to appoint an official of an international organisation to a post is in fact a decision that may be challenged in an internal appeal and ultimately before the Tribunal (see, for example, Judgments 4408, consideration 2, 4293, consideration 9, 4252, consideration 4, and 1204, consideration 6).
It is true that in this case the impugned decision does not, strictly speaking, concern a refusal to appoint an official to a post but a refusal to place her on a roster. The question is therefore whether such a refusal adversely affects a staff member in itself or, in other words, whether the fact of not being placed on such a roster is capable of having a legal effect.
The grounds for the impugned decision explicitly state that placement of a staff member on the roster does not confer an advantage in itself, as it does not create an entitlement to be considered for a particular job since any application is considered against the specific terms of assignment.
However, the Tribunal observes that, in urgent and exceptional circumstances, a manager may select a candidate who fulfils all the criteria for the vacant post directly from the roster. It follows that the fact of refusing placement on a roster is capable of producing legal effects and adversely affecting the person concerned, without there being any need to determine in these proceedings whether such a mechanism is compatible with all the other rules and regulations applicable to Interpol staff members. Accordingly, that refusal is a decision open to internal appeal.
It is clear from the foregoing that the Secretary Generalís decision to declare the complainantís internal appeal inadmissible rests on an obvious error of law.
The Tribunal considers that the Secretary Generalís decision raises particular concern given that Staff Rule 13.1.3, which allows him to prevent appeals from being considered by the Joint Appeals Committee, involves the fundamental safeguard provided to staff members of exercising the right of appeal against decisions that affect them and that this rule must therefore be applied extremely cautiously.
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1204, 4252, 4293, 4408
cause of action; internal appeal; right of appeal; administrative decision; roster
[T]he Tribunal considers it useful to reiterate that, under their terms of appointment and the applicable staff rules in an international organisation, all staff members who apply to be placed on a roster with a view to future appointment to a vacant post are entitled to have their applications considered in good faith and in keeping with the basic rules of fair and open competition (see, by analogy, Judgment 4524, consideration 8, and the case law cited therein). The Organization is therefore wrong to contend that the complainantís challenge to the decision not to place her on a roster in compliance with the Organizationís guidelines on creating and maintaining rosters is not based on her terms of appointment or staff rules.
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4524
cause of action; contract; selection procedure; roster
[T]he Tribunal considers that it is unnecessary to pay the complainant, as she requests, further compensation on account of the Organizationís alleged abusive and harassing tone in the proceedings before the Tribunal.
procedure before the tribunal; moral injury