Judgment No. 958
Decision
THE COMPLAINT IS DISMISSED.
Consideration 2
Extract:
The organization asks the Tribunal to strike out an item of evidence presented by the complainant. "In view of the other evidence before it the Tribunal will discount the challenged item. Since it thereby in substance grants the organisation satisfaction without detriment to the complainant's rights, it need not rule on the application. There is enough evidence before it anyway to allow of a ruling on the merits."
Keywords
confidential evidence; disclosure of evidence
Consideration 5
Extract:
"As to personal prejudice, the Tribunal has often said that it is usually concealed and its existence therefore usually has to be established by inference. [...] The Tribunal will [determine] whether in this case there is evidence strong enough to create a suspicion of prejudice. Only if it finds there is not will it consider the allegation of such suspicion in similar cases."
Keywords
evidence; judicial review; bias
Consideration 6
Extract:
"The foremost and surest safeguard against personal prejudice is due process, which is designed above all to prevent improper influence on administrative decisions."
Keywords
due process; bias; safeguard
Consideration 3
Extract:
"The Director-General has wide discretion to appoint, transfer and promote staff in the interests of the organization he heads. But his authority is not unqualified, and the Tribunal will review his decisions".
Keywords
appointment; competition; judicial review; discretion
Consideration 5
Extract:
The complainant alleges that the reason why he was not appointed to a P.5 post as principal reviser was that "the Director-General disliked him as a militant member of one of the two staff associations". On the evidence before the Tribunal, the plea fails.
Keywords
competition; candidate; staff union activity; bias
Consideration 17
Extract:
"Unless there is express derogation the rule is that the organisation need not, if that is not its practice, state the reasons for all its decisions: what matters is that the absence of a statement should not be to the staff member's detriment."
Keywords
duty to substantiate decision; injury; lack of injury; appointment; candidate; selection board
| 
