Judgment No. 2402
1. The ILO shall pay the complainant 30,000 Swiss francs in compensation.
2. It shall also pay her 3,000 francs in costs.
3. All further claims are dismissed.
Contrary to the view expressed by the complainant, the Office did not show bad faith in dealing with the delicate situation in which it found itself, and it cannot be considered to have taken the decisions concerning her career in “retaliation”: the decisions concerning the MISA project and her planned missions to Mozambique were based on sound management concerns which the Tribunal cannot criticise. The posts offered to the complainant – whose contract stipulated that she could be transferred – matched her grade and skills, even though the drafting of the job description for the post in Dakar may have been somewhat inadequate. Furthermore, the complainant had no right to renewal of her contract and the Tribunal, which exercises only a limited power of review over decisions taken in such matters by the competent authority, finds no error of fact or of law in this case, nor any misuse of authority: although the Reports Board was in favour of renewal, the Organization was not bound by the Board’s recommendation and was entitled to draw the consequences of the complainant’s refusal of the transfer proposals that were made to her. The evidence most favourable to the complainant’s case does not support the conclusion that the decision not to renew her contract was taken in bad faith or in “retaliation” for her harassment grievance. Consequently, the requested public hearing and witness hearings are unnecessary. As regards the complainant’s request for the production of numerous documents, the Tribunal considers itself sufficiently informed by the existing submissions and sees no need, in view of the evidence already submitted by the parties, to authorise the “fishing expedition” sought by the complainant.