Judgment No. 4311
Decision
The complaint is dismissed.
Summary
The complainant challenges the decision to apply the sanction of summary dismissal to him.
Judgment keywords
Keywords
misconduct; summary dismissal; complaint dismissed
Consideration 4
Extract:
Since the IAO report resulted from a thorough investigation and provided all the necessary information, there was no need for the Committee on Accountability to conduct a fresh investigation. In assessing the facts set out in the IAO report and drawing the conclusions it considered warranted, the Committee complied with its mandate under the Rules of Procedure. As the Tribunal has previously held, when an organisation initiates proceedings in the light of a report on an internal investigation, it is not obliged to repeat all the investigative steps recorded in the report, but must simply ensure that the person concerned is given the opportunity to reply to the findings it contains so as to respect the rights of defence (see Judgments 2773, under 9, and 3640, under 16).
Reference(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 2773, 3640
Keywords
due process in disciplinary procedure
Consideration 9
Extract:
The Tribunal has recently ruled that “where there is an investigation by an investigative body in disciplinary proceedings, the Tribunal’s role is not to reweigh the evidence collected by it, as reserve must be exercised before calling into question the findings of such a body and reviewing its assessment of the evidence. The Tribunal will interfere only in the case of manifest error” (see Judgments 3757, under 6, and 3872, under 2).
Reference(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 3757, 3872
Keywords
inquiry; judicial review; investigation; investigation report
Consideration 13
Extract:
A question [...] arises as to whether that fraud alone was sufficient to warrant the sanction of summary dismissal. On this point, the complainant alleges that the principle of proportionality has been breached in that the sanction imposed is too severe in relation to the charges.
Regarding the severity of a sanction, the case law has it that “[t]he disciplinary authority within an international organisation has a discretion to choose the disciplinary measure imposed on an official for misconduct. However, its decision must always respect the principle of proportionality which applies in this area” (see, for example, Judgments 3640, under 29, 3944, under 12, 3953, under 14, 3971, under 17, and 4244, under 4).
The concurrent use of more than one official vehicle, which [...] has been established, constitutes a serious breach of the Standards of Conduct for the International Civil Service. Article 12.7(1) of the Staff Regulations allows the sanction of summary dismissal to be applied to the staff member concerned in such a case.
The Tribunal hence finds that the sanction imposed on the complainant is not disproportionate in this case.
Reference(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 3640, 3944, 3953, 3971, 4244
Keywords
proportionality
|
