ٱƵapp

UNDT/2018/029, Finniss

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

The Tribunal finds it noteworthy that in relation to functional delegation of authority, the person in whom authority is vested by virtue of his/her position/function has the power to delegate that authority. However, such delegation does not equate to the delegator definitively ridding himself/herself of the powers and authority that he or she delegates. Legally, a delegator continues to maintain the powers and authority that he or she has delegated, and such delegation is thus revocable at any time. Therefore, both parties’ arguments that the USG/OIOS could or should have “surrendered” her delegation back to the Secretary-General are flawed. Rather, the Secretary-General may simply revoke a prior delegation of authority at any time. Relevant provisions do not contain any exception to any selection at the D-2 level as being exempted from appointment by the Secretary-General. Thus, the Tribunal cannot but conclude that the Secretary-General’s authority to select staff members to positions at the D-2 level applies across the board to any appointment to positions at that level, without any exception. By virtue of ST/SGB/2015/1, any prior delegation of appointments to the D-2 level within OIOS to the USG/OIOS was revoked by the “retention”, as per sec. 4.2(a) and annex 1 of ST/SGB/2015/1. Furthermore, according to the principle of hierarchy of norms, ST/SGB/2015/1, which is also a specialized norm, prevails over Administrative Instructions ST/AI/401 amended by ST/AI/2003/4 (see Villamoran 2011-UNAT-160). Since the decision-maker in this instance was the Secretary-General, the OIOS Review Body had no role to play in this selection exercise. The Tribunal reaches the conclusion that the Secretary-General had the authority to make the selection decision for the post of Director, ID/OIOS.

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

Non-selection to the position of Director (“D-2”), Investigations Division, Office of Internal Oversight Services.

Legal Principle(s)

In cases of staff selection, the Tribunal cannot substitute its assessment to that of the Administration and, as a consequence, its role is to evaluate the procedure and verify whether the Applicant was given full and fair consideration. The Secretary-General, as the Chief Administrative Officer of the United Nations, holds the primary authority and is accountable for the Administration of the Staff Rules and Regulations. The highest authority of the United Nations hierarchy of norms is the United Nations Charter. Its article 101.1 provides that staff members shall be appointed by the SecretaryGeneral, under regulations established by the General Assembly.

Outcome
Dismissed on merits

OAJ prepared this case law summary for informational purposes only. It is no official record and should not be relied upon as an authoritative interpretation of the Tribunals' rulings. For the authoritative texts, please refer to the judgment or order rendered by the respective Tribunal. The Tribunals are the only bodies competent to interpret their respective judgments, as provided under Article 12(3) of the UNDT Statute and Article 11(3) of the UNAT Statute. Any inaccuracies in the publication are the sole responsibility of OAJ, which should be contacted directly for any correction requests. To provide comments, don't hesitate to get in touch with OAJ at oaj@un.org.

The judgment summaries were generally prepared in English. They were translated into French and are being reviewed for accuracy of the translation.

Applicants/ Appellants
Finniss
Entity
Case Number(s)
Tribunal
Registry Location :
Date of Judgment
Judge(s)
Language of Judgment
Issuance Type