�鶹��ý

The Tribunal recalled that under the consistent jurisprudence of the Appeals Tribunal, it is well established that while the Secretary-General has broad discretionary authority in administrative matters, such authority is not unfettered and is subject to judicial review. (See, for instance, Farhadi 2022-UNAT-1203 and Samamdarov 2018-UNAT-859.) Moreover, “[w]hen judging the validity of the Secretary-General’s exercise of discretion in administrative matters, the Dispute Tribunal determines if the decision is legal, rational, procedurally correct, and proportionate”. The Dispute Tribunal “can consider whether relevant matters have been ignored and irrelevant matters considered, and also examine whether the decision is absurd or perverse”. (Sanwidi 2010-UNAT-084, para. 40.) As the Appeals Tribunal has also stated, “[t]he Administration has an obligation to act in good faith and comply with applicable laws. Mutual trust and confidence between the employer and the employee are implied in every contract of employment. Both parties must act reasonably and in good faith”. (Mancinelli 2023-UNAT-1339, para. 60.)

The Appeals Tribunal has established that the Administration owes a duty of care to staff members to ensure their safety and security. In AAG 2022-UNAT-1308, for instance, the Appeals Tribunal held that “Staff Regulation 1.2(c) establishes a duty of care of the Organization towards its staff members. It stipulates the authority of the Secretary-General to assign staff members to any of the activities or offices of the United Nations. In exercising this authority, the Secretary-General should seek to ensure, having regard to the circumstances, that all necessary safety and security arrangements are made for staff carrying out the responsibilities entrusted to them.