Administration of Justice at the United Nations

The General Assembly will be considering a report of the Joint Inspection Unit (JIU) on the administration of justice at the United Nations.

JIU carried out the review to help clarify the administration of justice system, and to provide recommendations to "adjust it to new management requirements". The review was also intended as a solid basis for "accountability and oversight in the United Nations by making administration-of-justice tools clear and transparent."

The administration of justice at the United Nations includes informal procedures and two stages of formal recourse. The first stage takes place before internal joint bodies whose role is advisory only; the second stage, before an Administrative Tribunal whose decisions are binding.

The Inspectors noted that a "comparatively high" proportion of all recommendations of the internal joint bodies - including unanimous recommendations - are rejected by the administrations, and expressed the hope that this trend "will be arrested and, in time, reversed". Further, the Inspectors "deplored" that there should be so many cases where the advice of these bodies is rejected and the fact that their deliberations serve only to add a year or two before referring it for decision to the Administrative Tribunal.

FICSA welcomes the report from Inspectors Fatih Bouayad-Agha and Homero L. Hernandez as a solid basis for further reflection, discussion and action. It submits, however, that any action be preceded by consultation involving all stakeholders, including FICSA as the representative of the staff of the organizations which have accepted the jurisdiction of the United Nations Administrative Tribunal (UNAT).

FICSA positions on JIU recommendations to improve the administration of justice:

• Recommendation 1: Creation of an Office for the Settlement of Disputes and the Administration of Justice: FICSA insists that the independence of the administration of justice should be increased and guaranteed at all stages. Consequently, FICSA cannot support this recommendation. The secretariats of the various bodies for the resolution of conflicts, settlement of disputes and administration of justice must be kept separate if they are to be trusted by all parties.
• Recommendation 2: Creation of the function of Ombudsman: FICSA supports efforts to resolve disputes prior to becoming formalized before the appellate bodies. The JIU has identified such efforts as "informal conciliation, mediation and negotiation" and establishing a post of Ombudsman.

FICSA does not support the recommendation that the position of Ombudsman be placed within an "Office for the Settlement of Disputes and the Administration of Justice". Nor can FICSA support the recommendation that the Ombudsman be a senior-level appointment by the Secretary-General, in consultation with the staff. In other organizations (notably WHO), the Ombudsman is elected by staff from a list of candidates nominated by staff. The appointment is confirmed by the executive head, and may be renewed if the incumbent is re-elected.

• Recommendation 3
  1. Eliminate present restrictions on the authority of the UN Administrative Tribunal: FICSA supports the recommendation that the Tribunal should have "full powers to order the rescinding of the decision contested or the specific performance of the obligation invoked." The Tribunal alone should "decide on the appropriate amount of compensation to be paid." These principles have been applied for decades by the Administrative Tribunal of the International Labour Organization (ILOAT).

  2. Strengthening candidates for membership of the Tribunal: FICSA supports the principle that candidates for membership of the Tribunal should have a recognized legal qualification, and proposes that article 3, paragraph 2 be amended as follows: "The members shall be appointed by the General Assembly for a period of four years [instead of three] from among persons with recognized professional experience in the judiciary." It would also be appropriate to give greater emphasis to the fact that the Tribunal is a court of law. To that end, members of the Tribunal could be designated "judges".

  3. Strengthen the Secretariat of the Administrative Tribunal by the addition of a post of Deputy Secretary. FICSA supports this recommendation.

• Recommendation 4
  1. Joint Appeals Board and Committee for Professional Responsibility: FICSA reserves its position for the time being. In recommending this change, JIU indicates that greater emphasis will be placed on the "ethical as compared to the disciplinary aspects" of the Committee's role. If the emphasis is to be placed on the ethical aspects of service, then consensus by and training for staff and administrators is required on an ethical framework for the international civil service.

  2. Training: The JIU recommendation that new members of these bodies "should be offered basic legal courses with special reference to the terms of appointment of the United Nations staff, the administrative policies and practices of the Organization and the jurisprudence of the Administrative Tribunal" should be expanded to include training and orientation in ethics based on a commonly agreed set of ethical standards.

  3. Recommendations of the Joint Appeals Board and the Committee for Professional Responsibility: FICSA supports the JIU recommendation that the "practice of accepting the unanimous recommendations of the Joint Appeals Board and the Committee for Professional Responsibility should be revivified".

     Publication of reports et al:
     FICSA supports recommendations that:

  4. the Secretariat of the Joint Appeals Board should publish annual reports on the cases heard;
  5. on the holding of oral hearings if so desired by the complainant;
  6. and on ensuring access of field staff to dispute settlement instances through information technology.

Because the exposure given to UNAT judgments is at present appallingly deficient, FICSA recommends that the case law, statute, procedure, etc. of the United Nations Administrative Tribunal be made available on a website, as is done by the ILO Administrative Tribunal.

• Recommendation 5:

  Establishment of Higher Appeal Instances: JIU believes that further consideration should be given to the establishment of higher appeal instances in respect of lower United Nations system judicial and semi-judicial bodies. FICSA is of the view that the Administrative Tribunal should remain the highest instance of appeal and that its judgments are final and binding. As suggested by JIU, greater efforts must be made to achieve dispute settlement at the earliest possible stage.

• Recommendation 6:

  Proper legal advice and representation for staff: At present, staff members may be represented only by current and retired staff members during the internal grievance stage. JIU recommends that staff should have the option to be represented by staff members who have separated from the Organization through resignation or in other ways.

FICSA is of the view that the staff member's options should not be restricted. In particular the staff member should be able to appoint a lawyer during the internal grievance stage. This is in the interest of both early settlement of the dispute and effectiveness of the judicial procedure should the case proceed to UNAT.

FICSA also notes that the United Nations may usefully draw from the experience of other organizations.

"An applicant may present his case before the Tribunal in person, in either the written or oral proceedings. Subject to article 7 of these rules, he may designate a staff member of the United Nations or one of the specialized agencies so to represent him, or may be represented by counsel authorized to practice in any country a member of the organization concerned. The President or, when the Tribunal is in session, the Tribunal may permit an applicant to be represented by a retired staff member of the United Nations or one of the specialized agencies."