UNDT/2020/120, Xing
The Applicant’s claims of ulterior motive are unsubstantiated. The preferential consideration of female candidates only applies when women are under-represented according to sec. 3(c) of the memorandum from the Secretary-General of 11 February 2019 on the implementation of ST/AI/1999/9 (Special measures for the achievement of gender equality). The evidence shows, however, that women are not under-represented in the relevant unit. Therefore, the Applicant was not entitled to preferential consideration due to her gender. The Administration has shown that the applicable procedure was followed and that, after the initial erroneous screening out of the Applicant’s candidature was corrected, she was afforded full and fair consideration.
Non selection for a post of Political Affairs Officer at the P-3 level.
The Secretary-General has broad discretion in the selection and appointment of staff. In matters of staff selection, it is the role of the Dispute Tribunal to review the challenged selection process to determine whether the applicable regulations and rules have been applied and whether a candidate has received full and fair consideration, discrimination and bias are absent, proper procedures have been followed, and all relevant material has been taken into consideration. The Tribunal’s role is not to substitute its decision for that of the Administration. The official acts of the Respondent enjoy a presumption of regularity. If the management is able to even minimally show that an applicant’s candidature was given a full and fair consideration, then the presumption of law stands satisfied. To rebut this minimal showing, the applicant “must [then] show through clear and convincing evidence that [s/he] was denied a fair chance of promotion†in order to win the case. Even if the Tribunal finds that the procedure was not properly followed, such irregularity will only result in the rescission of a non-selection decision if the candidate would have had a significant chance of selection. The Secretary-General has broad discretion in the selection and appointment of staff. In matters of staff selection, it is the role of the Dispute Tribunal to review the challenged selection process to determine whether the applicable regulations and rules have been applied and whether a candidate has received full and fair consideration, discrimination and bias are absent, proper procedures have been followed, and all relevant material has been taken into consideration. The Tribunal’s role is not to substitute its decision for that of the Administration. The official acts of the Respondent enjoy a presumption of regularity. If the management is able to even minimally show that an applicant’s candidature was given a full and fair consideration, then the presumption of law stands satisfied. To rebut this minimal showing, the applicant “must [then] show through clear and convincing evidence that [s/he] was denied a fair chance of promotion†in order to win the case. Even if the Tribunal finds that the procedure was not properly followed, such irregularity will only result in the rescission of a non-selection decision if the candidate would have had a significant chance of selection.