This article explores the subject of “what the ICSC Standards of Conduct mean for you and how they aim to protect the organizations and their staff” by analyzing some case studies from the United Nations Appeals Tribunal (UNAT), the highest court of record in the internal justice system of the United Nations, whose decisions are non- appealable. 

They must be followed by the organizations that are subject to its jurisdiction and their staff members. By sharing the abridged case findings, the author is partially fulfilling paragraph 53 of the ICSC Standards of Conduct, which states that: 

‘For these standards to be effectively applied, it is essential that they be widely disseminated and that measures be taken, and mechanisms put in place to ensure that their scope and importance are understood throughout the international civil service, member states and the organizations of the United Nations system.’

The selected cases highlight the scope and importance of ICSC Standards of Conduct as interpreted and applied by UNAT. They provide guidance and recommendations for future conduct of the organizations and staff members. 

Case Study 1: 2023-UNAT-1339

In this case, the Staff Member (SM) was separated from service for violating paragraphs 5 and 25 of the ICSC Standards of Conduct. It was reported that the SM had utilized, without authorization, UN Women’s official United Parcel Service (“UPS”) account for personal purposes on at least two separate occasions in December 2017. The amount involved in the act was $300.07, which she had eventually paid back to the organization. She appealed against the separation to the United Nations Dispute Tribunal (UNDT), the court of first instance under the UN internal justice system, which found that the conduct was indeed in breach of her terms and conditions of appointment but found that the sanction of separation without termination indemnity was excessive. 

The UN Secretary-General appealed before UNAT against the order of payment of indemnity while the SM appealed against the UNDT finding that the SM had committed misconduct. UNAT found that the sanction was proportionally appropriate and reversed the UNDT decision on payment of indemnity. UNAT dismissed the SM’s appeal in its entirety. 

UNAT decision

In summary, UNAT found that the SM had violated staff rules and regulations. The sanction of separation from service without termination indemnity was not arbitrary, excessive, or abusive.

UNAT recommendation

In this case, UNAT was also of the view that “…The Appeals Tribunal understands that certain disciplinary measures may seem harsh, begging the question as to whether the Administration could employ the principles of progressive or corrective discipline and graduation in sanction, when the circumstances of the case reveal that remedies have been made by the relevant party and that the element of trust in the relationship can be repaired. A mediation process involving a pedagogical approach can often resolve issues with a positive outcome for both parties in the interest of the Organization.” (Paragraph 73 of the UNAT judgment).

Case study 2: 2021-UNAT-1178

In this case the SM was separated from service for violating paragraph 42 of the ICSC Standards of Conduct. In summary, it was alleged among other things that the SM behaved in a manner that discredited UNHCR and undermined public confidence in the organization, and the fact that he had romantic relationships with two local women created a risk for UNHCR operations. It was concluded that his private life reflected negatively on the organization. He appealed against the separation before the UNDT, which found that SM had not violated ICSC Standards of Conduct and ordered his reinstatement. The Secretary-General appealed the UNDT decision before UNAT, which also found that the SM’s proven conduct was not in breach of ICSC Standards of Conduct. 

UNAT decision

In brief, UNAT found that the SM did not violate paragraph 42 of the ICSC Standards of Conduct when read and applied in the context of paragraph 40 of the same ICSC Standards of Conduct (paragraph 40 talks about respect for different customs and culture). He did not conduct himself in a manner not befitting his status as an international civil servant. The SM’s proven conduct was his own concern, not of the organization and did not reflect on it, at least not in a way that upset the necessary balance between his private life and the organization’s reputation. 

Conclusion

The summarized UNAT decisions reflect that the mission of the UN to bring about a just and peaceful world requires an international civil servant to adhere to the highest standards of conduct as prescribed in the ICSC Standards of Conduct. In applying the ICSC Standards of Conduct, the organizations and staff members should aim to strike a balance between individual rights, interests, and obligations of a staff member as an international civil servant and the core values of the United Nations.