2025-UNAT-1516, Désiré Yameogo
UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements
The UNAT held that the contested decision was lawful. It found that V01’s statements were consistent, detailed, coherent, credible and corroborated by the statements of her colleague. It held that the differences between the statements of V01 and her colleague were minor and had no bearing on the credibility or consistency of their testimonies. The UNAT found that the UNDT had properly concluded that the former staff member lacked credibility, highlighting that he waived his right to cross-examine V01 and her colleague.
The UNAT rejected the former staff members’ argument that his character of integrity and honesty throughout his service at UNICEF constituted evidence of the credibility of his statements.
The UNAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed Judgment No. UNDT/2022/005.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
A former staff member of the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) contested the decision of the Administration to impose on him the disciplinary measure of dismissal for sexual harassment.
In its Judgment No. UNDT/2022/005, the UNDT concluded that the sanction imposed on the former staff member was lawful and dismissed his application.
Former staff member appealed.
Legal Principle(s)
Clear and convincing evidence of misconduct, including serious misconduct, imports two high evidential standards. The first (‘clear’) is that the evidence of misconduct must be unequivocal and manifest. Separately, the second standard (‘convincing’) requires that this clear evidence must be persuasive to a high standard appropriate to the gravity of the allegation against the staff member and in light of the severity of the consequence of its acceptance. Clear and convincing proof requires more than a preponderance of the evidence but less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt—it means that the truth of the facts asserted is highly probable.
Evidence, which is required to be clear and convincing, can be direct evidence of events, or may be of evidential inferences that can be properly drawn from other direct evidence.
Sexual harassment requires sufficient, credible and reliable evidence proving a high probability that the perpetrator: i) made a sexual advance; ii) made a request for a sexual favour; iii) verbally or physically engaged in conduct or behaviour of a sexual nature; or iv) made a gesture of a sexual nature. In addition, the advance, request, conduct or gesture must be shown to have been unwelcome; might reasonably have been expected or perceived to cause offence or humiliation to another; or have caused an intimidating, hostile or offensive work environment.
it is typical in disputes concerning sexual harassment that the alleged conduct takes place in private, without direct evidence other than from the complainant and that the evidentiary questions in such cases center on the credibility of the complainant’s testimony.