Judgment No. 4618
Decision
1. The decision of Interpol’s Secretary General of 25 February 2019 is set aside.
2. The case is remitted to Interpol in order that it may take action as indicated in consideration 7 of the judgment.
3. Interpol shall pay the complainant compensation in the amount of 10,000 euros.
4. It shall also pay her 5,000 euros in costs.
5. All other claims are dismissed.
Summary
The complainant challenges the outcome of two selection procedures in which she took part.
Judgment keywords
Keywords
complaint allowed; cause of action; case sent back to organisation; competition; selection procedure
Consideration 6
Extract:
Under the Tribunal’s settled case law in this area, a decision not to appoint an official of an international organisation to a post is in fact a decision that may be challenged in an internal appeal and ultimately before the Tribunal (see, for example, Judgments 4408, consideration 2, 4293, consideration 9, 4252, consideration 4, and 1204, consideration 6).
While the Secretary General also referred in his decision to the broad discretion enjoyed by an international organisation’s executive head in a selection procedure, that issue, which relates to the review of the merits of decisions taken in this area, has no bearing on the receivability of appeals directed against those decisions.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1204, 4252, 4293, 4408
Keywords
internal appeal; discretion; selection procedure; administrative decision
Consideration 8
Extract:
In view of the Organization’s arguments in its submissions, the Tribunal considers it useful to reiterate that, under the terms of their appointment and the applicable staff rules within an international organisation, all staff members who apply for posts in competitive procedures are entitled to have their applications considered in good faith and in keeping with the basic rules of fair and open competition (see, for example, Judgment 4524, consideration 8, and the case law cited therein). The Organization is therefore wrong to contend that the complainant’s challenge to the outcome of the competitions in question is not based on the terms of her appointment or the staff rules.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4524
Keywords
cause of action; contract; competition
Consideration 9
Extract:
Whatever the eventual outcome of this dispute, the unlawful refusal to submit the complainant’s appeal to the Joint Appeals Committee has had the effect of delaying its final settlement. That decision has, in itself, caused the complainant injury that will be fairly redressed by ordering Interpol to pay her compensation [...].
Keywords
injury; moral injury
Consideration 10
Extract:
[T]he Tribunal considers that it is unnecessary to pay the complainant, as she requests, further compensation on account of the Organization’s allegedly unreasonable and harassing tone in the proceedings before the Tribunal.
Keywords
procedure before the tribunal; moral injury
| 
