UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements
The UNAT held that the UNRWA DT did not err in finding that the decision to close the investigation into the former staff member’s complaint was lawful.It found that the account of the incident in which B allegedly rubbed against her presented an equivocal case of sexual harassment, and that it was therefore open to the investigator and to the decision-maker to conclude that the case was of insufficient strength to pursue against B.The UNAT further found that the two other incidents invoked by the former staff member – B allegedly walking to her side in a corridor and offering her to drink coffee from his cup – could not, either individually or collectively, have contributed to a reasonable finding of sexual harassment.
The UNAT also rejected the former staff member’s challenge to the delays in the investigation process. It concluded that the one-year delay between her complaint and the initiation of an investigation, while on its face excessive, had not been raised before the UNRWA DT and was therefore not capable of review on appeal.As for the second delay, pertaining to the investigator’s request for further information, the UNAT concluded that it was relatively short and could not have adversely affected the validity of the investigation report.
Finally, the UNAT rejected the former staff member’s argument that the UNRWA DT wrongly treated A as an independent witness despite another complaint having been lodged against A.It concluded that the investigations into the allegations against A and B were conducted independently, and that A’s non-observation of the interactions between B and the former staff member constituted a neutral factor.
The UNAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed Judgment No. UNRWA/DT/2025/025.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
UNRWA DT: A former staff member of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA or Agency) contested the Agency's decision to close the investigation into her complaint of sexual harassment against B on the grounds that there was insufficient evidence to substantiate the allegations.
In its Judgment No. UNRWA/DT/2025/025, the UNDT dismissed the former staff member’s application, concluding that the contested decision was lawful.
The former staff member appealed.
Legal Principle(s)
Sexual harassment is any unwelcome sexual advance, request for sexual favour, verbal or physical conduct or gesture of a sexual nature, or any other behaviour of a sexual nature that might reasonably be expected or be perceived to cause offence or humiliation to another, when such conduct interferes with work, is made a condition of employment or creates an intimidating, hostile or offensive work environment. While typically involving a pattern of behaviour, it can take the form of a single incident. Both males and females can be victims or offenders.
While it is true that whether conduct amounts to sexual harassment must be considered from the reasonable viewpoint of the person allegedly harassed, the actions and intentions of the alleged harasser are also relevant.
Issues which were not raised before the UNDT cannot be introduced for the first time on appeal.