Home

Senior Protection Officer in Quetta, Pakistan (P-4) (JO 8647, Position No. 10018015) (“Position 4”) (...) It required, inter alia, a strong protection background, as well as experience in protection matters relating to the reintegration of returning refugees and protection needs of IDPs, in addition to good management, coordination and diplomatic skills. ... (...) Position 3 required, inter alia, a strategic protection background and supervisory experience, as well as experience with protection standards, operational procedures and protection delivery at the country level for matters relating to IDPs. ...

In her view there was no link between the protected action and the negative PAR because there was no protected activity. (...) The Ethics Office failed to provide her with an adequately reasoned decision for rejecting her application for protection for engaging in protected activity; g. (...) A report of misconduct is the protected activity which is the very foundation of a claim for protection without which a claim cannot be considered. 53.

Senior Protection Officer in Quetta, Pakistan (P-4) (JO 8647, Position No. 10018015) (“Position 4”). (...) It required, inter alia, a strong protection background, as well as experience in protection matters relating to the reintegration of returning refugees and protection needs of IDPs, in addition to good management, coordination and diplomatic skills. 10. (...) Position 3 required, inter alia, a strategic protection background and supervisory experience, as well as experience with protection standards, operational procedures and protection delivery at the country level for matters relating to IDPs.

The Applicant requests rescission of the decision dated 26 March 2012 by which the Ethics Office refused to consider that the settlement agreement she had concluded on 29 June 2011 with the International Trade Centre (ITC), following mediation, constituted a protected activity within the scope of the Secretary-General’s bulletin ST/SGB/2005/21 (Protection against retaliation for reporting misconduct and for cooperating with duly authorized audits or investigations). 2. (...) On 26 March 2012, the Ethics Office refused to grant protection to the Applicant on the grounds that the settlement agreement concluded with ITC on 29 June 2011 did not constitute a protected activity within the scope of the Secretary-General’s bulletin ST/SGB/2005/21. 13. (...) The Secretary-General’s bulletin ST/SGB/2005/21 on protection against retaliation for reporting misconduct and for cooperating with duly authorized audits or investigations entitles staff members to make complaints of retaliation to the Ethics Office and directs that Office to conduct a preliminary review to determine if the staff member engaged in a protected activity.

In December 2013, the Applicant submitted a request for protection against retaliation to the Ethics Office. (...) All managers in the Applicant’s section be provided with appropriate training on the Organization’s policy on protection against retaliation (the third recommendation); d. (...) UNDT/2020/057/Corr.1 Page 6 of 11 command, no steps were taken to ensure protection from further retaliation by other managers in his section. 18.

The Applicant is moving the court to order protective measures to ensure that his witnesses are not prejudiced, intimidated or retaliated against for testifying in the present case. (...) The Tribunal notes that the Statute and Rules of Procedure of the Dispute Tribunal are silent on the protective measures which may be ordered for the purposes of witness protection. (...) The issue of witness protection has been raised at international level mostly in the context of criminal trials.

By application filed on 11 September 2018, the Applicant, a Human Rights Officer (P-3) working for the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (“OHCHR”), challenges “the procedure by which her request for protection from retaliation was processed, the failure to protect her from retaliation and the failure to follow up on Ethics Office recommendations subsequent to her request for protection from retaliation”. 2. (...) The Applicant’s request for protection has been incorrectly referred between Ethics Offices. (...) UNDT/2020/097 Page 24 of 34 made aware of her situation and the “alleged” procedural flaws in the treatment of her request for protection, had an independent duty to protect her from retaliation. 96.

On 14 December 2010, the Applicant submitted to the Ethics Office a request for protection from retaliation based on ST/SGB/2005/21 (Protection Against Retaliation for Reporting Misconduct and for Cooperating with Duly Authorized Audits or Investigations). (...) In order to receive protection, the report should be made as soon as possible and not later than six years after the individual becomes aware of the misconduct. (...) Applications before the Tribunal and requests for management evaluation do not constitute a protected activity under the terms of sec. 2.1 of ST/SGB/2005/21. 50.

On 7 June 2019, she submitted to the Ethics Office a request for protection against retaliation (in terms of ST/SGB/2017/2/Rev.1 (Protection against retaliation for reporting misconduct and for cooperating with duly authorized audits or investigations). 5. (...) Fosse’s cooperation constitutes a protected activity in terms of Section 2 of ST/SGB/2017/2/Rev.1. 6. (...) It provides that individuals who make such reports in good faith have the right to be protected against retaliation. The right to protection is thus a term of the contract of staff members of the Organization as constituted by the relevant administrative issuance. 43.

Reinstatement as a Protection Officer at the P-3 level on a probationary basis; b. (...) In January 2000, she was given an indefinite appointment as Senior Protection Clerk at the GL4 level. In July 2000, she was promoted to the GL5 level. (...) By memorandum of 13 February 2007 to the UNHCR Representative in Iran, the Deputy Representative (Protection) expressed reservations about the Applicant’s performance and competencies and stressed her reluctance to accept comments by more experienced Protection Officers on her performance. 11.