Judgment No. 2867 of the Administrative Tribunal of the International Labour Organization upon a complaint filed against the International Fund for Agricultural Development (Request for Advisory Opini

Document Number
16863
Document Type
Number (Press Release, Order, etc)
2012/2
Date of the Document
Document File
Document

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE

Peace Palace, Carnegieplein 2, 2517 KJ The Hague, Netherlands
Tel.: +31 (0)70 302 2323 Fax: +31 (0)70 364 9928
Website: www.icj-cij.org

Press Release
Unofficial

No. 2012/2
25 January 2012

Judgment No. 2867 of the Administrative Tribunal of the International Labour Organization
upon a complaint filed against the International Fund for Agricultural Development
(Request for Advisory Opinion)

The Court to deliver its Advisory Opinion on Wednesday 1 February 2012 at 10 a.m.

THE HAGUE, 25 January 2012. On Wednesday 1 February 2012, the International Court of
Justice (ICJ), the principal judicial organ of th e United Nations, will deliver its Advisory Opinion

concerning the Judgment No.2867 of the Administrative Tribunal of the International Labour
Organization upon a complaint filed against the International Fund for Agricultural Development.

A public sitting will be held at 10 a.m. at th e Peace Palace in The Hague, during which the
President of the Court, Judge Hisashi Owada, will read out the Advisory Opinion.

History of proceedings

On 26April2010, the Court received a request for an advisory opinion from the
International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), aimed at obtaining the reversal of a
judgment rendered by an administrative court, the Administrative Tribunal of the International

Labour Organization (hereinafter “the Tribunal” or “ILOAT”).

In its judgment No. 2867 ( S-G. v. IFAD), delivered on 3 February 2010, the Tribunal found
that it had jurisdiction under the terms of Article II of its Statute to rule on the merits of a complaint
against IFAD introduced by MsS-G., a former staff member of the Global Mechanism of the

United Nations Convention to Combat Desertific ation in Those Countries Experiencing Serious
Drought and/or Desertification, Particularly in Africa (hereinafter “the Global Mechanism”).
Ms S-G. held a fixed-term contract of employment which was due to expire on 15 March 2006.

When her contract was not renewed, Ms S-G. made approaches to various organs of IFAD,
which houses the Global Mechanism. In particular, she filed an appeal with the Joint Appeals

Board, which recommended in December2007 that MsS-G. be reinstated within the Global
Mechanism for a period of two years and paid an am ount equivalent to all the salaries, allowances
and entitlements she had lost since March2006. Th e President of IFAD rejected this decision in
April 2008. In view of the failure of this appr oach, Ms S-G. filed a complaint against IFAD with
the Tribunal on 8 July 2008. - 2 -

In her complaint, Ms S-G. asked the Tribunal to order IFAD to reinstate her, for a minimum
of two years, in her previous post or an equivalent post with retroactive effect from 15 March 2006,

and to grant her monetary compensation equiva lent to the losses suffered as a result of the
non-renewal of her contract. In its judgment, the Tribunal decided that the decision of the
President of IFAD rejecting the recommendation of the Joint Appeals Board should be set aside. It
ordered IFAD to pay the complainant damages e quivalent to the salary and other allowances she

would have received if her contract had been extended for two years from 16 March 2006, together
with moral damages in the sum of €10,000 and costs in the amount of €5,000.

The Executive Board of IFAD, by a resolutio n adopted at its ninety-ninth session on

22 April 2010, acting within the framework of ArticleXII of the Annex of the Statute of the Tribunal,
decided to challenge the above-mentioned judgment of the Tribunal and to refer the question of the
validity of that judgment to the Internationl Court of Justice for an advisory opinion.

That Article reads as follows:

“1.In any case in which the Executive Board of an international organization . . .
challenges a decision of the Tribunal confir ming its jurisdiction, or considers that

a decision of the Tribunal is vitiated by a fundamental fault in the procedure
followed, the question of the validity of the decision given by the Tribunal shall be
submitted by the Executive Board concerne d, for an advisory opinion, to the
International Court of Justice.

2. The opinion given by the Court shall be binding.”

The request for an advisory opinion was transmitted to the Court by a letter from the

President of the Executive Board of IFAD dated 23April2010 and received in the Registry on
26 April.

It contained the nine following questions:

“I. Was the ILOAT competent, under ArticleII of its Statute, to hear the
complaint introduced against the International Fund for Agricultural Development
(hereby the Fund) on 8July2008 by MsA.T.S.G., an individual who was a member

of the staff of the Global Mechanism of the United Nations Convention to Combat
Desertification in Those Countries Experiencing Serious Drought and/or
Desertification, Particularly in Africa (hereby the Convention) for which the Fund acts
merely as housing organization?

II. Given that the record shows that the parties to the dispute underlying the
ILOAT’s Judgment No.2867 were in agreement that the Fund and the Global
Mechanism are separate legal entities and that the Complain ant was a member of the

staff of the Global Mechanism, and considering all the relevant documents, rules and
principles, was the ILOAT’s statement, made in support of its decision confirming its
jurisdiction, that ‘the Global Mechanism is to be assimilated to the various
administrative units of the Fund for all administrative purposes’ and that the ‘effect of

this is that administrative decisions taken by the Managing Director in relation to staff
in the Global Mechanism are, in law, deci sions of the Fund’ outside its jurisdiction
and/or did it constitute a fundamental fault in the procedure followed by the ILOAT?

III. Was the ILOAT’s general statement, made in support of its decision
confirming its jurisdiction, that ‘the pe rsonnel of the Global Mechanism are staff
members of the Fund’ outside its jurisdic tion and/or did it constitute a fundamental
fault in the procedure followed by the ILOAT? - 3 -

IV. Was the ILOAT’s decision confirming its jurisdiction to entertain the
Complainant’s plea alleging an abuse of authority by the Global Mechanism’s

Managing Director outside its jurisdiction a nd/or did it constitute a fundamental fault
in the procedure followed by the ILOAT?

V. Was the ILOAT’s decision confirmi ng its jurisdiction to entertain the

Complainant’s plea that the Managing Director’s decision not to renew the
Complainant’s contract constituted an error of law outside its jurisdiction and/or did it
constitute a fundamental fault in the procedure followed by the ILOAT?

VI. Was the ILOAT’s decision confirming its jurisdiction to interpret the
Memorandum of Understanding between the C onference of the Parties to the United
Nations Convention to Combat Desertification in Those Countries Experiencing
Serious Drought and/or Desertification, Particularly in Africa and IFAD (hereby the

MoU), the Convention, and the Agreement Establishing IFAD beyond its jurisdiction
and/or did it constitute a fundamental fault in the procedure followed by the ILOAT?

VII. Was the ILOAT’s decision confirming its jurisdiction to determine that by

discharging an intermediary and supporting role under the MoU, the President was
acting on behalf of IFAD outside its jurisdiction and/or did it constitute a fundamental
fault in the procedure followed by the ILOAT?

VIII. Was the ILOAT’s decision confirming its jurisdiction to substitute the
discretionary decision of the Managing Director of the Global Mechanism with its
own outside its jurisdiction and/or did it constitute a fundamental fault in the
procedure followed by the ILOAT?

IX. What is the validity of the decision given by the ILOAT in its Judgment
No. 2867?”

By letters dated 26 April 2010, the Registrar of the Court gave notice, pursuant to Article 66,
paragraph1, of the Statute, of the request for an advisory opinion to all States entitled to appear
before the Court.

By an Order of 29 April 2010, the Court:

1. decided that the International Fund for Ag ricultural Development and its Member States
entitled to appear before the Court, the States parties to the United Nations Convention to

Combat Desertification entitled to appear before the Court and those specialized agencies of the
United Nations which have made a declar ation recognizing the jurisdiction of the
Administrative Tribunal of the International Labour Organization pursuant to ArticleII,
paragraph5, of the Statute of the Tribunal we re considered likely to be able to furnish

information on the questions submitted to the Court for an advisory opinion;

2. fixed 29October2010 as the time-limit within which written statements on these questions
could be presented to the Court, in accordance with Article 66, paragraph 2, of the Statute;

3. fixed 31 January 2011 as the time-limit within which States and organizations having presented
written statements could submit written comments on the other written statements, in
accordance with Article 66, paragraph 4, of the Statute; - 4 -

4. decided to request the President of the International Fund for Agricultural Development to
transmit to the Court any statement setting forth the views of the complainant in the

proceedings against the Fund before the Admini strative Tribunal of the International Labour
Organization which the said complainant might wish to bring to the attention of the Court; and
fixed 29October2010 as the time-limit within which any possible statement by the
complainant who is the subject of the judgment could be presented to the Court and

31January2011 as the time-limit within which any possible comments by the complainant
could be presented to the Court.

On 26October2010, the General Counsel of IFAD submitted a written statement of the

Fund and a statement setting forth the views of the complainant.

On 28 October 2010, the Ambassador of the Plurinational State of Bolivia to the Kingdom of
the Netherlands submitted a written statement of the Government of Bolivia.

By Order of 24January2011, the President of the Court extended to 11March2011 the
time-limit within which States and organizations having presented written statements may submit
written comments on the other written statements, in accordance with Article66, paragraph4, of

the Statute, as well as the time-limit within wh ich any comments by the complainant in the
proceedings against the Fund before the Tribunal may be presented to the Court. The time-limits
were extended in response to a request to that effect made by the General Counsel of IFAD.

The written comments of the Fund and those of the complainant were presented within the
time-limit thus extended.

*

NOTE TO THE PRESS AND PUBLIC

1. The public sitting will be held in the Great Hall of Justice of the Peace Palace. Mobile
telephones are permitted in the courtroom provided they are switched off.

2. Media representatives are subject to an online accreditation procedure , details of
which can be found in the Media Advisory (2012/a) attached to this Press Release. The

accreditation procedure will close at midnight on Monday 30 January 2012.

3. Individual visitors (with the exception of members of the Diplomatic Corps) and groups
are subject to an online admission procedure. They are kindly requested to fill out the relevant
form on the Court’s website (click on “Attending a Hearing”). The admission procedure will

close at midnight on Monday 30 January 2012.

4. At the end of the sitting, a Press Release, a summary of the Advisory Opinion and the full
text of the Advisory Opinion will be distributed. All of these documents will be made available at
the same time on the Court’s website.

___________

Note: The Court’s press releases do not constitute official documents.

___________ - 5 -

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations.
It was established by the United Nations Char ter in June1945 and began its activities in
April1946. The seat of the Court is at the Peace Palace in The Hague (Netherlands). Of the six
principal organs of the United Nations, it is the only one not located in New York. The Court has a

twofold role: first, to settle, in accordance with international law, legal disputes submitted to it by
States (its judgments have binding force and are without appeal for the parties concerned); and,
second, to give advisory opinions on legal questi ons referred to it by duly authorized United
Nations organs and agencies of the system. The Court is composed of 15judges elected for a

nine-year term by the General Assembly and the Security Council of the United Nations. It is
assisted by a Registry, its international secretariat, whose activities are both judicial and diplomatic,
as well as administrative. The official languages of the Court are French and English.

The ICJ, a court open only to States for cont entious proceedings and to certain organs and
institutions of the United Nations system for advisory proceedings, should not be confused with the
other ⎯ mostly criminal ⎯ judicial institutions based in The Hague and adjacent areas, such as the
International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY, an ad hoc court created by the

Security Council), the International Criminal Court (ICC, the first permanent international criminal
court established by treaty, which does not belong to the United Nations system), the Special
Tribunal for Lebanon (STL, an independent judi cial institution composed of Lebanese and

international judges, which is not a United Nations tribunal and does not form part of the Lebanese
judicial system), or the Permanent Court of Ar bitration (PCA), an in stitution founded in 1899,
which is independent of the United Nations.

___________

Information Department:

Mr. Andrey Poskakukhin, First Secretary of the Court, Head of Department (+31 (0)70 302 2336)

Mr. Boris Heim, Information Officer (+31 (0)70 302 2337)
Ms Joanne Moore, Associate Information Officer (+31 (0)70 302 2394)
Ms Genoveva Madurga, Administrative Assistant (+31 (0)70 302 2396) INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE

Peace Palace, Carnegieplein 2, 2517 KJ The Hague, Netherlands
Tel.: +31 (0)70 302 2323 Fax: +31 (0)70 364 9928
Website: www.icj-cij.org

2012/a No.

Media advisory

Judgment No. 2867 of the Administrative Tribunal of the International Labour

Organization upon a complaint filed against the International Fund
for Agricultural Development (Request for Advisory Opinion)

Accreditation procedure for the reading of the Court’s Advisory Opinion
to be held on Wednesday 1 February 2012

Media representatives are required to fill othe online accreditation form on the Court’s
website (www.icj-cij.org). Applications for accreditation must reach the Court by midnight
on Monday 30 January 2012. Only online application forms will be accepted. Each application

will be checked by the Information Department, a nd replies will be sent by e-mail. Applications
received after the deadline will not be considered.

Entry to the Peace Palace

Media representatives must bring with them their personal ID and press card. They are

asked to arrive at the Peace Palace gatesbetween 8.30 and 9.30a.m. Only duly accredited
individuals with valid identification will be permitted to enter the Peace Palace grounds.

No parking is allowed in the Peace Palace grounds apart from satellite vehicles. Media
wishing to park satellite vehicles are requested tfill in the appropriate fields in the online

accreditation form.

Great Hall of Justice

Tables reserved for media representatives are located on the far left of the Great Hall of
Justice. However, photographers and camera crews are only permitte d to enter the room for a few

minutes at the start of the sitting. Photographers and camera crews must keep to the right side of
the Great Hall. - 2 -

Press room

Proceedings will be transmitted live to the Press Room in English and French. The room is
equipped with Wi-Fi and modem internet access. Live video and audio feeds are available via the
breakout box (PAL video output). The Press room will be open between 8.30 a.m. and 4 p.m. on
the day of the sitting.Please note that all media representatives must leave the Peace Palace

grounds by 4 p.m.

___________

Information Department:

Mr. Andrey Poskakukhin, First Secretary of the Court, Head of Department (+31 (0)70 302 2336)
Mr. Boris Heim, Information Officer (+31 (0)70 302 2337)
Ms Joanne Moore, Associate Information Officer (+31 (0)70 302 2394)

Ms Genoveva Madurga, Administrative Assistant (+31 (0)70 302 2396)

Document file FR
Document
Document Long Title

Judgment No. 2867 of the Administrative Tribunal of the International Labour Organization upon a complaint filed against the International Fund for Agricultural Development (Request for Advisory Opinion) - The Court to deliver its Advisory Opinion on Wednesday 1 February 2012 at 10 a.m.

Links