Enquête (860, 784, 898, 902, 903, 904, 906, 907, 913,-666)
Votre recherche:
Mots-clés: Enquête
Jugements trouvés: 202
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 | suivant >
Jugement 5160
141e session, 2026
Organisation européenne pour la sécurité de la navigation aérienne
Extraits: EN,
FR
Texte Intégral Du Jugement: EN,
FR
Synthèse: Le requérant conteste la décision de lui infliger la sanction disciplinaire de rétrogradation.
Considérants 7-9
Extrait:
« Il ressort des dispositions [applicables à Eurocontrol] que, contrairement à ce que fait valoir la défenderesse, toute enquête administrative doit être menée par le Comité d’examen […] la conduite de l’enquête administrative par le Comité d’examen offrait des garanties d’impartialité supplémentaires […] En confiant l’enquête […] au seul responsable de la sécurité, Eurocontrol a privé l’intéressé de son droit à une procédure régulière et des garanties procédurales prévues par ses propres règles. Il y a donc lieu de conclure à l’irrégularité de l’enquête administrative conduite dans la présente affaire […] la décision [attaquée] ainsi que les décisions de rétrogradation […], doivent être annulées […] Cependant, le Tribunal ne fera pas droit aux demandes en réparation du préjudice matériel que le requérant estime avoir subi du fait de sa rétrogradation. En effet, l’intéressé a lui-même reconnu avoir falsifié la date de la prescription médicale, soumise à l’appui de sa demande de remboursement de frais médicaux […] le Tribunal estime que le Directeur général pouvait conclure au-delà de tout doute raisonnable que le requérant s’était rendu coupable de tentative de fraude et qu’une enquête administrative menée par le Comité d’examen n’aurait pas pu, en tout état de cause, avoir d’incidence sur cette conclusion […] Le non-respect par Eurocontrol des garanties procédurales prévues par ses propres règles a néanmoins causé au requérant un préjudice moral.»
Mots-clés:
Au-delà de tout doute raisonnable; Enquête; Fraude; Interprétation; Interprétation des règles; Tort matériel; Tort moral;
Jugement 5156
141e session, 2026
Organisation mondiale de la santé
Extraits: EN,
FR
Texte Intégral Du Jugement: EN,
FR
Synthèse: The complainant contests her dismissal for misconduct.
Considérant 12
Extrait:
“The Tribunal notes that its case law […] concerning an investigator’s duty to gather exculpatory evidence, including interviewing witnesses listed by the accused person, was primarily established in cases where the disciplinary charges were solely based on witness statements and the accused person questioned the credibility of the witnesses (see, specifically, Judgment 5003, consideration 5). […] [In the present case] the charges of misconduct are supported not only by witness statements, but also by decisive and conclusive documentary evidence, consisting of emails sent by the complainant to other staff members and external third parties. Therefore, the hearing of the witnesses listed by the complainant could not have disproven the finding of misconduct already evident from the complainant’s emails.”
Référence(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 5003
Mots-clés:
Droit d'être entendu; Enquête; Preuves pendant l'enquête; Procédure disciplinaire; Témoin;
Considérant 20
Extrait:
“The Tribunal’s case law has it that an allegation of conflict of interest or lack of impartiality has to be substantiated and based on specific facts, not on mere suspicions or hypotheses. The complainant bears the burden of proving conflict of interest (see Judgments 4963, consideration 15, 4915, consideration 5, 4711, consideration 5, 4617, consideration 9, and 4616, consideration 6). The complainant has not discharged her burden of proof. The mere fact that an officer made an unfavourable decision concerning a staff member, or took part in the process leading to such a decision, does not, by itself, imply that such officer would be biased in future decisions concerning the same staff member or, as in this case, in providing testimony [to IOS].”
Référence(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 4616, 4617, 4711, 4915, 4963
Mots-clés:
Charge de la preuve; Conflit d'intérêts; Enquête; Témoin;
Considérant 38
Extrait:
“The complainant also requests moral compensation for the delay in the process, arguing that the overall duration of the investigation and disciplinary proceedings was excessively long. She contends that she was left in a state of complete uncertainty about her career for roughly 30 months, during which time she was suspended from service. Having regard to the circumstances of the case and, specifically, its complexity and the number of witnesses interviewed, the Tribunal finds that the length of the process was not inordinate and, therefore, the complainant is not entitled to moral damages in this regard.”
Mots-clés:
Enquête; Indemnité pour tort moral; Procédure disciplinaire; Retard; Suspension;
Considérant 4
Extrait:
“[A]lthough it would be preferable to notify the persons concerned that they are to be the subject of an investigation prior to the start of such investigation, except where this would be liable to compromise the outcome of the investigation, such advance notice is not a requisite element of due process (see Judgments 4310, consideration 6, and 3295, consideration 8); it is sufficient that the accused staff member be informed of the allegations at the beginning of the interview (see Judgments 4770, consideration 4, 4237, consideration 10, 4310, consideration 6, 4106, consideration 9, and 3200, consideration 8); there is no principle in the Tribunal’s case law stating that a staff member must receive detailed information about the allegations prior to the investigation interview (see Judgment 4106, consideration 9).”
Référence(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 3200, 3295, 4106, 4237, 4310, 4770
Mots-clés:
Enquête; Notification des allégations;
Considérant 4
Extrait:
“[B]efore adopting a disciplinary measure, an international organisation must give the staff concerned the opportunity to defend themselves in adversarial proceedings (see Judgments 5003, consideration 5, and 3875, consideration 3). The right to make a defence is necessarily a right to defend oneself before an adverse decision is made, whether by a disciplinary body or the deciding authority (see Judgments 4832, consideration 28, 4343, consideration 13, and 2496, consideration 7). Before disciplinary proceedings are undertaken, the investigator has the duty to ascertain all relevant facts and the accused person must be given the benefit of the doubt (see Judgments 5003, consideration 5, 4697, consideration 12, 4491, consideration 19, and 4011, consideration 9). This implies that the investigator has to assess not only evidence against the accused person, but also exculpatory evidence (see Judgments 5003, consideration 5, 4456, considerations 9 and 17, and 4362, consideration 12), and, before this, must allow the accused person to provide exculpatory evidence (see Judgment 5003, consideration 5).”
Référence(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 2496, 3875, 4011, 4343, 4491, 4697, 4832, 5003
Mots-clés:
Application des règles de procédure; Enquête; Preuves pendant l'enquête; Procédure disciplinaire; Sanction disciplinaire;
Considérant 4
Extrait:
“[T]he failure to respect confidentiality in an investigative process, even if it were proven, does not amount to a conclusive flaw which would justify the setting aside of the disciplinary decision. The breach of confidentiality, if proven, might only arguably entitle the complainant to moral damages (see Judgment 4858, consideration 14).”
Référence(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 4858
Mots-clés:
Enquête; Indemnité pour tort moral; Violation du principe de confidentialité;
Considérant 8
Extrait:
“Due process mandates that the health condition of the staff concerned be taken into consideration, striking a balance between the right to defense of the staff concerned and the need for an expeditious investigation in cases of harassment (see Judgments 4065, considerations 7 and 8, and 4064, considerations 8 to 10). In Judgment 4064, considerations 8 and 9, the Tribunal held that, in the absence of statutory rules or proven practice providing guidance on how the requirement of due process was to be fulfilled where a staff member who is accused of harassment is on certified sick leave, and given the duty of an organization to investigate harassment complaints, it was reasonable that it could ask a staff member who was on sick leave to comment upon an investigation report if doing so would not have exacerbated the illness which occasioned the grant of sick leave and if the staff concerned was fit to do so […] In the present case, the Tribunal is satisfied that IOS struck a proper balance, considering that the complainant’s interview was accommodated to her needs, and extended over several days. IOS made several attempts to afford the complainant the opportunity to answer questions in writing. Once it became clear that her medical condition prevented her from even responding in writing, IOS opted to limit the scope of the investigation to ‘those allegations which IOS was able to fully discuss with, seek comments from, and present relevant evidence to [the complainant]’.”
Référence(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 4064, 4065
Mots-clés:
Application des règles de procédure; Congé maladie; Devoir de sollicitude; Enquête; Harcèlement; Rapport d'enquête;
Jugement 5152
141e session, 2026
Organisation mondiale de la santé
Extraits: EN,
FR
Texte Intégral Du Jugement: EN,
FR
Synthèse: The complainant seeks a review of the measures taken following the Organization’s acknowledgment of the violation of its duty of care towards him and asks that it be ordered to publish a press release to clear his reputation and to pay him additional amounts in moral damages and legal “fees”.
Considérant 8
Extrait:
The Tribunal cannot, however, accept the complainant’s fourth and last argument that UNAIDS violated its duty of care by placing him on special leave with full pay or that the subsequent extensions thereof were invalid. Pursuant to Staff Rule 650.2, the Executive Director had the authority to place a staff member on special leave with full pay if he considered that it was in the interest of the Organization to do so. There were no other criteria in the applicable provisions limiting the exercise of this discretion by the Executive Director. To suggest that the Executive Director should have given priority, at that time, to the complainant’s interests and the protection of his reputation over those of the Organization would invite the Tribunal to second-guess what was otherwise a reasonable exercise of discretion by the executive head of the Organization faced with the situation that he then had to manage.
Mots-clés:
Congé avec traitement; Devoir de sollicitude; Enquête; Intérêt de l'organisation; Intérêt du fonctionnaire; Réputation de l'organisation;
Considérant 5
Extrait:
The Tribunal agrees with the complainant that the five-month duration of the WHO/IOS preliminary review was excessive and unreasonable, and that the Organization did not investigate promptly the allegations against him. The allegations made were serious; they related to alleged sexual harassment and depicted the complainant as a sexual predator and skirt chaser. By the time the preliminary review was requested from WHO/IOS […], the matter had become public […]. Clearly, time was of the essence, and it was urgent to proceed rapidly, in the interests of both justice in general and the interests of the complainant in particular. The Organization’s duty of care towards him required that the preliminary review proceed without delay. […]. Five months to complete a preliminary review in a matter such as the instant one was unacceptable. […]. The Tribunal finds the answers offered in this regard by the Organization unconvincing. The fact that there was no formal complaint made, that [the accuser] was not a staff member, and therefore not subject to internal rules, or that she could not be compelled to accept to be interviewed are insufficient to relieve the Organization from abiding with its well-recognized duty of care towards its officials in circumstances such as the present.
Mots-clés:
Devoir de sollicitude; Enquête; Retard;
Jugement 5151
141e session, 2026
Organisation mondiale de la santé
Extraits: EN,
FR
Texte Intégral Du Jugement: EN,
FR
Synthèse: The complainant contests the decision to close his harassment complaint.
Considérant 9
Extrait:
“Although the Tribunal’s case law emphasizes that investigations into cases of harassment should be prompt and thorough to protect staff members from unnecessary suffering (see Judgments 4954, consideration 8, and 4253, consideration 3), the length of the procedure may be justified, on a case-by-case basis, by the complexity of the case and the number of witnesses interviewed (see Judgment 4954, consideration 8). In the present case, considering the myriad issues raised by the complainant in his harassment complaint, the number of witnesses interviewed, the volume of documents collected, the one-year duration of the investigation cannot be considered excessive.”
Référence(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 4253, 4954
Mots-clés:
Enquête; Harcèlement; Retard;
Jugement 5122
141e session, 2026
Organisation pour l'interdiction des armes chimiques
Extraits: EN,
FR
Texte Intégral Du Jugement: EN,
FR
Synthèse: The complainant challenges the decision to impose upon him the disciplinary measure of written censure and to bar him from any future employment with the OPCW for alleged breaches of his confidentiality obligations.
Considérant 3
Extrait:
[C]onsistent precedent has it that decisions which are made in disciplinary cases are within the discretionary authority of the executive head of an international organization and are subject to limited review. The Tribunal will interfere only if the decision is tainted by a procedural or substantive flaw. Moreover, where there is an investigation by an investigative body in disciplinary proceedings, the Tribunal’s role is not to reweigh the evidence collected by it, as reserve must be exercised before calling into question the findings of such a body and reviewing its assessment of the evidence. The Tribunal will interfere only in the case of manifest error (see, for example, Judgments 4343, consideration 4, 4106, consideration 12, and 3872, consideration 2). The case law also states, in relation to the question of whether the alleged conduct took place, that the burden of proof rests on an organisation to prove allegations of misconduct beyond a reasonable doubt before a disciplinary sanction can be imposed (see, for example, Judgments 4749, consideration 5, 4227, consideration 6, and 3862, consideration 20).
Référence(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 3862, 3872, 4106, 4227, 4343, 4749
Mots-clés:
Au-delà de tout doute raisonnable; Charge de la preuve; Chef exécutif; Contrôle du Tribunal; Décision; Enquête; Erreur manifeste; Limites; Niveau de preuve; Organe d'enquête; Pouvoir d'appréciation; Rôle du Tribunal; Sanction disciplinaire;
Considérant 17
Extrait:
[U]nder the Tribunal’s case law, a complainant has no general right to legal representation in all circumstances during an investigation (see, for example, Judgment 2589, consideration 7). Moreover, there was no rule that mandated that a subject of an investigation was entitled to legal representation therein.
Référence(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 2589
Mots-clés:
Assistance juridique; Droit; Enquête; Règles de l'organisation;
Jugement 5119
141e session, 2026
Union internationale des télécommunications
Extraits: EN,
FR
Texte Intégral Du Jugement: EN,
FR
Synthèse: The complainant contests ITU’s decision to impose on him the disciplinary measure of dismissal with immediate effect.
Considérant 19
Extrait:
“The Tribunal’s case law recognizes that an accusation of harassment requires an international organization to investigate the matter in a manner designed to ascertain all relevant facts without compromising the good name of the employee and that the employee be given an opportunity to test the evidence put against him or her and to answer the charge made […]. This necessitates, amongst others, that the person accused be kept informed of the content of statements and testimonies gathered as part of the relevant investigation to challenge them if necessary. The Tribunal’s case law accepts, however, that there may be situations in which an organization can, in some circumstances, refuse to provide the subject of disciplinary proceedings with the transcripts of witness interviews without committing a breach of due process […]. The objective is to ensure that the person accused is sufficiently informed of the evidence on which the administration intends to base its decision and that he has an effective opportunity to test that evidence and to defend himself against the allegations of misconduct.”
Mots-clés:
Application des règles de procédure; Enquête; Harcèlement; Procédure disciplinaire; Témoin;
Considérants 21-22
Extrait:
“[T]he Tribunal relevantly observed in Judgment 4914, consideration 13, that a complainant was “mistaken to suggest that he was entitled to participate in the investigation in such a way that he could have, for instance, questioned or cross-examined himself, or through counsel, the persons that the investigator met at that stage of the process. The Tribunal’s case law does not support such an extensive right to an adversarial procedure at the investigation stage of the process as the complainant appears to be suggesting […]”.”
“[E]stablished precedents of the Tribunal […] confirm that an investigator has the duty to ascertain all relevant facts and that the accused person must be given the benefit of the doubt […], which entails that the investigator has to assess not only evidence against the accused person, but also exculpatory evidence […]. In the instant case, the investigation report indicates that exculpatory evidence identified by the complainant was indeed duly and sufficiently considered.
[…] Even though the complainant kept putting forward additional names of colleagues he thought would express positive opinions about their personal collaborations with him, at some point, having conducted the number of interviews that were done, the investigator could reasonably consider that she had gathered sufficient and adequate information on the case. In the context of what transpires from the record, to suggest, as the complainant does, that not all potential exculpatory witnesses were interviewed, or that some of these witness statements were ignored, remains highly insufficient to support an assertion that it amounted to a breach of his due process rights.”
Référence(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 4914
Mots-clés:
Application des règles de procédure; Devoir de sollicitude; Droit d'être entendu; Enquête; Procédure contradictoire;
Considérants 29-30
Extrait:
“An internal appeal body has a duty to address pleas of substance […]. Yet, the Appeal Board report shows that while it apparently identified what it considered as being potential issues on the question of the alleged conflict of interest, it did not resolve these issues as part of its remarks. Similarly, regarding the evidence and the burden of proof, the Appeal Board noted the applicable standard of preponderance of evidence […] and the beyond reasonable doubt standard applied by the Disciplinary Chamber, and even expressed having some doubts on the evidence from both sides. Still, it refrained from explaining what to conclude from these different standards and what these doubts were and amounted to, or from resolving any discrepancies that may have existed in its mind.
[A]n appeal board [is] wrong to consider that it was not competent to ascertain, in its opinion, whether an internal investigative body had correctly assessed the probative value of the documents and information provided by a complainant in support of an internal complaint, and that this error of law had the effect of denying the complainant his right to have the merits of his internal appeal duly considered. The same applies in the present situation.”
Mots-clés:
Droit de recours; Enquête; Erreur manifeste; Moyen; Organe de recours interne; Preuve;
Jugement 5118
141e session, 2026
Union internationale des télécommunications
Extraits: EN,
FR
Texte Intégral Du Jugement: EN,
FR
Synthèse: The complainant contests the decision to close her harassment complaint without carrying out an investigation following a preliminary review.
Mots-clés du jugement
Mots-clés:
Enquête; Harcèlement; Requête admise;
Jugement 5097
141e session, 2026
Laboratoire européen de biologie moléculaire
Extraits: EN,
FR
Texte Intégral Du Jugement: EN,
FR
Synthèse: The complainant challenges the decision to impose on him the disciplinary measure of a letter of warning.
Considérant 18
Extrait:
“[C]ross-examination of witnesses is not considered by the Tribunal’s case law to be a mandatory requirement for the lawfulness of the investigation and the disciplinary proceedings […].”
Mots-clés:
Application des règles de procédure; Enquête; Procédure disciplinaire; Témoin;
Considérant 11
Extrait:
“For the purpose of assessing whether the disciplinary proceedings were commenced in due time, the complainant’s argument that Ms J.H. never lodged a harassment complaint against him is irrelevant, as harassment may well amount to misconduct and an organization may pursue it by its own motion, even in the absence of a report by the alleged victim. Moreover, it is well settled in the case law that an international organization has a duty to provide a safe and adequate working environment for its staff members and that given the serious nature of allegations of harassment, an organization has an obligation to investigate them (see, for example, Judgment 5008, consideration 3).”
Référence(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 5008
Mots-clés:
Enquête; Harcèlement; Obligations de l'organisation; Ouverture d'une enquête;
Jugement 5055
140e session, 2025
Organisation des Nations Unies pour l'éducation, la science et la culture
Extraits: EN,
FR
Texte Intégral Du Jugement: EN,
FR
Synthèse: Le requérant conteste la décision de renvoi sans préavis dont il a fait l’objet.
Mots-clés du jugement
Mots-clés:
Enquête; Procédure disciplinaire; Renvoi sans préavis; Requête admise;
Considérants 5-6
Extrait:
Le Tribunal considère qu’il ressort de l’ensemble des dispositions [applicables], telles qu’elles sont conçues, qu’un examen préalable de toute allégation de faute par le DIR/IOS et une enquête officielle par l’unité d’investigation de ce service sont requis avant que la Directrice générale ne puisse décider d’ouvrir une procédure disciplinaire. L’intervention d’un service autonome chargé de donner un avis en toute indépendance quant au caractère établi et, le cas échéant, fautif des faits reprochés au fonctionnaire apparaît en effet comme une garantie essentielle reconnue à tout membre du personnel visé par des allégations de faute.
Le Tribunal relève du reste, que, comme le fait valoir à juste titre le requérant, le paragraphe 16 du point 11.3 du Manuel RH prévoit qu’une copie du rapport d’enquête doit être annexée à la lettre de notification des charges, ce qui confirme le caractère obligatoire de l’enquête.
Il s’ensuit que l’absence d’intervention de l’IOS dans la phase préalable à l’ouverture de la procédure disciplinaire proprement dite a entaché cette dernière d’un vice de procédure substantiel qui justifie, à lui seul, l’annulation de la décision attaquée.
Il résulte de ce qui précède que la décision de la Directrice générale du 3 juillet 2023 ainsi que celle du 25 mars 2020 doivent être annulées, sans qu’il soit besoin de se prononcer sur les autres moyens de la requête.
Mots-clés:
Annulation de la décision; Enquête; Vice de procédure;
Jugement 5026
140e session, 2025
Organisation mondiale de la santé
Extraits: EN,
FR
Texte Intégral Du Jugement: EN,
FR
Synthèse: Le requérant conteste la décision de l’OMS de lui infliger la sanction disciplinaire de révocation pour faute avec un mois de préavis et le paiement d’une indemnité, ainsi que d’inscrire son nom dans Clear Check, la base de données de l’Organisation des Nations Unies créée pour prévenir le réengagement d’auteurs de harcèlement sexuel.
Mots-clés du jugement
Mots-clés:
Application des règles de procédure; Charge de la preuve; Enquête; Harcèlement; Organe d'enquête; Rapport d'enquête; Requête admise; Retard; Sanction disciplinaire;
Considérant 19
Extrait:
The Tribunal considers that in the instant case, WHO clearly took an excessive and unreasonable amount of time to initiate, perform and conclude the investigation, in violation of its own statutory requirements and in disregard of its general duty not to cause its staff members undue hardship.
This excessive delay was much more than a mere procedural flaw under the circumstances. It adversely impacted the complainant’s right to a full answer and defence, and it prejudiced the integrity of the investigation. Most of the evidence was difficult to obtain as a result, and the record indicates that it indeed led IOS to eventually give up on collecting it. By the time he was informed of the investigation, some three years after the alleged incident, it was too late for the complainant to find additional evidence or identify other potential witnesses. This ended up breaching the complainant’s right to due process.
Mots-clés:
Application des règles de procédure; Enquête; Organe d'enquête; Rapport d'enquête; Retard;
Jugement 5023
140e session, 2025
Organisation internationale de police criminelle
Extraits: EN,
FR
Texte Intégral Du Jugement: EN,
FR
Synthèse: La requérante conteste le rejet de sa plainte pour harcèlement institutionnel.
Considérants 13-14
Extrait:
Le Tribunal considère que la défenderesse fait erreur quand elle affirme que la décision d’ouvrir ou non une enquête lorsqu’elle est saisie d’une plainte pour harcèlement relève du pouvoir discrétionnaire de son chef exécutif. Dans le jugement 4663, au considérant 9 – qui se réfère notamment au considérant 15 du jugement 4207, rendu en formation plénière –, le Tribunal a rappelé qu’il est de jurisprudence constante qu’une organisation internationale a le devoir d’assurer aux membres de son personnel un environnement sûr et adéquat, qu’étant donné la gravité que revêt une plainte pour harcèlement, elle a l’obligation d’engager une enquête rapidement et que celle-ci doit être menée de manière approfondie. Une organisation ne saurait se soustraire à cette obligation, en se retranchant, à tort comme exposé ci-dessus, derrière le fait que les décisions prises en matière de harcèlement relèveraient du seul pouvoir discrétionnaire de son chef exécutif.
Le Tribunal estime en outre qu’en l’espèce la nécessité d’engager, à tout le moins, une évaluation préliminaire de la plainte pour harcèlement institutionnel s’imposait d’autant plus que, d’une part, dans le cadre des plaintes pour harcèlement moral déposées par la requérante […], c’était précisément la procédure qu’Interpol avait jugé nécessaire de suivre et, d’autre part, les enquêteurs désignés pour traiter ces plaintes avaient mis en évidence, dans leurs rapports, des défaillances en termes de communication avec l’intéressée et considéraient que des efforts devaient être faits pour les pallier, ce qui aurait dû inciter l’Organisation à une certaine prudence.
Référence(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 4207, 4663
Mots-clés:
Enquête; Harcèlement institutionnel; Obligations de l'organisation;
Considérants 17-21
Extrait:
[I]l ressort du dossier qu’il est exact d’affirmer que le Secrétaire général a analysé la plainte pour harcèlement institutionnel uniquement dans la perspective d’éventuelles poursuites disciplinaires, sans tenir compte du fait que cette plainte visait, du point de vue de la requérante, à la reconnaissance d’un harcèlement et comportait des revendications explicites de l’intéressée concernant l’impact des comportements dénoncés sur elle. […]
Or, devant ce constat, le Tribunal estime que la défenderesse ne pouvait ignorer que la requérante se plaignait expressément de harcèlement institutionnel à son encontre, que ses dénonciations ne se limitaient pas à l’adoption de mesures disciplinaires, ce qu’elle n’aurait du reste pas pu revendiquer vis-à-vis de l’Organisation elle-même dans le cadre d’une plainte pour harcèlement institutionnel, et que l’impact sur sa situation personnelle et professionnelle était au cœur même de sa démarche (voir, dans le même sens, le jugement 4663, au considérant 10). Il s’ensuit que, dans un tel cas de figure, le Secrétaire général ne pouvait limiter son analyse à la seule question de savoir s’il y avait lieu d’ouvrir une procédure disciplinaire.
Dans le jugement 4900, au considérant 31, le Tribunal a rappelé ce qui suit:
«[C]ette compréhension d’une plainte pour harcèlement, selon laquelle ce qui peut en résulter ne peut se déterminer que du point de vue des personnes visées qui pourraient faire l’objet de mesures administratives ou disciplinaires, fait abstraction de la jurisprudence du Tribunal en la matière, qui rappelle qu’une telle plainte compte également, à titre de partie à la procédure qui est menée au sujet de son bien-fondé, l’auteur de la plainte, et ce, même si ce dernier ne sera pas partie à une éventuelle procédure disciplinaire subséquemment entreprise contre l’auteur des faits de harcèlement reconnus.»
(Voir également, sur ce point, le jugement 4739, au considérant 10.)
Le Tribunal considère que cette jurisprudence trouve également à s’appliquer, mutatis mutandis, en matière de plaintes pour harcèlement institutionnel.
En l’espèce, le Tribunal considère que l’Organisation avait une compréhension erronée de ses obligations en la matière et qu’elle a manifestement commis une erreur de droit en n’examinant la plainte que sous l’angle de l’éventuelle ouverture d’une procédure disciplinaire. Ainsi que le note à juste titre la requérante, si une enquête peut aboutir à l’ouverture d’une procédure disciplinaire, il est juridiquement erroné de prétendre que ce serait là son seul et unique but. […]
Le Tribunal considère qu’Interpol a méconnu le droit de la requérante à ce qu’il soit régulièrement statué sur sa plainte pour harcèlement institutionnel […]. Eu égard à la nature de cette plainte, l’obligation de l’Organisation était d’examiner si l’intéressée avait été victime de harcèlement au regard des faits dénoncés, quelles que soient les conclusions auxquelles elle pouvait parvenir sur la question d’une éventuelle mauvaise conduite ou faute pouvant justifier l’ouverture d’une procédure disciplinaire contre qui que ce soit.
Il ressort de la décision initiale […] et de la décision attaquée […] que le Secrétaire général ne s’est prononcé que sur le plan d’une éventuelle action disciplinaire, ce qui constitue une erreur de droit de sa part, qui vicie à la fois le processus suivi et les décisions qui en ont découlé. Ce faisant, il n’a en réalité ni examiné ni répondu à la question de savoir si la requérante avait été harcelée, selon l’évaluation de sa propre perception, et indépendamment de toute intention de nuire, malveillante ou autre, au regard de toutes les allégations qu’elle avait formulées dans sa plainte.
Dans ses écritures, la défenderesse soutient en outre erronément que le but de la conduite d’une enquête est d’établir la nature et les circonstances de l’affaire afin de déterminer s’il existe suffisamment de preuves pour justifier l’ouverture d’une procédure disciplinaire, qu’il est donc naturel que l’enquête tende vers la recherche de cette réalité sous l’angle de la faute et qu’il n’y a pas d'autre manière de conduire une telle enquête.
Or, en orientant ainsi erronément l’analyse dans la seule perspective des mesures disciplinaires qui pouvaient éventuellement en découler, l’Organisation a commis une nouvelle erreur de droit en recherchant une preuve d’intention de la part des auteurs présumés des actes de harcèlement, ce qui méconnaît, une fois de plus, la jurisprudence bien établie du Tribunal.
Référence(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 4663, 4739, 4900
Mots-clés:
Droit à l'information; Enquête; Harcèlement institutionnel; Obligations de l'organisation;
Jugement 5008
140e session, 2025
Organisation internationale du Travail
Extraits: EN,
FR
Texte Intégral Du Jugement: EN,
FR
Synthèse: Le requérant attaque la décision de le renvoyer pour motif disciplinaire.
Considérant 6
Extrait:
[I]n the absence of a specific deadline, the issue of whether the length of the proceedings should be characterized as excessive, might be relevant only to the question of whether the complainant is entitled to moral damages for undue delay. The complainant has not demonstrated that he suffered moral injury and, thus, he fails to establish the foundation for moral damages […].
Mots-clés:
Enquête; Indemnité pour tort moral; Procédure disciplinaire; Retard; Tort moral;
Considérant 9
Extrait:
[I]t is appropriate to recall the scope of the Tribunal’s review in disciplinary matters and the standard of evidence required for disciplinary convictions. The Tribunal shall not interfere with the findings of an investigative body in disciplinary proceedings unless there was a manifest error […]. In disciplinary matters, the Tribunal has consistently found that the burden of proof rests on an organization, which has to prove allegations of misconduct beyond reasonable doubt before a disciplinary sanction can be imposed […]. The role of the Tribunal is not to assess the evidence itself and determine whether the charge of misconduct has been established beyond reasonable doubt but rather to review the evidence and to assess whether there was evidence available to the relevant decision-maker to reach that conclusion […]. Part of the Tribunal’s role is to assess whether the decision-maker properly applied the standard when evaluating the evidence […].
Mots-clés:
Au-delà de tout doute raisonnable; Charge de la preuve; Enquête; Niveau de preuve; Pouvoir d'appréciation; Procédure disciplinaire; Rôle du Tribunal;
Mots-clés du jugement
Mots-clés:
Enquête; Harcèlement sexuel; Procédure disciplinaire; Requête rejetée; Sanction disciplinaire;
Considérant 6
Extrait:
[T]he Tribunal has consistently stressed the need for international organisations to conduct investigations on allegations of harassment expeditiously and with particular diligence […]. In relation to this obligation, the Tribunal has stated that international organisations have to ensure that an internal body responsible for investigating and reporting on the allegations is properly functioning […]. Therefore, the length of the investigation proceedings should be reasonable, taking into account all the circumstances of the case.
Mots-clés:
Enquête; Harcèlement; Obligations de l'organisation; Ouverture d'une enquête;
Considérant 5
Extrait:
[A]ccording to the Tribunal’s case law, it is sufficient that the accused staff member be informed of the allegations at the beginning of the interview […].
Mots-clés:
Application des règles de procédure; Enquête; Obligation d'information au sujet de l'enquête; Procédure disciplinaire;
Considérant 8
Extrait:
The Tribunal’s precedents have it that staff members must, as a general rule, have access to all evidence on which the authority bases (or intends to base) its decision against them, and, under normal circumstances, such evidence cannot be withheld on grounds of confidentiality. However, where disciplinary proceedings are brought against officials who have been accused of harassment, testimonies and other materials which are deemed to be confidential pursuant to provisions aimed at protecting third parties need not be forwarded to the accused officials, but they must nevertheless be informed of the content of these documents in order to have all the information which they need to defend themselves fully in these proceedings. In order to respect the right of defence, it is sufficient for the officials to have been informed precisely of the allegations made against them and of the content of testimony taken in the course of the investigation, in order that they may effectively challenge the probative value thereof […]. In light of the Tribunal’s case law, due process does not necessarily require that the accused staff be provided with the verbatim transcripts of the interviews of the witnesses […]. In conclusion, it was sufficient that the complainant was provided with an accurate written record of the interviews, and this was done.
Mots-clés:
Application des règles de procédure; Confidentialité; Enquête; Harcèlement; Harcèlement sexuel; Pièce confidentielle; Preuve; Procédure disciplinaire; Témoin;
Considérant 3
Extrait:
[N]one of the three alleged victims lodged a complaint. The two emails expressly indicated their subject as limited to “reporting incident + seeking advice”. Nothing more. They cannot be characterized as a complaint enlivening Circular No. 13/2009. In the absence of complaints of harassment within the meaning of the Circular, it was not applicable.
However, this does not mean that, when aware of misconduct amounting to harassment, the Organization cannot take action by its own motion in the absence of a complaint. It is well settled in the case law that an international organization has a duty to provide a safe and adequate working environment for its staff members and that given the serious nature of allegations of harassment, an organization has an obligation to investigate them […]. Moreover, the investigation must be initiated promptly, conducted thoroughly and the facts must be determined objectively and in their overall context […].
Mots-clés:
Enquête; Harcèlement; Harcèlement sexuel; Obligations de l'organisation; Ouverture d'une enquête;
Jugement 5003
139e session, 2025
Organisation mondiale de la santé
Extraits: EN,
FR
Texte Intégral Du Jugement: EN,
FR
Synthèse: Le requérant conteste la décision de le révoquer avec préavis.
Considérant 5
Extrait:
Firm and constant precedents of the Tribunal have it that, before adopting a disciplinary measure, an international organisation must give the staff member concerned the opportunity to defend herself or himself in adversarial proceedings (see, for example, Judgment 3875, consideration 3). Due process requires that a staff member accused of misconduct be given an opportunity to test the evidence relied upon and, if she or he so wishes, to produce evidence to the contrary. The right to make a defence is necessarily a right to defend oneself before an adverse decision is made, whether by a disciplinary body or the deciding authority (see Judgments 4832, consideration 28, 4343, consideration 13, and 2496, consideration 7). Before disciplinary proceedings are undertaken, the investigator has the duty to ascertain all relevant facts and the accused person must be given the benefit of the doubt (see, for example, Judgments 4697, consideration 12, 4491, consideration 19, and 4011, consideration 9). This implies that the investigator has to assess not only evidence against the accused person, but also exculpatory evidence (see Judgments 4456, considerations 9 and 17, and 4362, consideration 12), and, before this, must allow the accused person to provide exculpatory evidence. In the present case, the complainant’s request to hear witnesses was not even dismissed with a reason, it was ignored completely. […]
It is true that, pursuant to WHO e-Manual, section III.12.4.530, the hearing of witnesses is at the discretion of the GBA, but the GBA must give reasons for its refusal to grant the hearing of witnesses, whilst in the present case the complainant’s request was merely ignored with no grounds at all.
The failure, during the entire process of investigating and evaluating the position of the complainant, to consider hearing the witnesses listed by the complainant is, in the Tribunal’s view, a serious flaw in the process, as some of the charges against the complainant are based only on the report and on the interview of the alleged victim, and one of the charges (namely the one referring to unwelcome hugging) is based on the interview of Mr W. In conclusion, the pleas are well founded to the extent that the complainant’s request to hear witnesses was not considered. It cannot be established, at this stage, what would have been the outcome of the disciplinary proceedings if the witnesses listed by the complainant had been interviewed, namely, it cannot be established whether the findings would have warranted, in any event, the most severe sanction or a less severe sanction. Moreover, the Tribunal, in cases where it found that some of the charges were not proven “beyond reasonable doubt” due to the failure to consider exculpatory evidence, annulled the disciplinary decision in its entirety (see Judgments 4456, considerations 9, 16 and 17, 4453, consideration 15, and 4362, considerations 17 and 18).
Référence(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 2496, 3875, 4343, 4362, 4453, 4456, 4697, 4832
Mots-clés:
Charge de la preuve; Droit d'être entendu; Enquête; Preuves pendant l'enquête; Procédure disciplinaire; Sanction disciplinaire;
Jugement 5001
139e session, 2025
Organisation mondiale de la santé
Extraits: EN,
FR
Texte Intégral Du Jugement: EN,
FR
Synthèse: La requérante conteste la décision de la réaffecter dans le cadre du Programme de mobilité 2019.
Considérant 9
Extrait:
The complainant appears to have rejected the proposal of WHO/CRE that her allegations be referred to the Office of Internal Oversight Services (IOS) for investigation, preferring to seek an informal solution. […] [T]he documents submitted with the additional submissions by the parties, nor indeed the evidence in the record, has the complainant provided evidence of sufficient quality or weight to persuade the Tribunal that the decision to reassign her to Malawi was taken because of bias, bad faith, retaliation, as a hidden disciplinary sanction and/or abuse of authority, as she alleges. In particular, although it is significant that WHO/CRE recommended that the complainant be “protected preventatively” from retaliation based on a prima facie assessment of her allegations, this does not, in itself, establish that the alleged retaliation occurred.
Mots-clés:
Charge de la preuve; Enquête; Représailles;
Jugement 5000
139e session, 2025
Organisation mondiale de la santé
Extraits: EN,
FR
Texte Intégral Du Jugement: EN,
FR
Synthèse: Le requérant conteste le «rejet implicite» de sa demande d’ouverture d’une enquête sur la faute grave qu’aurait commise le Sous-Directeur général au Siège de l’OMS à Genève; la conclusion du Bureau de la conformité, de la gestion des risques et de l’éthique selon laquelle il n’avait pas subi de représailles et n’avait pas droit à une protection contre des actes de représailles; et la décision de l’OMS d’accepter sa démission, ce qui, selon lui, constitue un licenciement implicite.
Considérant 22
Extrait:
[T]he complainant contends that the Organization implicitly rejected his request for an investigation into Mr G. for retaliation, unethical conduct and conflict of interest. […] The Tribunal notes that the complainant reported the matter to IOS on 5 November 2020 and to the United Nations Office of Internal Oversight Services (UN/OIOS) on 6 December 2020; on 23 December 2020, he consented to the UN/OIOS sharing his report with IOS. There is no evidence in the record that IOS issued an implied decision containing a refusal to investigate. The IOS decision was adopted later, on 24 May 2023, and the complainant was notified on 28 July 2023 that the case had been closed. On 25 September 2023, he filed a separate request for review of this decision which was still pending at the time of the filing of the present complaint. Thus, on the one hand, the 24 May 2023 decision to close the investigation into Mr G. is outside the scope of the present complaint, and, on the other hand, the claim that the Organization implicitly rejected his request for investigation, is irreceivable for lack of a challengeable decision at the time this complaint was filed.
Mots-clés:
Décision implicite; Enquête; Procédures parallèles; Recevabilité de la requête;
Jugement 4967
139e session, 2025
Organisation mondiale de la propriété intellectuelle
Extraits: EN,
FR
Texte Intégral Du Jugement: EN,
FR
Synthèse: La requérante conteste la décision, prise sans qu’une enquête soit menée, de rejeter sa plainte pour harcèlement contre M. R. V.
Considérant 9
Extrait:
In the absence of prima facie evidence, as confirmed by the WAB, and this was open on its analysis, the Director General had no obligation to refer the complainant’s complaint of harassment against Mr R.V. for an independent investigation. This approach has been endorsed by the Tribunal (see Judgments 4746, consideration 9, and 3640, consideration 5).
Référence(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 3640, 4746
Mots-clés:
Enquête; Harcèlement;
Jugement 4964
139e session, 2025
Organisation mondiale de la propriété intellectuelle
Extraits: EN,
FR
Texte Intégral Du Jugement: EN,
FR
Synthèse: La requérante conteste la décision, prise à l’issue d’une enquête, de rejeter sa plainte pour harcèlement et harcèlement sexuel contre M. E.
Considérant 11
Extrait:
[I]t is appropriate to note the approach of the Tribunal to findings of fact made by investigative bodies particularly where individuals have been interviewed by the investigator. The Tribunal gives deference to the body and its findings of fact and will only interfere with its findings in the case of manifest error (see, for example, Judgment 4674, consideration 5). That is not to suggest that conclusions reached from the facts as found, particularly if they involve a legal element, are to be afforded the same status.
Référence(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 4674
Mots-clés:
Compétence du Tribunal; Contrôle du Tribunal; Enquête; Rôle du Tribunal;
Considérants 19-20
Extrait:
As to the first claim seeking a further investigation, there is considerable merit in making such an order given the failings of the initial investigation upon which much of the subsequent decision-making was based, particularly having regard to the conclusions reached by the investigator and subsequently repeated, in substance by WAB and the Director General. However, the time when the relevant events occurred is now well and truly in the past. As the Tribunal said in Judgment 4035, consideration 4: “the Tribunal considers that it was […] no longer possible to conduct such an investigation, not only because the [person the subject of the allegations] had left the Organization, but also because of the time that had elapsed since the incidents in question, which in particular made it difficult to gather reliable testimony from witnesses as to whether those incidents occurred and how third parties may have perceived them. The Tribunal has already found in similar cases that […] it is not appropriate to order that an investigation be re-opened if that course would raise practical difficulties of this nature (see, for example […] Judgment 3639, [considerations] 8 to 10).” For similar reasons, no further investigation will be ordered in this matter. However, the complainant is entitled to compensation for the failure of the investigation process and the subsequent decision-making based on it. The Tribunal assesses moral damages for this in the sum of 25,000 Swiss francs.
Référence(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 3639
Mots-clés:
Enquête; Harcèlement; Indemnité pour tort moral; Renvoi à l'organisation; Tort moral;
Mots-clés du jugement
Mots-clés:
Enquête; Harcèlement; Harcèlement sexuel; Requête admise;
Jugement 4954
139e session, 2025
Agence internationale de l'énergie atomique
Extraits: EN,
FR
Texte Intégral Du Jugement: EN,
FR
Synthèse: Le requérant conteste la décision de classer sa plainte pour harcèlement et de ne pas lui communiquer une copie du rapport d’enquête.
Considérant 8
Extrait:
[T]he Tribunal’s case law emphasizes that investigations into cases of harassment in particular should be prompt and thorough, in order to protect staff members from unnecessary suffering, but attention must also be paid to thoroughness and procedure (see, for example, Judgment 4253, consideration 3). The complainant argues that the length of the investigation, over nine months, constituted an excessive delay. Given the complexity of the case and the fact that 14 witnesses were interviewed, the nine-month period to complete the harassment investigation in the present case is not considered inordinate or excessive delay.
Référence(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 4253
Mots-clés:
Enquête; Harcèlement; Retard;
Considérants 5-7
Extrait:
The IAEA’s failure to disclose to the complainant the OIOS’s investigation report was central to the case. […] [T]he Tribunal’s case law obliges an organisation to communicate to the official who has filed a harassment complaint the report drawn up at the end of the investigation (see, for example, Judgment 3347, considerations 19 and 20) […] Moreover, the Tribunal has clarified in its case law that an international organisation is bound to grant a request from the staff member concerned for a copy of the report delivered by the investigative body at the end of an investigation into a harassment complaint, even if that means the report must be redacted in order to maintain the confidentiality of some aspects of the investigation, in particular the testimony gathered during that investigation (see, in particular, Judgments 4547, consideration 10) […] In the present case, the complainant requested a copy of the OIOS investigation report himself and through his counsel. This was in the context of him having launched his complaint of harassment after he left the employment of the IAEA but in which he sought significant amount of compensation for the harassment he alleged. These requests were rejected by the IAEA on the grounds of confidentiality and aimed at protecting the interests of third parties. Considering that the Director General based the impugned decision on the OIOS assessment report, but failed to provide the complainant with this report, even in a redacted form, the IAEA unlawfully deprived the complainant of the opportunity to review the report and the witness statements gathered, provide comments, and challenge the findings of the investigation, which is essential to the complainant’s due process rights. The limited communication offered to explain to him in more detail the OIOS findings does not meet the disclosure requirement set by the Tribunal’s case law. It follows that the impugned decision, tainted by procedural flaws, must be set aside […].
Référence(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 3347, 4547
Mots-clés:
Application des règles de procédure; Enquête; Harcèlement; Production des preuves; Rapport d'enquête;
Jugement 4944
139e session, 2025
Organisation des Nations Unies pour l'alimentation et l'agriculture
Extraits: EN,
FR
Texte Intégral Du Jugement: EN,
FR
Synthèse: La requérante conteste la décision de rejeter son recours interne, dans lequel elle a affirmé, entre autres, que les enquêtes menées et ordonnées par le Programme alimentaire mondial (PAM), programme subsidiaire autonome commun à l’Organisation des Nations Unies et à la FAO, concernant sa plainte pour viol étaient ultra vires et que sa plainte aurait dû être renvoyée aux autorités judiciaires nationales ou internationales pour enquête.
Considérant 7
Extrait:
The complainant further contends that, in the present case, rather than investigating the case, the FAO should have referred it to national or international judicial authorities. This argument is unfounded. As noted above, the applicable legal framework does not compel the FAO to report to the police and national judicial authority facts that allegedly amount to crimes punishable on the basis of the local applicable criminal law. The applicable rules and policies establish that the FAO has the discretionary power to report a breach of national laws to the relevant national authorities on a case-by-case basis. An assessment on a case-by-case basis required, for example, an evaluation, by the Organization, of whether national proceedings might help to ensure a prompt investigation, useful for the purposes of the internal proceedings set up for the protection of the victim and the punishment of the perpetrator. The complainant has not established to the Tribunal’s satisfaction that, in the present case, this discretionary power was exercised unlawfully. She was, in any event, able to report directly to the local police and judicial authority, if she had wanted to.
Mots-clés:
Enquête; Harcèlement sexuel; Pouvoir d'appréciation;
Considérant 8
Extrait:
As to the arguments alleging errors of fact or law in the investigation, firstly, the Tribunal observes that it will not address the arguments concerning the first investigation as they are outside the scope of the present case. The first investigation was replaced by the second one, and the complainant withdrew her internal appeal against the outcome of the first investigation. Thus, there is no final decision based on the outcome of the first investigation, open to challenge before the Tribunal (Article VII, paragraph 1, of the Tribunal’s Statute).
Mots-clés:
Décision définitive; Enquête;
Considérant 6
Extrait:
As to the complainant’s contention that the FAO was not allowed to hire an external investigator for investigating into [an allegation of rape], the Tribunal reiterates that the investigation was administrative in character, and that nothing in the rules prevented the FAO from engaging external investigators. In the circumstances of the case, the hiring of external investigators was reasonable and appropriate, in light of the complexity and of the sensitivity of the case.
Mots-clés:
Enquête; Harcèlement sexuel; Organe d'enquête;
Considérant 6
Extrait:
The complainant’s contention that the investigations conducted and mandated by the Organization [into her complaint of rape] were ultra vires and went beyond the scope of an administrative investigation, is misconceived. Firstly, the Tribunal notes that the FAO’s legal framework enshrined a wide definition of sexual harassment, which included rape, and compelled the Organization to promptly and thoroughly investigate reports of sexual assault […] Secondly, the Tribunal notes that pursuant to the relevant provisions of the FAO Staff Rules and Regulations, the fact that deeds of staff members amount to a violation of national laws including crimes as defined by competent national laws, does not impede the FAO from taking action and investigating such deeds as misconduct for the purposes of its internal legal framework. Misconduct may well be relevant and be punishable both by national law and by the legal framework of an international organization. […] [T]he Organization is entitled to carry out an investigation into episodes of sexual harassment, including involving violence or lack of consent, even though such episodes may amount to rape according to the relevant national criminal laws. As a matter of fact, the same deed (here the alleged rape) may be regarded simultaneously as a crime according to the relevant national laws and as misconduct according to the legal framework of an international organization. Accordingly, such a deed may well be the subject matter of a criminal investigation and of internal proceedings (through an investigation into a harassment complaint and potential disciplinary proceedings) in parallel or in sequence, as can be inferred from paragraph 44 of the Standards of Conduct for the International Civil Service, quoted in Section 304 of the FAO Staff Rules and Regulations. The fact that a deed may amount to a crime potentially subject to criminal investigation to be carried out by the competent national authority does not impede an international organization from taking action for the purposes of its internal rules, and, in particular, for the purpose of conducting a prompt and thorough investigation upon a report of harassment/misconduct. There are no internal rules or policies that prevent the FAO from investigating misconduct amounting to a crime, for the purposes and the effects of internal investigation and measures. In such a case, the investigation is not of a criminal nature, and it is carried out without prejudice for further – concurrent, earlier or subsequent – action taken by the competent national authority. Thus, the allegation that, in the present case, the investigations mandated and conducted by WFP were ultra vires and beyond the Organization’s mandate, is unfounded.
Mots-clés:
Enquête; Faute; Harcèlement; Harcèlement sexuel; Pouvoir d'appréciation; Procédure disciplinaire;
Mots-clés du jugement
Mots-clés:
Enquête; Harcèlement sexuel; Requête rejetée;
Jugement 4923
139e session, 2025
Organisation des Nations Unies pour l'éducation, la science et la culture
Extraits: EN,
FR
Texte Intégral Du Jugement: EN,
FR
Synthèse: Le requérant conteste la décision de classer sa plainte pour propos mensongers.
Considérants 4-6
Extrait:
[E]n estimant […] qu’il ne relevait pas de sa mission consultative de vérifier le bien-fondé de l’appréciation des éléments de preuve à laquelle s’était livré [le Service d’évaluation et d’audit], le Conseil a commis une erreur de droit.
Il semble que cette considération ait reposé, dans l’esprit des auteurs de l’avis, sur la jurisprudence bien établie du Tribunal selon laquelle il ne lui appartient pas de réévaluer les preuves analysées par un organe d’enquête et les conclusions d’un tel organe méritent, sauf à ce qu’elles aient été irrégulièrement établies ou révèlent une erreur manifeste, la plus grande déférence de sa part (voir, par exemple, les jugements 4703, au considérant 8, 4291, au considérant 12, 4091, au considérant 17, ou 3593, au considérant 12). Mais cette jurisprudence concerne le rôle du Tribunal lui-même, et non celui d’un organe de recours tel que le Conseil d’appel.
S’expliquant notamment par le fait que le Tribunal n’a pas vocation à procéder à des investigations analogues à celles d’un organe d’enquête et par l’idée suivant laquelle il n’est pas le mieux placé pour évaluer la fiabilité des déclarations des personnes éventuellement entendues dans le cadre d’une enquête, la jurisprudence en question renvoie, plus généralement, aux particularités et limites de la mission juridictionnelle dévolue au Tribunal. Or, ces spécificités ne valent pas pour les organes de recours et, comme le Tribunal a eu maintes fois l’occasion de l’affirmer, un tel organe se méprend lorsque, pour définir son propre rôle, il se réfère aux restrictions qui s’appliquent, dans certaines hypothèses, au contrôle juridictionnel des décisions administratives (voir, par exemple, les jugements 3161, au considérant 5, ou 3077, au considérant 3). En effet, si le Tribunal a pour seule mission de vérifier la légalité de ces décisions et se prononce, en principe, exclusivement en droit, il appartient aux organes de recours, qui sont pour leur part investis d’un pouvoir de contrôle s’étendant au réexamen complet de celles-ci, de déterminer si la décision qui leur est soumise était, à leurs yeux, celle qu’il convenait effectivement de prendre ou si, au vu du dossier, il aurait fallu en prendre une autre (voir, par exemple, les jugements 3161, au considérant 6, ou 3032, au considérant 10). Il n’en va différemment que si les règles régissant l’organe de recours restreignent ce pouvoir (voir, par exemple, les jugements 3318, au considérant 5, ou 3077, au considérant 3), ce qui n’est pas le cas du Conseil d’appel de l’UNESCO dans le domaine considéré.
Dès lors, c’est à tort que le Conseil d’appel a estimé qu’il n’avait pas compétence pour examiner, dans le cadre de son avis, si le directeur de l’IOS avait correctement apprécié la valeur probante des documents et éléments d’information fournis par le requérant à l’appui de sa plainte. En outre, il y a lieu de souligner que l’erreur de droit ainsi commise, qui a conduit le Conseil à refuser de vérifier pleinement la pertinence du classement de la plainte litigieuse, a eu pour effet de priver l’intéressé de son droit à voir le bien-fondé de son recours interne dûment examiné par cet organe.
Référence(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 3032, 3077, 3161, 3318, 3593, 4091, 4291, 4703
Mots-clés:
Compétence du Tribunal; Enquête; Erreur manifeste; Organe de recours interne; Preuve;
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 | suivant >
|
