Blog

Appeal Form

A. Appellants:

(i) if an individual(s)

Full name

Muthuswami et al (Appellants of the Common Cause Appeal # UNAT 2009-001, which was heard on 22 June 2010 + many other UN retirees)

Date of birth

1923 – 1940

Nationality

USA, Canada, India, etc.

Employment status or relationship to staff member if relying on his/her rights

UN Retirees since June 1983 ..

Human Rights Activists

Official index number

Retiree # R/…..

Dept/Office/Section

Not Applicable

Representative (attach authorization)

Not Applicable

Address for service of documents

Florida, Montreal, Canada, Bangaluru, Chennai, etc.

(ii) if an Organization

Name

Not Applicable

Representative

Address for service of documents

B. Respondent

(i) Organization

UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY

(ii) Individual

Name

REPRESENTATED BY ITS SECRETARY GENERAL

C. Decision under appeal

Date of decision

24 Dec 2008 & 16 Dec 2009

UNDT Judgement Number or Number of Annexed decision

UN GA Resolutions # A/RES/63/253 of 24 Dec 2008 – promulgating the UNAT Statute and # A/RES/64/119 – establishing the rules of procedures of the UNAT

D. Pleas

Relief claimed

(Set out the remediable injustice and substantive relief sought):

• What is claimed is true “justice” in the system of governance.

1. A year or so working of the UNDT & UNAT have shown clearly that the reformed system lacks the teeth and the will to perform effectively, except for a few individual judges whose wisdom and independence deserve our salute and appreciation. The problem is that these very few individual judges may not survive their full term.

2. Of all the shortcomings, the reformed system faces a few important formidable challenges that will make the system unable succeed. This is indeed the failure of the UNGA which failed to establish a flawless system in the first place.

3. The hierarchical levels of the judges being D2; their decisions, suggestions, and judgments are least likely to be honored or accepted by the chiefs of UN divisions, or UN funds and programmes, who are all of higher “ego” status and levels of ASGs and USGs. How come the UNGA could not be sensitive to such a simple human psychology?

4. UNGA should have decided on a consolidated compact of compensation, nothing to do with the existing ICSC salary structures? UNDT/UNAT judges should be engaged outside of the abused 100, 200 and 300 series staff rules. The judges should be taking oath of office in the presence of the President of the GA, not with Secretary General.

5. Related to the above situation (described in 4 above), even if the judgments are impacting on the middle level section heads etc. they are also likely be shielded by the chiefs to serve their ego status and avoid public exposure.

6. In other words, it is difficult to change the pre-wired mindset that the decisions coming out of SG/DSG/USG/ASGs or those supported by these elite groups are “absolute”. No-one can question!

7. So long as the OAJ, incl. UNDT and UNAT are being funded by the same budgetary norms and controls that are under the jurisdiction of the powerful bureaucracy, so long as the OAJ house-keeping and staff and their issues being financed, promoted, transferred, serviced etc. by the same powerful bureaucracy, no real “justice” will ever take roots in the UN system.

8. The way forward is to make the reformed UN Internal Justice System truly effective, independent and transparent, fully equipped with necessary resources and powers to endorse/implement its judgments and decisions without fear or favour. The governance of the OAJ should be totally independent and directly accountable to the UNGA.

9. In essence, let the “rule of law” begin to blossom at home, inside the UN corridors. UNGA should vote independent resource base, its use and accountability to operate the internal justice system, should be totally disconnected from the existing bureaucratic system control. The whole Internal Justice System must be answerable only to the UNGA, no one else.

10. Make sure that UNDT and UNAT judges are of Deputy Secretary General rank and no less. It is a lot cheaper and effective to pay top price for good and independent judges.

11. UNGA should not fail to stipulate the norms and criteria of its own Universal Chapter of the Judge (1999) that should govern the judicial independence and access to justice.

12. Why was it not possible to spell out and enforce the basic principles on the independence of the judiciary of the Internal Judicial System, as well as those described in the UN Universal Charter for the Judges, endorsed thru several UNGA resolutions in 80s and 90s?

13. Let the UN General Assembly open their big bold eyes, see things in the true perspective, behave rationally, logically and independently, and NOT to succumb to the pre-cooked documentation and resolutions prepared by the same bureaucracy.

14. If the present flawed system is allowed to continue, not only faith in the UN internal justice system will fail, but in the collective wisdom of UNGA as well will likely wither away.

Behold and beware!

Brief

The above plea detail itself could serve the necessary brief, reiterating that it is not for personal gain or profit this appeal is being made, but for the upholding of true justice and eliminate the “remediable/removable injustices” in the system.

E. Supporting documents

(a) List

Annex number

Title

Date

Nature

Symbol number

1

Review Panel Judges see a culture of UN secrecy

16 June 2010

NYT Column written by Neil MacFarquar www.NYtimes.com Diplomatic Memo

This and below articles are easily accessible through internet

2

UN Justice, behind the Facade

30 March

2010

Written by UNPost and displayed on their website as of that date

3

UN Justice and Secrecy

22 March

2010

Written by UNPost and displayed on their website as of that date

(b) List of translated documents included in part (a)

Annex number

Name and qualifications of translator

NONE

F. Request for oral hearings

Is oral hearing requested?

Yes/No (strike out inapplicable)

It is really up to the system to decide if they want to learn the truth as to how the outside world perceives the system, and want to grow and develop a truly transparent democratic system. Do not make the oral hearing as another formality.

Reasons for request

Set out reasons:

1. Make internal self-analysis of the dynamics within the Internal Justice System by the UNDT and UNAT judges, totally unfettered, and let us hear them honestly.

2. Only when the UNDT/UNAT judges can collectively gather the strength to tell the truth, only then the system has a chance of survival as a truly independent and transparent system.

3. Lest, it is just another facade, needlessly wasting taxpayers’ good money being poured over another bad system or a system of dubious characteristics.

4. Can the UN afford to become a show-case of failed internal justice system and derided by all as a failed model once again?

G. Signature and certification

The Appellant or his/her legal representative certifies:

(a) That a properly signed original Appeal Form, together with all annexes thereto, can be delivered to the Registrar, either in hard copy or electronically;

(b) That all copies submitted to the Registrar are true copies of the originals

(all in English).

_VMS___________________________________________

Signature and full name of Appellant or Representative Date 15 July 2010

_VMS______________________________

Full name of Appellant or Representative

_Chennai 6000 41, India –

email: vmuthuswami@gmail.com; vmuthuswami@live.com;

Address for service of documents

As above.

* * * * *