29 October 2012
The story of Mr. Muratore, a former professional staffer of
the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human
Rights – OHCHR - is a great testament to the
continuing controversy of the interconnection of current
ineffective accountability mechanisms for oversight of the
UN and the limitations of the UN judiciary to provide legal
remedies that are deemed necessary.
Rated as belonging to the best 2% of UN staff in 2003, Mr.
Muratore lost his job in 2006 when he complained through UN
internal control channels about some 140 professional posts
which had been attributed by OHCHR to candidates who would
have not been selected had the proper rules been followed
during a recruitment scheme called “Post Regularization
Exercise”.
Mr. Muratore told UNJustice that “the
fraud was organized in 2005 – 2006 by a group of UN
employees, and its negative financial implications continue
to date: as result, at the very least approximately USD 135
million of public funds were embezzled. It all started when
OHCHR, UNOG (the
UN Office in Geneva), and UN-OHRM (the UN Office for Human
Resources Management) organized the so-called OHCHR Post
Regularization Exercise, whereby 132 regular professional
posts at P3, P4 and P5 levels were assigned in derogation to
applicable UN recruitment rules and procedures.
Such derogation treated temporary staff members holding
Geneva OHCHR contracts older than November 30, 2003 as
«internal candidates»,
contrary to applicable UN rules. This was on the basis of
an ad hoc «agreement
between OHCHR and OHRM»,
as some senior OHCHR officials explained to Geneva staff.
Shortly after the conclusion of the Post Regularization
Exercise, in April 2006, I learned from the OHCHR Chair of
the Steering Committee on post regularization, that the
above-mentioned agreement did not exist. Therefore, the
whole exercise was illegal. I reported the facts the moment
I learned of them to the then Deputy High Commissioner; I
also wrote to the United Nations Joint Inspection Unit, to
the United Nations Office for Internal Oversight, to the UN
Ethics Office and to the UN Ombudsman. This was to no avail,
as they refused to intervene.
My reports led only to increasing forms of retaliation
against me. I was even intimidated by a staff member who
told me very bluntly that my chances of continuing my career
at OHCHR were close to zero, as I was «perceived
as speaking too much».
A few weeks later, in fact, my contract was brought to an
end, despite my excellent past professional evaluations in
the UN system, the availability of funds for the post I
occupied, and the existence of administrative promises of
renewal”.
Six years later, Mr. Muratore eventually obtained a
favourable judgment by the UNDT, which declared that "the
regularization exercise was illegal" and ruled that he had
“suffered significant material damage, as well as a high
degree of moral damage.” Moreover, the court found that
“there was a bias against” him and he was “deprived of a
very real chance of obtaining continuing employment” [UNDT/2011/129].
However, despite awarding him financial compensation – a
comparatively petty sum of seven months’ net base salary -
the UNDT didn’t concern itself with the effects of an
unlawful decision which is still in place, and which
according to Mr. Muratore “is wasting international
taxpayers’ money at the appalling rate of at least USD 20
million per year”. Furthermore, neither has the tribunal
ordered his reinstatement as Human Rights Officer.
The UN views its whistleblower protection policy as one of
its most important internal reform programmes but, like the
majority of those persons who have contacted UNJustice, Mr.
Muratore explained that his career was destroyed when he
blew the whistle on the Organization and that this has
created insurmountable difficulties and unwarranted
privations also for his family. Under the circumstances,
Muratore’s battle for justice and dignity is far from over.
“I am above all seeking my rehabilitation and reinstatement
as Human Rights Officer,” he said to UNJustice. “I have
reported several violations of the rules and of my human
rights, I have lost my job because of that. Now UNDT has
ruled that I was right, but I have not got my job back and
those who violated the rules are still there. Is this
acceptable at the UN Office of the High Commissioner for
Human Rights? Well, it seems it is, but it shouldn't be
tolerated in my view.”
After the UNAT recently reaffirmed the UNDT judgment [UNAT/2012/245],
Muratore drew his concern to the attention of the head of
his former agency, UN Human Rights High Commissioner Navi
Pillay. She has not replied yet.
The hope is that the High Commissioner will give priority
consideration in other applications for OHCHR posts to Mr.
Muratore, who has not been selected again for the various UN
jobs for which he has applied. The OHCHR should also
commence as a matter of urgency an independent, impartial,
thorough and effective investigation into all aspects of
this “Post Regularization Exercise”, particularly to
ensure that public resources are put to the best possible
use during the economic crisis that has affected the world
community.
UNJustice notes that during the past few years the General
Assembly has repeatedly called on the Secretary-General to
report on measures in place to provide for the
accountability of officials who cause financial loss to the
Organization, including recovery action, as well as actions
taken to enforce such accountability. These laudable
initiatives risk becoming meaningless since it is widely
believed that the accountability of UN officials too often
remains in the realm of “the broad discretion of the
Secretary-General in disciplinary matters” – as it is
defined the current UN Secretariat work context, and is not
real or substantial.
UNJustice is also very concerned about the well-being of
those men and women who risk their professional lives and
livelihoods by seeking to expose wrongdoing within the
Organization, for which they should be commended, not
punished. UNJustice believes that the opportunity to ensure
proper remedies are provided for Mr. Muratore, and to other
innocent persons when their fundamental rights are violated
by the administrative authority of the Organization, would
be an indication that it is possible to reverse a trend
which is troubling all those who hold close to their hearts
and live by the ideals and proper functioning of the UN.
Related information:
