Cookies Policy
X

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

From Advisory Opinions to Binding Decisions: The new Appeal Mechanism of the Un system of Administration of Justice

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

In 2009 the United Nations launched a new two-tier system of administration of justice. The system is composed of two standing bodies, the United Nations Dispute Tribunal (UNDT) and the United Nations Appeals Tribunal (UNApT), the latter acting as an appeals mechanism against decisions of the UNDT. The former system foresaw the United Nations Administrative Tribunal (UNAT) as the sole body of administration of justice within the UN, while the International Court of Justice (ICJ) acted as review mechanism on the decisions of the UNAT. However, this review system was abolished in 1995 and, since then, no option was available to unsuccessful (or partially successful) staff members for having a UNAT judgment reviewed.

The lack of any option for review led to criticisms and instances for reform of the whole system, which eventually led to the establishment of a Redesign Panel, which suggested the establishment of a two-tier system of administration of justice, with the aim of meeting the 'basic standards of due process established in international human rights instruments'. The recently established Appeals Tribunal should fill the gap created by the abolition of the ICJ competence to review the judgments rendered by the UNAT.

This article evaluates the improvement to the system represented by the establishment of the United Nations Appeals Tribunal in three main steps. The first is the identification of the shortcomings of the previous review mechanism before the ICJ. The second is the overview of the problems of the former system of administration of justice within the UN. The third and final step is the analysis of the scope of jurisdiction of the new UNApT.

Affiliations: 1: Lecturer, University of Leicester, UK;, Email: paolo.vargiu@le.ac.uk

10.1163/157237410X543341
/content/journals/10.1163/157237410x543341
dcterms_title,pub_keyword,dcterms_description,pub_author
6
3
Loading
Loading

Full text loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/157237410x543341
Loading

Data & Media loading...

http://brill.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1163/157237410x543341
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/157237410x543341
2010-12-01
2016-12-10

Sign-in

Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to ToC alert
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
     
    International Organizations Law Review — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation