A Serial Kisser in the UN: When Harassment Is Dismissed as Festive Fun

⚠️ Trigger Warning: This article contains detailed descriptions of workplace sexual harassment, which may be distressing to some readers, especially survivors of similar experiences. Please proceed with caution and prioritize your well-being.

“I’m a serial kisser.”

These were the chilling words of AAY, a P-5 level United Nations staff member, at UNHQ in New Yorkwhen describing his behavior during a farewell party at the United Nations headquarters in 2017. AAY’s actions that evening went far beyond social decorum, as he admitted to forcibly kissing, attempting to kiss, and physically restraining several female colleagues, leaving them shaken and traumatized.

In a UNAT judgment issued last week, AAY v. Secretary-General of the United Nations, Judgment No. 2024-UNAT-1493, the Appeals Tribunal reversed a previous UNDT judgment (Applicant v. Secretary-General of the United Nations, UNDT/2023/111) that astonishingly justified the actions of the “serial kisser” because they occurred in a festive context. The UNDT, presided over by Judge Margaret Tibulya, ruled that AAY’s actions could not “reasonably be perceived to cause offence or humiliation, let alone to give any sexual connotation to the conduct,” given the festive nature of the event. 

This rationale, implying that workplace harassment is excusable at a party, is as baffling as it is dangerous.

Bias in Judgment: How Cultural Disparities and Selection Failures Undermine the UNDT

What does this mean for female staff members of the United Nations?

According to this logic, if you attend an end-of-year party or a Christmas gathering, and your boss or colleague forces himself on you, attempts to kiss you, or chases you down a hallway, you should simply brush it off.

Maybe so says the UN tribunal, as the “festive context” seems to render such behavior acceptable. One might sarcastically conclude that this is the justice system’s way of reminding women to avoid social gatherings entirely—lest they accidentally wander into a no-rules zone where basic human dignity no longer applies.

Are we moving forward or backward with this system of justice? A tribunal tasked with protecting the rights and dignity of United Nations staff instead normalized behavior that undermines safety and equality in the workplace. If workplace sexual harassment can be brushed aside as “festive,” one must question the integrity of the system itself.

What could have caused Judge Tibulya to be blinded in her judgment? While UNDT judges are selected based on recommendations from the Internal Justice Council, emphasizing high moral character, impartiality, and geographical representation, this process does not eliminate the potential for judges to bring their own cultural biases and preconceptions into their decisions.

Judges, like all individuals, carry their own perspectives and values, which may not always align with the principles of justice and equality upheld by the United Nations. Perhaps it is time to include specific training for UNDT judges not only on the organization’s zero-tolerance policies but also on recognizing and mitigating their own biases to ensure their decisions reflect UN values and uphold fairness.

How else can they understand that the setting of the misconduct does not absolve the perpetrator of responsibility? It’s alarming that in 2024, we are forced to reexamine the very basics of workplace ethics and accountability.

AAY’s admissions to investigators were nothing short of appalling. He admitted, “I was trying to kiss her, and that’s why she was retracting,” and “I kissed her or I managed to kiss her on the forehead…she retracted, you know just leaning on the back.” When questioned about holding AA’s face and forcing a kiss on her, he casually replied, “Yeah, that’s how it went actually,” and added, “it’s like what you do when you kiss someone, you take the face and then you kiss him.” Shockingly, he downplayed the incident further, remarking, “It was not like this was the most romantic moment in my life let’s say.”

Despite these confessions, corroborated by testimony from the victims, the United Nations Dispute Tribunal (UNDT) found that the evidence did not meet the threshold for establishing misconduct. Astonishingly, the tribunal rationalized its decision by stating that the incidents occurred in a “festive context,” as though the celebratory atmosphere excused AAY’s actions.

Serial Kisser’s Defense: It Was All Just Festive Fun

AAY’s behavior, by his own account, included intrusive and unwelcome physical advances toward three female staff members. Excerpts from the testimonies of these three women are chilling:

• AA: “I kept on resisting then he … sort of forced my head down and kissed me on the forehead.”
• BB: “He grabbed my face in front of everyone … my instinct at that moment was to freeze … it could have been a bit of an out-of-body experience.”
• CC: “He kept asking, ‘Did I kiss you tonight? Let me kiss you.’ I said, ‘I’m not interested.’ I started shouting, ‘I’m not interested.’ He pulled my hands apart forcefully. I felt it was impossible for me to get out of that grip.”
• CC (continued): “He fell on me, and I used all my strength to push him away. I almost bent completely back trying to avoid him. His whole body was on top of me, and I felt utterly trapped.”

These women’s testimonies highlight the physical and psychological trauma they endured. CC described the night as “traumatic,” adding that she “was utterly shocked… like this is my office space and colleagues who I saw every day.” The lingering impact of the event was severe, with victims reporting sleepless nights, anxiety attacks, and feelings of helplessness.

Excusing Harassment: A Dangerous Message from the UNDT

The UNDT’s handling of this case is nothing short of a dereliction of justice. By dismissing clear evidence of misconduct and prioritizing flimsy contextual justifications over the dignity, safety, and rights of the victims, the tribunal has sent an unacceptable and dangerous message. Allowing harassment to be excused under the guise of a “festive context” trivializes the severity of the misconduct and undermines the United Nations’ professed commitment to equality and accountability. Thankfully, the UNAT overturned this troubling judgment, restoring some semblance of justice. The victims’ courage in coming forward should serve as a reminder that workplace safety and dignity are non-negotiable.

However, the victims had to endure an agonizing seven-year wait for this final judgment, as the case was remanded multiple times, delaying closure and accountability. Adding to the indignity, in a stark departure from established jurisprudence, the name of the perpetrator was anonymized, shielding him from the full consequences of his actions and depriving the victims of the transparency they deserved.

Why can’t these senior leaders understand that sexual harassment is a real offense and that a woman has an unequivocal right to say no? The repeated recruitment of individuals who exploit their power and disregard the fundamental principles of dignity and respect raises urgent questions about the United Nations’ commitment to upholding its own values.

Why does it take the UN eight years to deliver justice? And why does it continue to allow predators to occupy positions of authority within its ranks, further tarnishing the trust of those they are meant to protect?

This case is a stark reminder of how far the system must go to achieve meaningful reform and ensure workplace safety, no matter the setting.