Today, I am sharing a deeply concerning letter addressed to the UN Secretary-General and the Under-Secretary-General for Internal Oversight Services (OIOS). The letter highlights systemic failures and racial discrimination exposed in two recent judgments (BANGAMBILA v. SG and KISUMIRO v. SG), involving unethical conduct by a senior OIOS investigator and the inaction of their supervisors.
These judgments reveal:
- The unjust termination of two African national staff members based on flawed investigations.
- Gross incompetence and potential conscious bias by OIOS leadership.
- The failure of the UN’s internal justice system to protect underprivileged staff, leaving them unsupported against systemic misconduct.
Key examples include:
- The Bangambila Case: A single mother lost her livelihood due to a lack of basic understanding by the investigator, who failed to grasp the definition of “spouse.” The Tribunal described this as “a clear failure of due diligence at almost every level.”
- The Kisumiro Case: A construction worker, ethical and truthful, was exploited because of his limited legal knowledge. OIOS disregarded his straightforward defense, and OSLA refused to represent him.
Only thanks to the courageous and relentless efforts of Sètondji Roland Adjovi and Anthony Wilson, who pursued these cases with unmatched determination, were the affected staff members saved. Their advocacy not only led to groundbreaking decisions to reinstate these individuals but also set a precedent for the UN system to rectify its failures. Without their intervention, these outcomes would not have been possible.
I encourage you to read the letter in full to understand the extent of the failures against these national staff from Congo and the systemic injustice they endured. Share it widely to demand independent investigations, transparency, and accountability within the UN system. Together, we can amplify their voices and call for meaningful reform.
OIOS has made itself obsolete and now lacks creditability. With respect to investigations, OIOS determines what will be investigated, and to want extent. They write the terms of reference. The conclusions and recommendations are shared internally at the highest level, and may or may not be acted upon. Staff who report wrongdoing almost never know the results. Senior UNHQ officials outside of the OIOS have sway on the entire process, allowing issues to “legitimately” be barried. It’s time that the offices in OIOS that manage case intake and category one investigations report externally, or this entire area is outsourced and staffed with individuals that do not have a stake in the game.
OIOS always claim they are independent, but in reality they take direction from the Administration on what to investigate and what outcomes are expected. OIOS colludes with the legal officers in charge of disciplinary cases. These 2 cases could not have gone anywhere without the Administrative Law Division conspiring with OIOS to achieve their intended actions, since they are the ones that defend the decisions in front of the UN Dispute Tribunal.
Bangambilla
322. It is crucial to mention the Tribunal’s observation of the counsel who provided patently incorrect legal advice to the Secretary-General in the decision-making process, which resulted in the Applicant losing her job. Highlighting this ensures that we maintain transparency and accountability in the legal advisory process in a disciplinary procedure of the United Nations. The Tribunal particularly wants to highlight the role of counsel advising the Secretary-General in making this decision. It is important that the counsel advising the Secretary-General is cognizant of their duties in protecting the rules of the United Nations system. Legally untenable or duplicitous positions must be scrupulously avoided at all times.
The poor Legal Officer who handled the case and purportedly “advised” senior management has little to do with the decisions that are made by the non-lawyers in charge of running the Administrative Law Division.