international humanitarian law - united...
TRANSCRIPT
INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW
PROFESSOR MÓNICA PINTO
International Organizations as Actors in the International Arena
REQUIRED READINGS (printed format)
Case Law
1. Reparation for Injuries Suffered in the Service of the United Nations, Advisory Opinion,
I.C.J. Reports 1949, p. 174
2. Admission of a State to the United Nations (Charter, Art. 4), Advisory Opinion,
I.C.J. Reports 1948, p. 57
3. Competence of General Assembly Regarding Admission to the United Nations,
Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1950, p. 4
4. Difference Relating to Immunity from Legal Process of a Special Rapporteur of
the Commission on Human Rights, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1999, pp.
84-89, paras. 47-67
5. European Commission and Others v. Yassin Abdullah Kadi (Joined cases C-
584/10 P, 494 C-593/10 P and C-595/10 P), Judgment, European Court of
Justice, 18 July 2013
SUGGESTED READINGS (not reproduced)
6. Amerasinghe, C.F., An Introduction to the Institutional Law of International
Organizations, New York, Cambridge University Press, 2005,pp. 1-6
7. Keohane, Robert, "International Institutions: Can Interdependence Work?",
Foreign Policy 1998, Washington D.C, pp. 82-96
International Organizations as Law Makers
REQUIRED READINGS (printed format)
Case Law
8. Prosecutor v. Duško Tadic, ICTY Appeals Chamber, 2 October 1995 (Decision
on the Defence Motion for Interlocutory Appeal on Jurisdiction), pp. 1-5 and 9-
18, paras. 1-12 and paras. 26-48
SUGGESTED READINGS (not reproduced)
9. Klabbers, Jan, An Introduction to International Institutional Law, New York,
Cambridge University Press, 2002, pp. 197-212
International Organizations as Accountable Entities
REQUIRED READINGS (printed format)
Legal Documents
10. Statute of the Administrative Tribunal of the International Bank for
Reconstruction and Development, International Development Association and
International Finance Corporation, adopted by the Board of Governors on 30
April 1980 and amended on 31 July 2001 and on 18 June 2009
11. Rules of the World Bank Administrative Tribunal, as adopted by the Tribunal on
September 26, 1980 and amended on 1 January 2002
Case Law
12. The Word Bank Administrative Tribunal, Louis de Merode and others v. The
World Bank, Decision of 5 June 1981, Decision No. 1, paras.16-29
International Court of Justice
Reparation for Injuries Suffered in the Service of the United
Nations
Advisory Opinion
I.C.J. Reports 1949, p. 174
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
International Court of Justice
Conditions to Admission of a State to Membership in the
United Nations (Charter, Art. 4)
Advisory Opinion
I.C.J. Reports 1948, p. 57
410
411
412
413
414
International Court of Justice
Competence of the General Assembly for the Admission of a
State to the United Nations
Advisory Opinion
I.C.J. Reports 1950, p. 4
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
International Court of Justice
Difference Relating to Immunity from Legal Process of a
Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights
Advisory Opinion
I.C.J. Reports 1999, pp. 84-89, paras. 47-67
466
467
468
European Court of Justice
European Commission and Others v. Yassin Abdullah Kadi Judgment of 18 July 2013 [Grand Chamber]
Joined cases C-584/10 P, C-593/10 P and C-595/10 P
JUD
GM
ENT
OF
THE
CO
UR
T (G
rand
Cha
mbe
r)
18 Ju
ly 2
013
(*)
(App
eal –
Com
mon
For
eign
and
Sec
urity
Pol
icy
(CFS
P) –
Res
trict
ive
mea
sure
s tak
en a
gain
stpe
rson
s and
ent
ities
ass
ocia
ted
with
Usa
ma
bin
Lade
n, th
e A
l-Qae
da n
etw
ork
and
the
Talib
an –
Reg
ulat
ion
(EC
) No
881/
2002
– F
reez
ing
of fu
nds a
nd e
cono
mic
reso
urce
s of a
per
son
incl
uded
in a
list
dra
wn
up b
y a
body
of t
he U
nite
d N
atio
ns –
Lis
ting
of th
at p
erso
n’s n
ame
in A
nnex
I to
Reg
ulat
ion
(EC
) No
881/
2002
– A
ctio
n fo
r ann
ulm
ent –
Fun
dam
enta
l rig
hts –
Rig
hts o
f the
defe
nce
– Pr
inci
ple
of e
ffec
tive
judi
cial
pro
tect
ion
– Pr
inci
ple
of p
ropo
rtion
ality
– R
ight
tore
spec
t for
pro
perty
– O
blig
atio
n to
stat
e re
ason
s)
In Jo
ined
Cas
es C
584/
10 P
, C59
3/10
P a
nd C
595/
10 P
,
THR
EE A
PPEA
LS u
nder
Arti
cle
56 o
f th
e St
atut
e of
the
Cou
rt of
Jus
tice
of t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on, b
roug
ht o
n 10
Dec
embe
r 201
0,
Eur
opea
n C
omm
issi
on, r
epre
sent
ed i
nitia
lly b
y P.
Het
sch,
S. B
oela
ert,
E. P
aasi
virta
and
M.
Kon
stan
tinid
is,
and
subs
eque
ntly
by
L.
G
usse
tti,
S.
Boe
laer
t, E.
Pa
asiv
irta
and
M.
Kon
stan
tinid
is, a
ctin
g as
Age
nts,
with
an
addr
ess f
or se
rvic
e in
Lux
embo
urg,
Uni
ted
Kin
gdom
of
Gre
at B
rita
in a
nd N
orth
ern
Irel
and,
rep
rese
nted
ini
tially
by
E.Je
nkin
son
and
subs
eque
ntly
by
S. B
ehza
di-S
penc
er, a
ctin
g as
Age
nts,
and
by J
. Wal
lace
QC
, D.
Bea
rd Q
C, a
nd M
. Woo
d, B
arris
ter,
appe
llant
s,
supp
orte
d by
:
Rep
ublic
of B
ulga
ria,
repr
esen
ted
by B
. Zai
mov
, T. I
vano
v an
d E.
Pet
rano
va, a
ctin
g as
Age
nts,
Ital
ian
Rep
ublic
, re
pres
ente
d by
G.
Palm
ieri,
act
ing
as A
gent
, an
d by
M.
Fior
illi,
avvo
cato
dello
Sta
to, w
ith a
n ad
dres
s for
serv
ice
in L
uxem
bour
g,
Gra
nd D
uchy
of L
uxem
bour
g, re
pres
ente
d by
C. S
chilt
z, a
ctin
g as
Age
nt,
Hun
gary
, rep
rese
nted
by
M. F
ehér
, K. S
zíjjá
rtó a
nd K
. Mol
nár,
actin
g as
Age
nts,
Kin
gdom
of t
he N
ethe
rlan
ds, r
epre
sent
ed b
y C
. Wis
sels
and
M. B
ulte
rman
, act
ing
as A
gent
s,
Slov
ak R
epub
lic, r
epre
sent
ed b
y B
. Ric
ziov
á, a
ctin
g as
Age
nt,
Rep
ublic
of F
inla
nd, r
epre
sent
ed b
y H
. Lep
po, a
ctin
g as
Age
nt,
inte
rven
ers i
n th
e ap
peal
s in
Cas
es C
-584
/10
P an
d C
595/
10 P
,
Cou
ncil
of th
e E
urop
ean
Uni
on, r
epre
sent
ed b
y M
. Bis
hop,
E. F
inne
gan
and
R. S
zost
ak, a
ctin
gas
Age
nts,
appe
llant
,
supp
orte
d by
:
Rep
ublic
of B
ulga
ria,
repr
esen
ted
by B
. Zai
mov
, T. I
vano
v an
d E.
Pet
rano
va, a
ctin
g as
Age
nts,
Cze
ch R
epub
lic,
repr
esen
ted
by K
. N
ajm
anov
á, E
. R
uffe
r, M
. Sm
olek
and
D.
Had
rouš
ek,
actin
g as
Age
nts,
Kin
gdom
of D
enm
ark,
repr
esen
ted
by L
. Vol
ck M
adse
n, a
ctin
g as
Age
nt,
Irel
and,
repr
esen
ted
initi
ally
by
D. O
’Hag
an a
nd su
bseq
uent
ly b
y E.
Cre
edon
, act
ing
as A
gent
s,an
d by
N. T
rave
rs B
L an
d P.
Ben
son,
Sol
icito
r, w
ith a
n ad
dres
s for
serv
ice
in L
uxem
bour
g,
Kin
gdom
of S
pain
, rep
rese
nted
by
M. M
uñoz
Pér
ez a
nd N
. Día
z A
bad,
act
ing
as A
gent
s, w
ithan
add
ress
for s
ervi
ce in
Lux
embo
urg,
Ital
ian
Rep
ublic
, re
pres
ente
d by
G.
Palm
ieri,
act
ing
as A
gent
, an
d by
M.
Fior
illi,
avvo
cato
dello
Sta
to, w
ith a
n ad
dres
s for
serv
ice
in L
uxem
bour
g,
Gra
nd D
uchy
of L
uxem
bour
g, re
pres
ente
d by
C. S
chilt
z, a
ctin
g as
Age
nt,
Hun
gary
, rep
rese
nted
by
M. F
ehér
, K. S
zíjjá
rtó a
nd K
. Mol
nár,
actin
g as
Age
nts,
Kin
gdom
of t
he N
ethe
rlan
ds, r
epre
sent
ed b
y C
. Wis
sels
and
M. B
ulte
rman
, act
ing
as A
gent
s,
Rep
ublic
of
Aus
tria
, re
pres
ente
d by
C.
Pese
ndor
fer,
actin
g as
Age
nt,
with
an
addr
ess
for
serv
ice
in L
uxem
bour
g,
Slov
ak R
epub
lic, r
epre
sent
ed b
y B
. Ric
ziov
á, a
ctin
g as
Age
nt,
Rep
ublic
of F
inla
nd, r
epre
sent
ed b
y H
. Lep
po, a
ctin
g as
Age
nt,
inte
rven
ers i
n th
e ap
peal
in C
ase
C59
3/10
P,
the
othe
r par
ties t
o th
e pr
ocee
ding
s bei
ng:
Yas
sin
Abd
ulla
h K
adi,
repr
esen
ted
by D
. Vau
ghan
QC
, V. L
owe
QC
, J. C
raw
ford
SC
, M.
Lest
er a
nd P
. Eec
khou
t, B
arris
ters
, G. M
artin
, Sol
icito
r, an
d by
C. M
urph
y,
appl
ican
t at f
irst i
nsta
nce,
Fren
ch R
epub
lic,
repr
esen
ted
by E
. B
ellia
rd,
G.
de B
ergu
es,
D.
Col
as,
A.
Ada
m a
nd E
.R
anai
voso
n, a
ctin
g as
Age
nts,
inte
rven
er a
t firs
t ins
tanc
e,
THE
CO
UR
T (G
rand
Cha
mbe
r),
com
pose
d of
V. S
kour
is, P
resi
dent
, K. L
enae
rts (R
appo
rteur
), V
ice
Pres
iden
t, M
. Ile
ši, L
. Bay
Lars
en,
T. v
on D
anw
itz a
nd M
. B
erge
r, Pr
esid
ents
of
Cha
mbe
rs,
U.
Lõhm
us,
E. L
evits
, A
.A
raba
djie
v, C
. Toa
der,
J.-J.
Kas
el, M
. Saf
jan
and
D. Š
váby
, Jud
ges,
Adv
ocat
e G
ener
al: Y
. Bot
,
Reg
istra
r: A
. Im
pelli
zzer
i, A
dmin
istra
tor,
havi
ng re
gard
to th
e w
ritte
n pr
oced
ure
and
furth
er to
the
hear
ing
on 1
6 O
ctob
er 2
012,
afte
r hea
ring
the
Opi
nion
of t
he A
dvoc
ate
Gen
eral
at t
he si
tting
on
19 M
arch
201
3,
494
give
s the
follo
win
g
Judg
men
t
1
B
y th
eir a
ppea
ls, t
he E
urop
ean
Com
mis
sion
, the
Cou
ncil
of th
e Eu
rope
an U
nion
and
the
Uni
ted
Kin
gdom
of
Gre
at B
ritai
n an
d N
orth
ern
Irel
and
seek
to
have
set
asi
de t
he j
udgm
ent
of t
heG
ener
al C
ourt
of t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on o
f 30
Sep
tem
ber
2010
in
Cas
e T
85/0
9 K
adi
vC
omm
issi
on[2
010]
EC
R I
I51
77 (
‘the
judg
men
t und
er a
ppea
l’), b
y w
hich
that
Cou
rt an
nulle
dC
omm
issi
on R
egul
atio
n (E
C) N
o 11
90/2
008
of 2
8 N
ovem
ber 2
008
amen
ding
for t
he 1
01st
tim
eC
ounc
il R
egul
atio
n (E
C)
No
881/
2002
impo
sing
cer
tain
spe
cific
res
trict
ive
mea
sure
s di
rect
edag
ains
t ce
rtain
per
sons
and
ent
ities
ass
ocia
ted
with
Usa
ma
bin
Lade
n, t
he A
l-Qae
da n
etw
ork
and
the
Talib
an (
OJ
2008
L 3
22, p
. 25;
‘th
e co
ntes
ted
regu
latio
n’),
in s
o fa
r as
that
mea
sure
conc
erns
Mr K
adi.
Leg
al c
onte
xt
The
Cha
rter
of t
he U
nite
d N
atio
ns
2
Und
er A
rticl
e 1(
1) a
nd (
3) o
f th
e C
harte
r of
the
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
, sig
ned
at S
an F
ranc
isco
(Uni
ted
Stat
es o
f Am
eric
a) o
n 26
Jun
e 19
45, t
he p
urpo
ses
of th
e U
nite
d N
atio
ns a
re in
ter a
lia to
‘mai
ntai
n in
tern
atio
nal p
eace
and
sec
urity
’ and
to ‘a
chie
ve in
tern
atio
nal c
oope
ratio
n in
sol
ving
inte
rnat
iona
l pr
oble
ms
of a
n ec
onom
ic,
soci
al,
cultu
ral,
or h
uman
itaria
n ch
arac
ter,
and
inpr
omot
ing
and
enco
urag
ing
resp
ect
for
hum
an r
ight
s an
d fo
r fu
ndam
enta
l fr
eedo
ms
for
all
with
out d
istin
ctio
n as
to ra
ce, s
ex, l
angu
age,
or r
elig
ion’
.
3
U
nder
Arti
cle
24(1
) of t
he C
harte
r of t
he U
nite
d N
atio
ns, t
he U
nite
d N
atio
ns S
ecur
ity C
ounc
il(‘
the
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil’
) is
giv
en p
rimar
y re
spon
sibi
lity
for
the
mai
nten
ance
of
inte
rnat
iona
lpe
ace
and
secu
rity.
Arti
cle
24(2
) the
reof
pro
vide
s th
at, i
n di
scha
rgin
g th
ose
dutie
s, th
e Se
curit
yC
ounc
il is
to a
ct in
acc
orda
nce
with
the
purp
oses
and
prin
cipl
es o
f the
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
.
4
Und
er A
rticl
e 25
of
the
Cha
rter
of th
e U
nite
d N
atio
ns, t
he M
embe
rs o
f th
e U
nite
d N
atio
ns[U
N] a
gree
to a
ccep
t and
car
ry o
ut th
e de
cisi
ons o
f the
Sec
urity
Cou
ncil
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith th
atC
harte
r.
5
C
hapt
er V
II o
f the
Cha
rter o
f the
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
, hea
ded
‘Act
ion
with
resp
ect t
o th
reat
s to
the
peac
e, b
reac
hes
of t
he p
eace
, and
act
s of
agg
ress
ion’
, def
ines
the
act
ion
to b
e ta
ken
in s
uch
case
s. A
rticl
e 39
of
that
Cha
rter,
whi
ch i
ntro
duce
s C
hapt
er V
II,
prov
ides
tha
t th
e Se
curit
yC
ounc
il is
to d
eter
min
e th
e ex
iste
nce
of a
ny s
uch
thre
at, a
ny s
uch
brea
ch o
r any
suc
h ac
t and
isto
mak
e re
com
men
datio
ns, o
r dec
ide
wha
t mea
sure
s are
to b
e ta
ken,
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith A
rticl
es41
and
42
of th
e C
harte
r, to
mai
ntai
n or
rest
ore
inte
rnat
iona
l pea
ce a
nd s
ecur
ity. U
nder
Arti
cle
41 o
f th
at C
harte
r, th
e Se
curit
y C
ounc
il m
ay d
ecid
e w
hat m
easu
res,
not i
nvol
ving
the
use
ofar
med
forc
e, a
re to
be
empl
oyed
to g
ive
effe
ct to
its d
ecis
ions
and
it m
ay c
all u
pon
the
Mem
bers
of th
e U
nite
d N
atio
ns to
app
ly su
ch m
easu
res.
6
B
y vi
rtue
of A
rticl
e 48
(2) o
f the
Cha
rter o
f the
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
, the
dec
isio
ns o
f the
Sec
urity
Cou
ncil
for
the
mai
nten
ance
of
inte
rnat
iona
l pe
ace
and
secu
rity
are
to b
e ca
rrie
d ou
t by
the
Mem
bers
of t
he U
nite
d N
atio
ns d
irect
ly a
nd th
roug
h th
eir a
ctio
n in
the
appr
opria
te in
tern
atio
nal
agen
cies
of w
hich
they
are
mem
bers
.
7
A
rticl
e 10
3 of
the
Cha
rter o
f the
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
sta
tes
that
in th
e ev
ent o
f a c
onfli
ct b
etw
een
the
oblig
atio
ns o
f th
e M
embe
rs o
f th
e U
nite
d N
atio
ns u
nder
that
Cha
rter
and
thei
r ob
ligat
ions
unde
r any
oth
er in
tern
atio
nal a
gree
men
t, th
eir o
blig
atio
ns u
nder
that
Cha
rter a
re to
pre
vail.
Act
ions
of t
he S
ecur
ity C
ounc
il ag
ains
t int
erna
tiona
l ter
rori
sm a
nd th
e im
plem
enta
tion
of th
ose
actio
ns b
y th
e Eu
rope
an U
nion
8
Sin
ce th
e la
te 1
990s
, and
eve
n m
ore
sinc
e th
e at
tack
s of
11
Sept
embe
r 20
01 in
the
Uni
ted
Stat
es,
the
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil
has
adop
ted
a nu
mbe
r of
res
olut
ions
und
er C
hapt
er V
II o
f th
eC
harte
r of
the
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
in
orde
r to
com
bat
terr
oris
t th
reat
s to
int
erna
tiona
l pe
ace
and
secu
rity.
Ini
tially
dire
cted
sol
ely
agai
nst
the
Talib
an o
f A
fgha
nist
an,
thos
e re
solu
tions
wer
esu
bseq
uent
ly e
xten
ded
to i
nclu
de U
sam
a bi
n La
den,
Al-Q
aeda
and
per
sons
and
ent
ities
asso
ciat
ed w
ith t
hem
. Th
e re
solu
tions
pro
vide
, in
ter
alia
, fo
r th
e fr
eezi
ng o
f as
sets
of
the
orga
nisa
tions
, en
titie
s an
d pe
rson
s id
entif
ied
by t
he c
omm
ittee
est
ablis
hed
by t
he S
ecur
ityC
ounc
il in
acc
orda
nce
with
Res
olut
ion
1267
(19
99)
of 1
5 O
ctob
er 1
999
(‘th
e Sa
nctio
nsC
omm
ittee
’) o
n a
cons
olid
ated
list
(‘th
e Sa
nctio
ns C
omm
ittee
Con
solid
ated
Lis
t’).
9
In
ord
er to
dea
l with
del
istin
g re
ques
ts m
ade
by o
rgan
isat
ions
, ent
ities
or p
erso
ns n
amed
on
that
list,
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil
Res
olut
ion
1730
(20
06)
of 1
9 D
ecem
ber
2006
pro
vide
d fo
r th
ees
tabl
ishm
ent o
f a ‘f
ocal
poi
nt’ w
ithin
the
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil,
resp
onsi
ble
for e
xam
inat
ion
of su
chre
ques
ts. T
hat f
ocal
poi
nt w
as e
stab
lishe
d in
Mar
ch 2
007.
10
Und
er p
arag
raph
5 o
f Se
curit
y C
ounc
il R
esol
utio
n 17
35 (
2006
) of
22
Dec
embe
r 20
06, w
hen
Stat
es p
ropo
se n
ames
of
orga
nisa
tions
, en
titie
s or
per
sons
to
the
Sanc
tions
Com
mitt
ee f
orin
clus
ion
on th
e C
onso
lidat
ed L
ist,
they
mus
t ‘pr
ovid
e a
stat
emen
t of c
ase;
the
stat
emen
t of c
ase
shou
ld p
rovi
de a
s m
uch
deta
il as
pos
sibl
e on
the
basi
s(es
) for
the
listin
g, in
clud
ing:
(i) s
peci
ficin
form
atio
n su
ppor
ting
a de
term
inat
ion
that
the
indi
vidu
al o
r ent
ity m
eets
the
crite
ria a
bove
; (ii)
the
natu
re o
f th
e in
form
atio
n; a
nd (
iii)
supp
ortin
g in
form
atio
n or
doc
umen
ts t
hat
can
bepr
ovid
ed’.
Und
er p
arag
raph
6 o
f tha
t res
olut
ion,
Sta
tes
are
requ
este
d ‘a
t the
tim
e of
sub
mis
sion
,to
iden
tify
thos
e pa
rts o
f the
sta
tem
ent o
f cas
e w
hich
may
be
publ
icly
rele
ased
for t
he p
urpo
ses
of n
otify
ing
the
liste
d [o
n th
e Sa
nctio
ns C
omm
ittee
Con
solid
ated
Lis
t] in
divi
dual
or e
ntity
, and
thos
e pa
rts w
hich
may
be
rele
ased
on
requ
est t
o in
tere
sted
Sta
tes’
.
11
U
nder
par
agra
ph 1
2 of
Sec
urity
Cou
ncil
Res
olut
ion
1822
(200
8) o
f 30
June
200
8, S
tate
s m
ust,
inte
r al
ia,
‘for
eac
h su
ch p
ropo
sal
[of
nam
es t
o th
e Se
curit
y C
ounc
il fo
r in
clus
ion
on t
heC
onso
lidat
ed L
ist]
iden
tify
thos
e pa
rts o
f th
e st
atem
ent o
f ca
se th
at m
ay b
e pu
blic
ly r
elea
sed,
incl
udin
g fo
r us
e by
the
[San
ctio
ns]
Com
mitt
ee f
or d
evel
opm
ent o
f th
e su
mm
ary
desc
ribed
inpa
ragr
aph
13 b
elow
or f
or th
e pu
rpos
e of
not
ifyin
g or
info
rmin
g th
e lis
ted
indi
vidu
al o
r ent
ity,
and
thos
e pa
rts w
hich
may
be
rele
ased
upo
n re
ques
t to
inte
rest
ed S
tate
s.’ P
arag
raph
13
of th
atre
solu
tion
prov
ides
, firs
t, th
at th
e Sa
nctio
ns C
omm
ittee
, whe
n it
adds
a n
ame
to it
s Con
solid
ated
List
, is
to
mak
e ac
cess
ible
on
its w
ebsi
te ‘
a na
rrat
ive
sum
mar
y of
rea
sons
for
lis
ting’
and
,se
cond
ly, t
hat t
hat c
omm
ittee
is to
mak
e ac
cess
ible
on
the
sam
e si
te, ‘
narr
ativ
e su
mm
arie
s of
reas
ons f
or li
stin
g’ n
ames
on
that
list
bef
ore
the
adop
tion
of R
esol
utio
n 18
22/2
008.
12
A
s re
gard
s de
listin
g re
ques
ts, S
ecur
ity C
ounc
il R
esol
utio
n 19
04 (2
009)
of 1
7 D
ecem
ber 2
009
esta
blis
hed
an ‘
Off
ice
of t
he O
mbu
dspe
rson
’, w
hose
tas
k, u
nder
par
agra
ph 2
0 th
ereo
f, is
to
assi
st t
he S
anct
ions
Com
mitt
ee i
n th
e co
nsid
erat
ion
of s
uch
requ
ests
. U
nder
tha
t sa
me
para
grap
h, th
e pe
rson
app
oint
ed to
be
the
Om
buds
pers
on m
ust b
e an
indi
vidu
al o
f hi
gh m
oral
char
acte
r, im
parti
ality
and
inte
grity
with
hig
h qu
alifi
catio
ns a
nd e
xper
ienc
e in
rel
evan
t fie
lds,
incl
udin
g la
w,
hum
an
right
s, co
unte
rter
roris
m,
and
sanc
tions
. Th
e m
anda
te
of
the
Om
buds
pers
on,
as d
escr
ibed
in
Ann
ex I
I to
tha
t re
solu
tion,
cov
ers
a st
age
of g
athe
ring
info
rmat
ion
from
the
Sta
te c
once
rned
and
a s
tage
of
cons
ulta
tion,
in
the
cour
se o
f w
hich
dial
ogue
may
be
enga
ged
with
the
orga
nisa
tion,
ent
ity o
r pe
rson
req
uest
ing
delis
ting
from
the
Sanc
tions
Com
mitt
ee C
onso
lidat
ed L
ist.
Follo
win
g th
ose
two
stag
es, t
he O
mbu
dspe
rson
mus
tdr
aw u
p a
‘com
preh
ensi
ve r
epor
t’ an
d pr
esen
t it t
o th
e Sa
nctio
ns C
omm
ittee
, whi
ch m
ust t
hen
cons
ider
the
del
istin
g re
ques
t, w
ith t
he a
ssis
tanc
e of
the
Om
buds
pers
on,
and
afte
r do
ing
sode
cide
whe
ther
to a
ppro
ve th
at re
ques
t.
13
Sinc
e th
e M
embe
r St
ates
con
side
red,
in a
num
ber
of C
omm
on P
ositi
ons
adop
ted
unde
r th
e
495
Com
mon
For
eign
and
Sec
urity
Pol
icy,
tha
t Eu
rope
an U
nion
act
ion
was
req
uire
d in
ord
er t
oim
plem
ent t
he S
ecur
ity C
ounc
il R
esol
utio
ns o
n co
mba
ting
inte
rnat
iona
l ter
roris
m, t
he C
ounc
ilad
opte
d a
serie
s of
reg
ulat
ions
pro
vidi
ng f
or,
inte
r al
ia,
the
free
zing
of
the
asse
ts o
for
gani
satio
ns, e
ntiti
es a
nd in
divi
dual
s ide
ntifi
ed b
y th
e Sa
nctio
ns C
omm
ittee
.
14
In
par
alle
l with
the
regi
me
desc
ribed
abo
ve, w
hich
is a
imed
sole
ly a
t org
anis
atio
ns, e
ntiti
es a
ndin
divi
dual
s des
igna
ted
by n
ame
by th
e Sa
nctio
ns C
omm
ittee
as b
eing
ass
ocia
ted
with
Usa
ma
bin
Lade
n, th
e A
l-Qae
da n
etw
ork
and
the
Talib
an, t
here
exi
sts a
wid
er re
gim
e of
sanc
tions
pro
vide
dfo
r by
Sec
urity
Cou
ncil
Res
olut
ion
1373
(20
01)
of 2
8 Se
ptem
ber
2001
, w
hich
was
lik
ewis
ead
opte
d in
res
pons
e to
the
terr
oris
t atta
cks
of 1
1 Se
ptem
ber
2001
. Tha
t res
olut
ion,
whi
ch a
lso
prov
ides
for
ass
et-f
reez
ing
mea
sure
s, di
ffer
s fr
om th
e re
solu
tions
men
tione
d ab
ove
in th
at th
eid
entif
icat
ion
of th
e or
gani
satio
ns, e
ntiti
es o
r per
sons
whi
ch it
is in
tend
ed to
cov
er is
left
entir
ely
to th
e di
scre
tion
of th
e St
ates
.
15
At
Euro
pean
Uni
on l
evel
, Res
olut
ion
1373
(20
01)
was
im
plem
ente
d by
Cou
ncil
Com
mon
Posi
tion
2001
/931
/CFS
P of
27
Dec
embe
r 20
01 o
n th
e ap
plic
atio
n of
spe
cific
mea
sure
s to
com
bat t
erro
rism
(OJ
2001
L 3
44, p
. 93)
and
by
Cou
ncil
Reg
ulat
ion
(EC
) No
2580
/200
1 of
27
Dec
embe
r 20
01 o
n sp
ecifi
c re
stric
tive
mea
sure
s di
rect
ed a
gain
st c
erta
in p
erso
ns a
nd e
ntiti
esw
ith a
vie
w to
com
batin
g te
rror
ism
(O
J 20
01 L
344
, p. 7
0, a
nd c
orrig
endu
m, O
J 20
10 L
52,
p.58
). Th
ose
mea
sure
s co
ntai
n a
list,
whi
ch is
regu
larly
revi
ewed
, of o
rgan
isat
ions
, ent
ities
and
pers
ons s
uspe
cted
of b
eing
invo
lved
in te
rror
ist a
ctiv
ities
.
Bac
kgro
und
to th
e pr
ocee
ding
s
The
cas
e w
hich
gav
e ri
se to
the
Kad
i jud
gmen
t
16
On
17 O
ctob
er 2
001
Mr
Kad
i, id
entif
ied
as b
eing
an
indi
vidu
al a
ssoc
iate
d w
ith U
sam
a bi
nLa
den
and
the
Al-Q
aeda
net
wor
k, w
as li
sted
on
the
Sanc
tions
Com
mitt
ee C
onso
lidat
ed L
ist.
17
Mr
Kad
i’s n
ame
was
sub
sequ
ently
add
ed to
the
list i
n A
nnex
I to
Cou
ncil
Reg
ulat
ion
(EC
)N
o 46
7/20
01 o
f 6
Mar
ch 2
001
proh
ibiti
ng t
he e
xpor
t of
cer
tain
goo
ds a
nd s
ervi
ces
toA
fgha
nist
an, s
treng
then
ing
the
fligh
t ban
and
ext
endi
ng th
e fr
eeze
of f
unds
and
oth
er fi
nanc
ial
reso
urce
s in
resp
ect o
f the
Tal
iban
of A
fgha
nist
an, a
nd re
peal
ing
Reg
ulat
ion
No
337/
2000
(OJ
2001
L 6
7, p
. 1),
by C
omm
issi
on R
egul
atio
n (E
C) N
o 20
62/2
001
of 1
9 O
ctob
er 2
001
amen
ding
,fo
r the
third
tim
e, R
egul
atio
n N
o 46
7/20
01 (O
J 20
01 L
277
, p. 2
5). H
e w
as s
ubse
quen
tly li
sted
in A
nnex
I to
Cou
ncil
Reg
ulat
ion
(EC
) No
881/
2002
of 2
7 M
ay 2
002
impo
sing
cer
tain
spe
cific
rest
rictiv
e m
easu
res
dire
cted
aga
inst
cer
tain
per
sons
and
ent
ities
ass
ocia
ted
with
Usa
ma
bin
Lade
n, th
e A
l-Qae
da n
etw
ork
and
the
Talib
an, a
nd re
peal
ing
Reg
ulat
ion
No
467/
2001
(OJ
2002
L 13
9, p
. 9).
18
On
18 D
ecem
ber
2001
Mr
Kad
i br
ough
t be
fore
the
Gen
eral
Cou
rt an
act
ion
seek
ing
the
annu
lmen
t, in
itial
ly,
of R
egul
atio
ns N
o 46
7/20
01 a
nd N
o 20
62/2
001,
the
n of
Reg
ulat
ion
No
881/
2002
, in
so f
ar a
s th
ose
regu
latio
ns c
once
rned
him
. The
gro
unds
for
ann
ulm
ent w
ere,
resp
ectiv
ely,
inf
ringe
men
t of
the
rig
ht t
o be
hea
rd,
the
right
to
resp
ect
for
prop
erty
and
the
prin
cipl
e of
pro
porti
onal
ity, a
nd a
lso
of th
e rig
ht to
eff
ectiv
e ju
dici
al re
view
.
19
B
y ju
dgm
ent o
f 21
Sept
embe
r 200
5 in
Cas
e T
315/
01 K
adi v
Cou
ncil
and
Com
mis
sion
[200
5]EC
R II
3649
, the
Gen
eral
Cou
rt di
smis
sed
that
act
ion.
In e
ssen
ce, t
he G
ener
al C
ourt
held
that
itfo
llow
ed f
rom
the
prin
cipl
es g
over
ning
the
rel
atio
nshi
p be
twee
n th
e in
tern
atio
nal
lega
l or
der
unde
r th
e U
nite
d N
atio
ns a
nd t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on l
egal
ord
er t
hat
Reg
ulat
ion
No
881/
2002
,be
ing
desi
gned
to im
plem
ent a
Sec
urity
Cou
ncil
reso
lutio
n le
avin
g no
latit
ude
in th
at r
egar
d,co
uld
not b
e th
e su
bjec
t of j
udic
ial r
evie
w o
f its
inte
rnal
law
fuln
ess
and
thus
enj
oyed
imm
unity
from
juris
dict
ion,
exc
ept a
s re
gard
s its
com
patib
ility
with
rul
es f
allin
g w
ithin
the
ambi
t of
jus
coge
ns,
unde
rsto
od a
s a
body
of
rule
s of
pub
lic i
nter
natio
nal
law
bin
ding
on
all
subj
ects
of
inte
rnat
iona
l law
, inc
ludi
ng th
e bo
dies
of t
he U
N, a
nd fr
om w
hich
no
dero
gatio
n is
pos
sibl
e.
20
Acc
ordi
ngly
, th
e G
ener
al C
ourt,
app
lyin
g th
e st
anda
rd o
f un
iver
sal
prot
ectio
n of
the
fund
amen
tal r
ight
s of
the
hum
an p
erso
n co
vere
d by
jus c
ogen
s, ru
led
out,
in th
e gi
ven
case
, any
infr
inge
men
t of t
he ri
ghts
relie
d on
by
Mr K
adi.
As
rega
rds,
in p
artic
ular
, the
righ
t to
effe
ctiv
eju
dici
al r
evie
w,
the
Gen
eral
Cou
rt st
ated
tha
t it
was
not
for
it
to r
evie
w i
ndire
ctly
whe
ther
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil
Res
olut
ions
are
com
patib
le w
ith s
uch
fund
amen
tal r
ight
s as
are
pro
tect
ed b
yth
e Eu
rope
an U
nion
lega
l ord
er, n
or to
ver
ify th
at th
ere
had
been
no
erro
r of a
sses
smen
t of t
hefa
cts a
nd e
vide
nce
relie
d on
by
the
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil
in su
ppor
t of t
he m
easu
res i
t had
take
n, n
or,
agai
n, t
o re
view
ind
irect
ly t
he a
ppro
pria
tene
ss a
nd p
ropo
rtion
ality
of
thos
e m
easu
res.
The
Gen
eral
Cou
rt ad
ded
that
any
suc
h la
cuna
in th
e ju
dici
al p
rote
ctio
n av
aila
ble
to M
r Kad
i is
not
in it
self
cont
rary
to ju
s cog
ens.
21
B
y its
judg
men
t of 3
Sep
tem
ber 2
008
in J
oine
d C
ases
C40
2/05
P a
nd C
415/
05 P
Kad
i and
Al
Bara
kaat
Int
erna
tiona
l Fou
ndat
ion
v C
ounc
il an
d C
omm
issi
on [
2008
] EC
R I
6351
(‘th
e K
adi
judg
men
t’), t
he C
ourt
set
asid
e th
e ju
dgm
ent
of t
he G
ener
al C
ourt
in C
ase
T31
5/01
Kad
i vC
ounc
il an
d C
omm
issi
on a
nd a
nnul
led
Reg
ulat
ion
No
881/
2002
in
so f
ar a
s it
conc
erne
d M
rK
adi.
22
In
ess
ence
, the
Cou
rt he
ld th
at th
e ob
ligat
ions
impo
sed
by a
n in
tern
atio
nal a
gree
men
t can
not
have
the
effe
ct o
f pre
judi
cing
the
cons
titut
iona
l prin
cipl
es o
f the
EC
Tre
aty,
whi
ch in
clud
e th
epr
inci
ple
that
all
Euro
pean
Uni
on a
cts
mus
t res
pect
fund
amen
tal r
ight
s, th
at re
spec
t con
stitu
ting
a co
nditi
on o
f th
eir
law
fuln
ess
whi
ch i
t is
for
the
Cou
rt to
rev
iew
in
the
fram
ewor
k of
the
com
plet
e sy
stem
of
lega
l re
med
ies
esta
blis
hed
by t
hat
treat
y. T
he C
ourt
held
fur
ther
tha
t,no
twith
stan
ding
the
fac
t th
at u
nder
taki
ngs
give
n in
the
UN
con
text
mus
t be
obs
erve
d w
hen
impl
emen
ting
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil
reso
lutio
ns, i
t doe
s no
t fol
low
from
the
prin
cipl
es g
over
ning
the
inte
rnat
iona
l leg
al o
rder
und
er th
e U
nite
d N
atio
ns th
at a
n ac
t ado
pted
by
the
Euro
pean
Uni
onsu
ch a
s R
egul
atio
n N
o 88
1/20
02 th
ereb
y en
joys
imm
unity
fro
m ju
risdi
ctio
n. T
he C
ourt
adde
dth
at th
ere
is n
o ba
sis f
or su
ch im
mun
ity in
the
EC T
reat
y.
23
In
thos
e ci
rcum
stan
ces t
he C
ourt
held
, in
para
grap
hs 3
26 a
nd 3
27 o
f the
Kad
i jud
gmen
t, th
at th
eC
ourts
of
the
Euro
pean
Uni
on m
ust
ensu
re t
he r
evie
w,
in p
rinci
ple
the
full
revi
ew,
of t
hela
wfu
lnes
s of
all
Euro
pean
Uni
on a
cts
in th
e lig
ht o
f fun
dam
enta
l rig
hts,
incl
udin
g w
here
suc
hac
ts a
re d
esig
ned
to i
mpl
emen
t Se
curit
y C
ounc
il re
solu
tions
, an
d th
at t
he G
ener
al C
ourt’
sre
ason
ing
was
con
sequ
ently
viti
ated
by
an e
rror
of l
aw.
24
Rul
ing
on t
he a
ctio
n br
ough
t by
Mr
Kad
i be
fore
the
Gen
eral
Cou
rt, t
he C
ourt
held
, in
para
grap
hs 3
36 to
341
of t
he K
adi j
udgm
ent,
that
the
effe
ctiv
enes
s of j
udic
ial r
evie
w m
eans
that
the
com
pete
nt E
urop
ean
Uni
on a
utho
rity
is b
ound
to c
omm
unic
ate
the
grou
nds f
or th
e co
ntes
ted
listin
g de
cisi
on to
the
pers
on c
once
rned
and
to p
rovi
de th
at p
erso
n w
ith th
e op
portu
nity
to b
ehe
ard
in th
at re
gard
. The
Cou
rt st
ated
that
, as
rega
rds
a de
cisi
on th
at a
per
son’
s na
me
shou
ld b
elis
ted
for t
he fi
rst t
ime,
for r
easo
ns c
onne
cted
with
the
effe
ctiv
enes
s of
the
rest
rictiv
e m
easu
res
at is
sue
and
with
the
obje
ctiv
e of
the
regu
latio
n co
ncer
ned,
it w
as n
eces
sary
that
that
dis
clos
ure
and
that
hea
ring
shou
ld o
ccur
not
prio
r to
the
adop
tion
of th
at d
ecis
ion
but w
hen
that
dec
isio
nw
as a
dopt
ed o
r as s
wift
ly a
s pos
sibl
e th
erea
fter.
25
In p
arag
raph
s 34
5 to
349
of
the
Kad
i jud
gmen
t, th
e C
ourt
adde
d th
at, s
ince
the
Cou
ncil
had
neith
er c
omm
unic
ated
to M
r K
adi t
he e
vide
nce
relie
d on
aga
inst
him
to ju
stify
the
rest
rictiv
em
easu
res
impo
sed
on h
im n
or a
ffor
ded
him
the
right
to b
e in
form
ed o
f th
at e
vide
nce
with
in a
reas
onab
le p
erio
d af
ter
thos
e m
easu
res
wer
e en
acte
d, M
r K
adi
had
not
been
in
a po
sitio
nef
fect
ivel
y to
mak
e kn
own
his
poin
t of v
iew
in th
at re
gard
, with
the
cons
eque
nce
that
the
right
sof
def
ence
and
the
right
to e
ffec
tive
judi
cial
revi
ew h
ad b
een
infr
inge
d. T
he C
ourt
also
stat
ed, i
npa
ragr
aph
350
of th
at ju
dgm
ent,
that
that
infr
inge
men
t had
not
bee
n re
med
ied
befo
re th
e C
ourts
of th
e Eu
rope
an U
nion
, giv
en th
at th
e C
ounc
il ha
d no
t add
uced
bef
ore
them
any
suc
h ev
iden
ce.
In p
arag
raph
s 36
9 to
371
of t
hat j
udgm
ent,
the
Cou
rt co
nclu
ded,
on
the
sam
e gr
ound
s, th
at M
r
496
Kad
i’s fu
ndam
enta
l rig
ht to
resp
ect f
or p
rope
rty h
ad b
een
infr
inge
d.
26
Th
e ef
fect
s of
the
annu
lled
regu
latio
n in
so
far a
s it
conc
erne
d M
r Kad
i wer
e m
aint
aine
d fo
r am
axim
um p
erio
d of
thr
ee m
onth
s in
ord
er t
o al
low
the
Cou
ncil
to r
emed
y th
e in
frin
gem
ents
foun
d.
The
res
pons
e of
the
Eur
opea
n U
nion
ins
titut
ions
to
the
Kad
i ju
dgm
ent
and
the
cont
este
dre
gula
tion
27
On
21 O
ctob
er 2
008
the
Cha
irman
of
the
Sanc
tions
Com
mitt
ee c
omm
unic
ated
the
narr
ativ
esu
mm
ary
of r
easo
ns f
or M
r K
adi’s
lis
ting
on t
hat
com
mitt
ee’s
Con
solid
ated
Lis
t to
Fra
nce’
sPe
rman
ent R
epre
sent
ativ
e to
the
UN
, and
aut
horis
ed it
s tra
nsm
issi
on to
Mr K
adi.
28
Th
at su
mm
ary
of re
ason
s is w
orde
d as
follo
ws:
‘The
ind
ivid
ual
Yas
in A
bdul
lah
Ezze
dine
Qad
i …
sat
isfie
s th
e st
anda
rd f
or l
istin
g by
the
[San
ctio
ns C
omm
ittee
] be
caus
e of
his
act
ions
in
(a)
parti
cipa
ting
in t
he f
inan
cing
, pl
anni
ng,
faci
litat
ing,
pre
parin
g, o
r pe
rpet
ratin
g of
act
s or
act
iviti
es b
y, i
n co
njun
ctio
n w
ith, u
nder
the
nam
e of
, on
beha
lf of
, or
in s
uppo
rt of
; (b)
sup
plyi
ng, s
ellin
g, o
r tra
nsfe
rrin
g ar
ms
and
rela
ted
mat
eria
l to;
(c) r
ecru
iting
for;
or (d
) oth
erw
ise
supp
ortin
g ac
ts o
r act
iviti
es o
f; A
l-Qae
da, U
sam
abi
n La
den
or th
e Ta
liban
, or
any
cell,
aff
iliat
e, s
plin
ter
grou
p or
der
ivat
ive
ther
eof
(see
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
Sec
urity
Cou
ncil
Res
olut
ion
1822
(200
8), p
arag
raph
2).
Mr
Qad
i ha
s ac
know
ledg
ed t
hat
he i
s a
foun
ding
tru
stee
and
dire
cted
the
act
ions
of
the
Muw
afaq
Fou
ndat
ion.
The
Muw
afaq
Fou
ndat
ion
hist
oric
ally
ope
rate
d un
der
the
umbr
ella
of
Mak
htab
Al-K
hida
mat
/Al
Kifa
h (Q
E.M
.12.
01),
an o
rgan
isat
ion
foun
ded
by M
r A
bdul
lah
Azz
am a
nd M
r U
sam
a M
uham
med
Aw
ad b
in L
aden
(Q
I.B.8
.01)
, and
the
pre
dece
ssor
to
Al-
Qae
da (Q
E.A
.4.0
1). F
ollo
win
g th
e di
ssol
utio
n of
Mak
htab
Al-K
hida
mat
/Al K
ifah
in e
arly
Jun
e20
01 a
nd it
s ab
sorp
tion
into
Al-Q
aeda
, a n
umbe
r of
NG
Os
form
erly
ass
ocia
ted
with
Mak
htab
Al-K
hida
mat
/Al K
ifah,
incl
udin
g th
e M
uwaf
aq F
ound
atio
n, a
lso
join
ed w
ith A
lQae
da.
In 1
992,
Mr Q
adi h
ired
Mr S
hafiq
Ben
Moh
amed
Ben
Moh
amed
AlA
yadi
(QI.A
.25.
01) t
o he
adth
e Eu
rope
an o
ffic
es o
f th
e M
uwaf
aq F
ound
atio
n. D
urin
g th
e m
id-1
990s
, M
r A
l-Aya
di a
lso
head
ed t
he M
uwaf
aq F
ound
atio
n br
anch
in
Bos
nia
and
Her
zego
vina
. M
r Q
adi
hire
d M
r A
l-A
yadi
on
the
reco
mm
enda
tion
of k
now
n A
l-Qae
da f
inan
cier
Mr
Wa’
el H
amza
Abd
Al-F
atah
Jula
idan
(QI.J
.79.
02),
who
foug
ht w
ith M
r bin
Lad
en in
Afg
hani
stan
in th
e 19
80s.
At t
he ti
me
ofhi
s app
oint
men
t by
Mr Q
adi a
s the
Muw
afaq
Fou
ndat
ion’
s Eur
opea
n di
rect
or, M
r AlA
yadi
was
oper
atin
g un
der a
gree
men
ts w
ith M
r bin
Lad
en. M
r AlA
yadi
was
one
of t
he p
rinci
pal l
eade
rs o
fth
e Tu
nisi
an I
slam
ic F
ront
, w
ent
to A
fgha
nist
an i
n th
e ea
rly 1
990s
to
rece
ive
para
mili
tary
train
ing,
and
then
wen
t to
Suda
n w
ith o
ther
s to
mee
t Mr b
in L
aden
, with
who
m th
ey c
oncl
uded
a fo
rmal
agr
eem
ent r
egar
ding
the
rece
ptio
n an
d tra
inin
g of
Tun
isia
ns. T
hey
late
r m
et w
ith M
rbi
n La
den
a se
cond
tim
e, s
ecur
ing
an a
gree
men
t fo
r bi
n La
den
colla
bora
tors
in
Bos
nia
and
Her
zego
vina
to re
ceiv
e Tu
nisi
an m
ujah
idin
from
Ital
y.
In 1
995,
the
lead
er o
f Al-G
ama’
at A
l-Isl
amiy
a, M
r Tal
ad F
uad
Kas
sem
, sai
d th
at th
e M
uwaf
aqFo
unda
tion
had
prov
ided
logi
stic
al a
nd fi
nanc
ial s
uppo
rt fo
r a m
ujah
idin
bat
talio
n in
Bos
nia
and
Her
zego
vina
. In
the
mid
-199
0s, t
he M
uwaf
aq F
ound
atio
n w
as in
volv
ed in
pro
vidi
ng f
inan
cial
supp
ort
for
terr
oris
t ac
tiviti
es o
f th
e m
ujah
idin
, as
wel
l as
arm
s tra
ffic
king
fro
m A
lban
ia t
oB
osni
a an
d H
erze
govi
na. S
ome
invo
lvem
ent i
n th
e fin
anci
ng o
f the
se a
ctiv
ities
was
pro
vide
d by
Mr b
in L
aden
.
Mr
Qad
i was
als
o a
maj
or s
hare
hold
er in
the
now
clo
sed
Sara
jevo
-bas
ed D
epos
itna
Ban
ka, i
nw
hich
Mr
Al-A
yadi
als
o he
ld a
pos
ition
and
act
ed a
s no
min
ee f
or M
r Q
adi’s
sha
res.
Plan
ning
sess
ions
for
an
atta
ck a
gain
st a
Uni
ted
Stat
es f
acili
ty in
Sau
di A
rabi
a m
ay h
ave
take
n pl
ace
atth
is b
ank.
Mr
Qad
i fu
rther
ow
ned
seve
ral
firm
s in
Alb
ania
whi
ch f
unne
lled
mon
ey t
o ex
trem
ists
or
empl
oyed
ext
rem
ists
in
posi
tions
whe
re t
hey
cont
rolle
d th
e fir
m’s
fun
ds.
Mr
Bin
Lad
enpr
ovid
ed th
e w
orki
ng c
apita
l for
four
or f
ive
of M
r Qad
i’s c
ompa
nies
in A
lban
ia.’
29
Th
at su
mm
ary
of re
ason
s was
als
o pu
blis
hed
on th
e w
ebsi
te o
f the
San
ctio
ns C
omm
ittee
.
30
O
n 22
Oct
ober
200
8 Fr
ance
’s P
erm
anen
t Rep
rese
ntat
ive
to th
e Eu
rope
an U
nion
tran
smitt
ed th
atsu
mm
ary
of r
easo
ns to
the
Com
mis
sion
, whi
ch s
ent i
t to
Mr
Kad
i on
the
sam
e da
y, in
form
ing
him
that
, for
the
reas
ons
set o
ut in
that
sum
mar
y, it
env
isag
ed m
aint
aini
ng h
is li
stin
g in
Ann
ex I
to R
egul
atio
n N
o 88
1/20
02.
The
Com
mis
sion
gav
e M
r K
adi
until
10
Nov
embe
r 20
08 t
oco
mm
ent
on t
hose
rea
sons
and
to
prov
ide
it w
ith a
ny i
nfor
mat
ion
that
he
mig
ht c
onsi
der
rele
vant
bef
ore
it to
ok it
s fin
al d
ecis
ion.
31
O
n 10
Nov
embe
r 200
8 M
r Kad
i sen
t his
com
men
ts to
the
Com
mis
sion
. He
argu
ed, o
n th
e ba
sis
of d
ocum
ents
cer
tifyi
ng t
hat
the
Swis
s, Tu
rkis
h an
d A
lban
ian
auth
oriti
es h
ad d
ecid
ed n
ot t
opu
rsue
cr
imin
al
inve
stig
atio
ns
agai
nst
him
co
ncer
ning
hi
s al
lege
d su
ppor
t of
te
rror
ist
orga
nisa
tions
or
invo
lvem
ent
in f
inan
cial
crim
e, t
hat,
whe
neve
r he
had
bee
n gi
ven
the
oppo
rtuni
ty to
exp
ress
his
poi
nt o
f vie
w o
n th
e ev
iden
ce s
aid
to in
culp
ate
him
, he
had
been
abl
eto
dem
onst
rate
tha
t th
e al
lega
tions
mad
e ag
ains
t hi
m w
ere
unfo
unde
d, a
nd h
e re
ques
ted
the
prod
uctio
n of
the
evi
denc
e in
sup
port
of t
he c
laim
s an
d as
serti
ons
mad
e in
the
sum
mar
y of
reas
ons
rela
ting
to h
is b
eing
lis
ted
on t
he S
anct
ions
Com
mitt
ee C
onso
lidat
ed L
ist
and
the
rele
vant
doc
umen
ts in
the
Com
mis
sion
’s fi
le, a
nd a
sked
that
he
be a
llow
ed to
sub
mit
com
men
tson
that
evi
denc
e. W
hile
dra
win
g at
tent
ion
to th
e va
guen
ess
and
gene
ralit
y of
a n
umbe
r of
the
alle
gatio
ns c
onta
ined
in th
at s
umm
ary
of r
easo
ns, h
e di
sput
ed, w
ith s
uppo
rting
evi
denc
e, th
atan
y of
the
reas
ons r
elie
d on
aga
inst
him
wer
e w
ell f
ound
ed.
32
O
n 28
Nov
embe
r 200
8 th
e C
omm
issi
on a
dopt
ed th
e co
ntes
ted
regu
latio
n.
33
A
ccor
ding
to re
cita
ls 3
to 6
, 8 a
nd 9
of t
he p
ream
ble
to th
at re
gula
tion:
‘(3)
In o
rder
to c
ompl
y w
ith [t
he K
adi j
udgm
ent],
the
Com
mis
sion
has
com
mun
icat
ed th
e …
[sum
mar
y] o
f rea
sons
pro
vide
d by
the
… S
anct
ions
Com
mitt
ee, t
o M
r Kad
i … a
nd g
iven
[him
] th
e op
portu
nity
to c
omm
ent o
n th
ese
grou
nds
in o
rder
to m
ake
[his
] po
int o
f vi
ewkn
own.
(4)
T
he C
omm
issi
on h
as re
ceiv
ed c
omm
ents
by
Mr K
adi …
and
exa
min
ed th
ese
com
men
ts.
(5)
The
list
of
pers
ons,
grou
ps a
nd e
ntiti
es to
who
m th
e fr
eezi
ng o
f fu
nds
and
econ
omic
reso
urce
s sho
uld
appl
y, d
raw
n up
by
the
… S
anct
ions
Com
mitt
ee, i
nclu
des M
r Kad
i …
(6)
A
fter h
avin
g ca
refu
lly c
onsi
dere
d th
e co
mm
ents
rece
ived
from
Mr K
adi i
n a
lette
r dat
ed10
Nov
embe
r 200
8, a
nd g
iven
the
prev
entiv
e na
ture
of t
he fr
eezi
ng o
f fun
ds a
nd e
cono
mic
reso
urce
s, th
e C
omm
issi
on c
onsi
ders
that
the
listin
g of
Mr K
adi i
s ju
stifi
ed fo
r rea
sons
of
his a
ssoc
iatio
n w
ith th
e A
lQai
da n
etw
ork.
… (8)
In
vie
w o
f thi
s, M
r Kad
i … sh
ould
be
adde
d to
Ann
ex I.
(9)
Thi
s R
egul
atio
n sh
ould
app
ly f
rom
30
May
200
2, g
iven
the
pre
vent
ive
natu
re a
ndob
ject
ives
of
the
free
zing
of
fund
s an
d ec
onom
ic r
esou
rces
und
er R
egul
atio
n …
No
881/
2002
and
the
need
to p
rote
ct le
gitim
ate
inte
rest
s of
the
econ
omic
ope
rato
rs, w
hoha
ve b
een
rely
ing
on th
e le
galit
y of
[the
regu
latio
n an
nulle
d by
the
Kad
i jud
gmen
t].’
34
In a
ccor
danc
e w
ith A
rticl
e 1
of th
e co
ntes
ted
regu
latio
n an
d th
e an
nex
ther
eto,
Ann
ex I
to
497
Reg
ulat
ion
No
881/
2002
was
am
ende
d to
that
eff
ect,
inte
r alia
, by
the
addi
tion
of th
e fo
llow
ing
entry
und
er th
e he
adin
g ‘N
atur
al p
erso
ns’:
‘Yas
in A
bdul
lah
Ezze
dine
Qad
i (al
ias
(a) K
adi,
Shay
kh Y
assi
n A
bdul
lah;
(b) K
ahdi
, Yas
in; (
c)Y
asin
Al-Q
adi).
Dat
e of
birt
h: 2
3.2.
1955
. Pl
ace
of b
irth:
Cai
ro,
Egyp
t. N
atio
nalit
y: S
audi
Ara
bian
. Pas
spor
t num
ber:
B 7
5155
0, (b
) E 9
7617
7 (is
sued
on
6.3.
2004
, exp
iring
on
11.1
.200
9).
Oth
er in
form
atio
n: Je
ddah
, Sau
di A
rabi
a.’
35
The
cont
este
d re
gula
tion,
in
acco
rdan
ce w
ith A
rticl
e 2
ther
eof,
ente
red
into
for
ce o
n 3
Dec
embe
r 200
8 an
d is
app
licab
le fr
om 3
0 M
ay 2
002.
36
By
lette
r of
8 D
ecem
ber
2008
, th
e C
omm
issi
on r
eplie
d to
Mr
Kad
i’s c
omm
ents
of
10N
ovem
ber 2
008.
The
pro
cedu
re b
efor
e th
e G
ener
al C
ourt
and
the
judg
men
t und
er a
ppea
l
37
By
appl
icat
ion
lodg
ed a
t the
Reg
istry
of
the
Gen
eral
Cou
rt on
26
Febr
uary
200
9, M
r K
adi
brou
ght
an a
ctio
n fo
r an
nulm
ent
of t
he c
onte
sted
reg
ulat
ion
in s
o fa
r as
it
conc
erns
him
. In
supp
ort o
f hi
s cl
aim
s, he
put
for
war
d fiv
e pl
eas
in la
w. T
he s
econ
d pl
ea a
llege
d br
each
of
the
right
s of
the
defe
nce
and
of th
e rig
ht to
eff
ectiv
e ju
dici
al p
rote
ctio
n, a
nd th
e fif
th p
lea
alle
ged
adi
spro
porti
onat
e re
stric
tion
on th
e rig
ht to
pro
perty
.
38
In th
e ju
dgm
ent u
nder
app
eal,
the
Gen
eral
Cou
rt, r
elyi
ng o
n pa
ragr
aphs
326
and
327
of
the
Kad
ijud
gmen
t, fir
st h
eld,
in p
arag
raph
126
of
the
judg
men
t und
er a
ppea
l, th
at it
s ta
sk w
as to
ensu
re ‘i
n pr
inci
ple
the
full
revi
ew’ o
f the
law
fuln
ess
of th
e co
ntes
ted
regu
latio
n in
the
light
of
the
fund
amen
tal r
ight
s gua
rant
eed
by th
e Eu
rope
an U
nion
. It a
dded
, in
para
grap
hs 1
27 to
129
of
the
judg
men
t un
der
appe
al,
that
, so
lon
g as
the
re-
exam
inat
ion
proc
edur
e op
erat
ed b
y th
eSa
nctio
ns C
omm
ittee
cle
arly
fails
to o
ffer
gua
rant
ees
of e
ffec
tive
judi
cial
pro
tect
ion,
the
revi
ewca
rrie
d ou
t by
the
Cou
rts o
f th
e Eu
rope
an U
nion
of
Uni
on m
easu
res
to f
reez
e fu
nds
can
bere
gard
ed a
s ef
fect
ive
only
if it
con
cern
s, in
dire
ctly
, the
sub
stan
tive
asse
ssm
ents
of t
he S
anct
ions
Com
mitt
ee it
self
and
the
evid
ence
und
erly
ing
them
.
39
Th
e ar
gum
ent o
f the
Com
mis
sion
and
the
Cou
ncil
conc
erni
ng th
e C
ourt
of J
ustic
e’s
failu
re to
com
men
t, in
the
Kad
i jud
gmen
t, on
the
scop
e an
d in
tens
ity o
f suc
h ju
dici
al re
view
was
hel
d, in
para
grap
h 13
1 of
the
judg
men
t und
er a
ppea
l, to
be
clea
rly w
rong
.
40
In th
at r
egar
d, th
e G
ener
al C
ourt
held
in e
ssen
ce, i
n pa
ragr
aphs
132
to 1
35 o
f th
e ju
dgm
ent
unde
r ap
peal
, tha
t it i
s ob
viou
s, pa
rticu
larly
fro
m p
arag
raph
s 32
6, 3
27, 3
36 a
nd 3
42 to
344
of
the
Kad
iju
dgm
ent,
that
it
was
the
int
entio
n of
the
Cou
rt of
Jus
tice
that
jud
icia
l re
view
, in
prin
cipl
e fu
ll re
view
, sho
uld
exte
nd n
ot o
nly
to th
e ap
pare
nt m
erits
of t
he c
onte
sted
mea
sure
but
also
to th
e ev
iden
ce a
nd in
form
atio
n on
whi
ch th
e fin
ding
s mad
e in
that
mea
sure
are
bas
ed.
41
Th
e G
ener
al C
ourt
furth
er s
tate
d, in
par
agra
phs
138
to 1
46 o
f the
judg
men
t und
er a
ppea
l, th
at,
by r
epea
ting
the
esse
nce
of i
ts r
easo
ning
, in
con
nect
ion
with
the
reg
ime
men
tione
d in
para
grap
hs 1
4 an
d 15
of t
his
judg
men
t, in
its
judg
men
t of 1
2 D
ecem
ber 2
006
in C
ase
T22
8/02
Org
anis
atio
n de
s M
odja
hedi
nes
du p
eupl
e d’
Iran
v C
ounc
il[2
006]
EC
R I
I46
65, t
he C
ourt
ofJu
stic
e ap
prov
ed a
nd e
ndor
sed
the
stan
dard
and
inte
nsity
of
judi
cial
rev
iew
det
erm
ined
in th
atju
dgm
ent,
nam
ely
that
the
Cou
rts o
f the
Eur
opea
n U
nion
mus
t rev
iew
the
asse
ssm
ent m
ade
byth
e in
stitu
tion
conc
erne
d of
the
fact
s an
d ci
rcum
stan
ces
relie
d on
in s
uppo
rt of
the
rest
rictiv
em
easu
res a
t iss
ue a
nd d
eter
min
e w
heth
er th
e in
form
atio
n an
d ev
iden
ce o
n w
hich
that
ass
essm
ent
is b
ased
is a
ccur
ate,
relia
ble
and
cons
iste
nt, a
nd su
ch re
view
can
not b
e ba
rred
on
the
grou
nd th
atth
at in
form
atio
n an
d ev
iden
ce is
secr
et o
r con
fiden
tial.
42
A
fter h
avin
g al
so e
mph
asis
ed, i
n pa
ragr
aphs
148
to 1
51 o
f the
judg
men
t und
er a
ppea
l, th
at th
e
effe
ct o
n M
r K
adi’s
rig
hts
of th
e re
stric
tive
mea
sure
s to
whi
ch h
e ha
d be
en s
ubje
ct f
or a
lmos
tte
n ye
ars
was
mar
ked
and
long
-last
ing,
in p
arag
raph
151
of
that
judg
men
t the
Gen
eral
Cou
rtco
nfirm
ed ‘
the
prin
cipl
e of
a f
ull
and
rigor
ous
judi
cial
rev
iew
of
[fre
ezin
g m
easu
res
such
as
thos
e at
issu
e in
this
inst
ance
]’.
43
Ex
amin
ing,
nex
t, th
e se
cond
and
fifth
ple
as in
law
in s
uppo
rt of
ann
ulm
ent,
the
Gen
eral
Cou
rtfo
und,
in p
arag
raph
s 17
1 to
180
of
the
judg
men
t und
er a
ppea
l, th
at th
ere
was
a b
reac
h of
Mr
Kad
i’s ri
ghts
of d
efen
ce, a
fter o
bser
ving
, in
esse
nce,
that
:
–th
ose
right
s ha
d be
en re
spec
ted
only
in a
pur
ely
form
al a
nd s
uper
ficia
l sen
se, s
ince
the
Com
mis
sion
con
side
red
itsel
f st
rictly
bou
nd b
y th
e fin
ding
s of
the
Sanc
tions
Com
mitt
eean
d at
no
time
envi
sage
d ca
lling
them
into
que
stio
n in
the
light
of M
r Kad
i’s c
omm
ents
or
mak
ing
any
real
eff
ort t
o re
fute
the
excu
lpat
ory
evid
ence
add
uced
by
Mr K
adi;
–M
r Kad
i was
refu
sed
acce
ss b
y th
e C
omm
issi
on to
the
evid
ence
aga
inst
him
des
pite
his
expr
ess r
eque
st, w
hils
t no
bala
nce
was
stru
ck b
etw
een
his i
nter
ests
and
the
need
to p
rote
ctth
e co
nfid
entia
lity
of th
e in
form
atio
n in
que
stio
n, a
nd
–th
e fe
w p
iece
s of
inf
orm
atio
n an
d th
e va
gue
alle
gatio
ns i
n th
e su
mm
ary
of r
easo
nsre
latin
g to
the
lis
ting
of M
r K
adi
on t
he S
anct
ions
Com
mitt
ee C
onso
lidat
ed L
ist,
for
exam
ple,
that
Mr K
adi w
as a
shar
ehol
der i
n a
Bos
nian
ban
k in
whi
ch p
lann
ing
sess
ions
for
an a
ttack
on
a U
nite
d St
ates
faci
lity
in S
audi
Ara
bia
‘may
hav
e’ ta
ken
plac
e, w
ere
clea
rlyin
suff
icie
nt to
ena
ble
Mr
Kad
i to
mou
nt a
n ef
fect
ive
chal
leng
e to
the
alle
gatio
ns a
gain
sthi
m.
44
Th
e G
ener
al C
ourt
also
foun
d, in
par
agra
phs
181
to 1
84 o
f the
judg
men
t und
er a
ppea
l, th
at th
epr
inci
ple
of e
ffec
tive
judi
cial
pro
tect
ion
had
been
infr
inge
d on
the
grou
nds,
first
, tha
t sin
ce M
rK
adi w
as a
ffor
ded
no p
rope
r acc
ess
to th
e in
form
atio
n an
d ev
iden
ce u
sed
agai
nst h
im, M
r Kad
iha
d be
en u
nabl
e to
def
end
his r
ight
s with
rega
rd to
that
info
rmat
ion
and
evid
ence
in sa
tisfa
ctor
yco
nditi
ons
befo
re th
e C
ourts
of
the
Euro
pean
Uni
on a
nd, s
econ
dly,
that
that
infr
inge
men
t had
not
been
rem
edie
d in
the
cou
rse
of t
he p
roce
edin
gs b
efor
e th
e G
ener
al C
ourt,
giv
en t
hat
noev
iden
ce o
f th
at k
ind
or a
ny i
ndic
atio
n of
the
evi
denc
e re
lied
on a
gain
st M
r K
adi
had
been
disc
lose
d to
the
Gen
eral
Cou
rt by
the
inst
itutio
ns c
once
rned
.
45
Th
e G
ener
al C
ourt
furth
er h
eld,
in p
arag
raph
s 19
2 to
194
of
the
judg
men
t und
er a
ppea
l, th
atsi
nce
the
cont
este
d re
gula
tion
had
been
ado
pted
with
out M
r K
adi h
avin
g be
en a
ble
to p
ut h
isca
se to
the
com
pete
nt a
utho
ritie
s, no
twith
stan
ding
the
fact
that
the
mea
sure
s fr
eezi
ng h
is a
sset
s,gi
ven
thei
r gen
eral
app
licat
ion
and
dura
tion,
repr
esen
ted
a si
gnifi
cant
rest
rictio
n on
his
righ
t to
prop
erty
, the
impo
sitio
n of
suc
h m
easu
res
cons
titut
ed a
n un
just
ified
rest
rictio
n of
that
righ
t, an
dco
nseq
uent
ly th
at M
r K
adi’s
cla
im th
at th
e in
frin
gem
ent b
y th
at r
egul
atio
n of
his
fun
dam
enta
lrig
ht t
o re
spec
t fo
r pr
oper
ty e
ntai
led
a br
each
of
the
prin
cipl
e of
pro
porti
onal
ity w
as w
ell
foun
ded.
46
Th
e G
ener
al C
ourt
ther
efor
e an
nulle
d th
e co
ntes
ted
regu
latio
n in
so fa
r as i
t con
cern
s Mr K
adi.
Pro
cedu
re b
efor
e th
e C
ourt
and
form
s of o
rder
soug
ht
47
B
y or
der o
f the
Pre
side
nt o
f the
Cou
rt of
9 F
ebru
ary
2011
, Cas
es C
584/
10 P
, C59
3/10
P a
ndC
595/
10 P
wer
e jo
ined
for t
he p
urpo
ses o
f the
writ
ten
and
oral
pro
cedu
res a
nd th
e ju
dgm
ent.
48
B
y or
der o
f the
Pre
side
nt o
f the
Cou
rt of
23
May
201
1, fi
rst,
the
Cze
ch R
epub
lic, t
he K
ingd
omof
Den
mar
k, Ir
elan
d, th
e K
ingd
om o
f Spa
in a
nd th
e R
epub
lic o
f Aus
tria
wer
e gr
ante
d le
ave
toin
terv
ene
in C
ase
C59
3/10
P in
sup
port
of th
e fo
rms
of o
rder
of t
he C
ounc
il, a
nd, s
econ
dly,
the
Rep
ublic
of
Bul
garia
, th
e Ita
lian
Rep
ublic
, th
e G
rand
Duc
hy o
f Lu
xem
bour
g, H
unga
ry,
the
498
Kin
gdom
of
the
Net
herla
nds,
the
Slov
ak R
epub
lic a
nd t
he R
epub
lic o
f Fi
nlan
d w
ere
gran
ted
leav
e to
inte
rven
e in
Cas
es C
584/
10 P
, C59
3/10
P a
nd C
595/
10 P
in s
uppo
rt of
the
form
s of
orde
r of t
he C
omm
issi
on, t
he C
ounc
il an
d th
e U
nite
d K
ingd
om.
49
In
Cas
e C
584/
10 P
, the
Com
mis
sion
cla
ims t
hat t
he C
ourt
shou
ld:
–se
t asi
de th
e ju
dgm
ent u
nder
app
eal i
n its
ent
irety
;
–di
smis
s M
r K
adi’s
app
licat
ion
for
annu
lmen
t of
the
cont
este
d re
gula
tion
in s
o fa
r as
itco
ncer
ns h
im a
s bei
ng u
nfou
nded
, and
–or
der M
r Kad
i to
pay
the
Com
mis
sion
’s c
osts
in th
is a
ppea
l and
in th
e pr
ocee
ding
s bef
ore
the
Gen
eral
Cou
rt.
50
In
Cas
e C
593/
10 P
, the
Cou
ncil
clai
ms t
hat t
he C
ourt
shou
ld:
–se
t asi
de th
e ju
dgm
ent u
nder
app
eal;
–di
smis
s M
r K
adi’s
app
licat
ion
for
annu
lmen
t of
the
cont
este
d re
gula
tion
in s
o fa
r as
itco
ncer
ns h
im a
s bei
ng u
nfou
nded
, and
–or
der
Mr
Kad
i to
pay
the
cost
s in
the
proc
eedi
ngs
at f
irst i
nsta
nce
and
in th
e pr
esen
tap
peal
.
51
In
Cas
e C
595/
10 P
, the
Uni
ted
Kin
gdom
cla
ims t
hat t
he C
ourt
shou
ld:
–se
t asi
de th
e ju
dgm
ent u
nder
app
eal i
n its
ent
irety
;
–di
smis
s M
r K
adi’s
app
licat
ion
for
annu
lmen
t of
the
cont
este
d re
gula
tion
in s
o fa
r as
itco
ncer
ns h
im, a
nd
–or
der M
r Kad
i to
bear
the
Uni
ted
Kin
gdom
’s c
osts
in th
e pr
ocee
ding
s be
fore
the
Cou
rt of
Just
ice.
52
M
r Kad
i con
tend
s in
all t
hree
cas
es th
at th
e C
ourt
shou
ld:
–di
smis
s the
app
eals
;
–up
hold
the
judg
men
t und
er a
ppea
l and
dec
lare
that
it b
ecam
e im
med
iate
ly e
nfor
ceab
le o
nth
e da
te o
f del
iver
y; a
nd
–or
der
the
appe
llant
s to
pay
Mr
Kad
i’s c
osts
in th
e pr
esen
t app
eal,
incl
udin
g al
l cos
tsin
curr
ed in
resp
ondi
ng to
the
obse
rvat
ions
of i
nter
veni
ng M
embe
r Sta
tes.
53
Th
e Fr
ench
Rep
ublic
, int
erve
ner a
t firs
t ins
tanc
e, c
laim
s tha
t in
all t
hree
cas
es th
e C
ourt
shou
ld:
–se
t asi
de th
e ju
dgm
ent u
nder
app
eal,
and
–gi
ve fi
nal j
udgm
ent a
s to
the
subs
tanc
e, in
acc
orda
nce
with
Arti
cle
61 o
f the
Sta
tute
of t
heC
ourt
of J
ustic
e of
the
Euro
pean
Uni
on, a
nd re
ject
the
form
s of
ord
er s
ough
t by
Mr K
adi
at fi
rst i
nsta
nce.
54
Th
e R
epub
lic o
f Bul
garia
, the
Cze
ch R
epub
lic, t
he K
ingd
om o
f Den
mar
k, Ir
elan
d, th
e K
ingd
omof
Spa
in, t
he It
alia
n R
epub
lic, t
he G
rand
Duc
hy o
f Lux
embo
urg,
Hun
gary
, the
Kin
gdom
of t
heN
ethe
rland
s, th
e R
epub
lic o
f A
ustri
a, th
e Sl
ovak
Rep
ublic
and
the
Rep
ublic
of
Finl
and
clai
mth
at t
he j
udgm
ent
unde
r ap
peal
sho
uld
be s
et a
side
and
tha
t M
r K
adi’s
act
ion
for
annu
lmen
t
shou
ld b
e di
smis
sed.
The
req
uest
to r
eope
n th
e or
al p
roce
dure
55
B
y le
tter o
f 9 A
pril
2013
, Mr K
adi r
eque
sted
that
the
Cou
rt re
open
the
oral
pro
cedu
re, c
laim
ing,
in e
ssen
ce, t
hat s
tate
men
ts m
ade
in p
oint
117
of t
he O
pini
on o
f the
Adv
ocat
e G
ener
al in
rela
tion
to th
e is
sue
of re
spec
t for
the
right
s of
the
defe
nce
are
cont
radi
cted
by
the
findi
ngs
of fa
ct m
ade
by th
e G
ener
al C
ourt,
in p
arag
raph
s 17
1 an
d 17
2 of
the
judg
men
t und
er a
ppea
l, w
hich
hav
e no
tbe
en d
ebat
ed b
y th
e pa
rties
in th
e co
urse
of t
hese
app
eals
.
56
In
that
rega
rd, i
t mus
t be
reca
lled
that
, firs
t, th
e C
ourt
may
, of i
ts o
wn
mot
ion,
on
a pr
opos
alfr
om t
he A
dvoc
ate
Gen
eral
, or
at
the
requ
est
of t
he p
artie
s, or
der
the
reop
enin
g of
the
ora
lpr
oced
ure,
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith A
rticl
e 83
of t
he R
ules
of P
roce
dure
, if i
t con
side
rs th
at it
lack
ssu
ffic
ient
info
rmat
ion
or th
at th
e ca
se s
houl
d be
dec
ided
on
the
basi
s of
an
argu
men
t whi
ch h
asno
t bee
n de
bate
d be
twee
n th
e pa
rties
(see
judg
men
t of 1
1 A
pril
2013
in C
ase
C53
5/11
Nov
artis
Phar
ma,
par
agra
ph 3
0 an
d ca
se-la
w c
ited)
.
57
Se
cond
ly, p
ursu
ant t
o th
e se
cond
par
agra
ph o
f Arti
cle
252
TFEU
, it i
s the
dut
y of
the
Adv
ocat
eG
ener
al, a
ctin
g w
ith c
ompl
ete
impa
rtial
ity a
nd in
depe
nden
ce, t
o m
ake,
in o
pen
cour
t, re
ason
edsu
bmis
sion
s on
cas
es w
hich
, in
acco
rdan
ce w
ith th
e St
atut
e of
the
Cou
rt of
Jus
tice,
requ
ire th
eA
dvoc
ate
Gen
eral
’s i
nvol
vem
ent.
The
Cou
rt is
not
bou
nd e
ither
by
the
Adv
ocat
e G
ener
al’s
Opi
nion
or b
y th
e re
ason
ing
on w
hich
it is
bas
ed (s
ee ju
dgm
ent o
f 22
Nov
embe
r 201
2 in
Cas
eC
89/1
1 P
E.O
N E
nerg
ie v
Com
mis
sion
, par
agra
ph 6
2 an
d ca
se-la
w c
ited)
.
58
In t
he p
rese
nt c
ase,
the
Cou
rt, h
avin
g he
ard
the
Adv
ocat
e G
ener
al,
cons
ider
s th
at i
t ha
ssu
ffic
ient
inf
orm
atio
n to
adj
udic
ate
and
that
the
cas
es n
eed
not
be d
ecid
ed o
n th
e ba
sis
ofar
gum
ents
whi
ch h
ave
not
been
deb
ated
bet
wee
n th
e pa
rties
. Th
ere
is t
here
fore
no
need
to
acce
de to
the
requ
est t
o re
open
the
oral
pro
cedu
re.
The
app
eals
59
Th
e C
omm
issi
on, t
he C
ounc
il an
d th
e U
nite
d K
ingd
om p
ut fo
rwar
d va
rious
gro
unds
in s
uppo
rtof
thei
r res
pect
ive
appe
als.
Ther
e ar
e, in
ess
ence
, thr
ee. T
he fi
rst g
roun
d, ra
ised
by
the
Cou
ncil,
alle
ges
an e
rror
of l
aw in
that
the
cont
este
d re
gula
tion
was
not
reco
gnis
ed a
s ha
ving
imm
unity
from
juris
dict
ion.
The
sec
ond
grou
nd, r
aise
d by
the
Com
mis
sion
, the
Cou
ncil
and
the
Uni
ted
Kin
gdom
, al
lege
s er
rors
of
law
with
reg
ard
to t
he l
evel
of
inte
nsity
of
judi
cial
rev
iew
dete
rmin
ed i
n th
e ju
dgm
ent
unde
r ap
peal
. Th
e th
ird g
roun
d, a
gain
rai
sed
by t
hose
thr
eeap
pella
nts,
alle
ges
that
the
Gen
eral
Cou
rt er
red
in it
s ex
amin
atio
n of
Mr K
adi’s
ple
as in
resp
ect
of i
nfrin
gem
ent
of h
is r
ight
s of
def
ence
and
his
rig
ht t
o ef
fect
ive
judi
cial
pro
tect
ion,
and
in
resp
ect o
f inf
ringe
men
t of t
he p
rinci
ple
of p
ropo
rtion
ality
.
The
firs
t gro
und
of a
ppea
l: er
ror
of la
w in
that
the
cont
este
d re
gula
tion
was
not
rec
ogni
sed
asha
ving
imm
unity
from
juri
sdic
tion
Arg
umen
ts o
f the
par
ties
60
In r
elat
ion
to th
e fir
st g
roun
d of
app
eal,
the
Cou
ncil,
sup
porte
d by
Ire
land
, the
Kin
gdom
of
Spai
n an
d th
e Ita
lian
Rep
ublic
, com
plai
ns th
at th
e G
ener
al C
ourt
erre
d in
law
, in
parti
cula
r in
para
grap
h 12
6 of
the
jud
gmen
t un
der
appe
al, b
y re
fusi
ng, p
ursu
ant
to t
he K
adij
udgm
ent,
tore
cogn
ise
that
the
cont
este
d re
gula
tion
had
imm
unity
from
juris
dict
ion.
The
Cou
ncil,
sup
porte
dby
Irel
and,
form
ally
requ
ests
the
Cou
rt to
reco
nsid
er th
e pr
inci
ples
set
out
in th
at re
gard
in th
eK
adi j
udgm
ent.
499
61
R
efer
ring
to p
arag
raph
s 11
4 to
120
of
the
judg
men
t und
er a
ppea
l, th
e C
ounc
il, s
uppo
rted
byIr
elan
d an
d th
e Ita
lian
Rep
ublic
, cl
aim
s th
at t
he r
efus
al t
o gr
ant
the
cont
este
d re
gula
tion
imm
unity
from
juris
dict
ion
is c
ontra
ry to
inte
rnat
iona
l law
. Tha
t ref
usal
who
lly ig
nore
s th
e fa
ctth
at it
is th
e Se
curit
y C
ounc
il w
hich
has
prim
ary
resp
onsi
bilit
y fo
r de
term
inin
g th
e m
easu
res
nece
ssar
y fo
r th
e m
aint
enan
ce o
f in
tern
atio
nal p
eace
and
sec
urity
and
igno
res
the
prim
acy
ofob
ligat
ions
und
er th
e U
nite
d N
atio
ns C
harte
r ov
er th
ose
aris
ing
unde
r an
y ot
her
inte
rnat
iona
lag
reem
ent.
It di
sreg
ards
the
obl
igat
ion
to a
ct i
n go
od f
aith
and
the
dut
y to
pro
vide
mut
ual
assi
stan
ce w
hich
mus
t be
res
pect
ed w
hen
impl
emen
ting
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil
mea
sure
s. Th
atap
proa
ch le
ads
the
Euro
pean
Uni
on’s
inst
itutio
ns to
sub
stitu
te th
emse
lves
for
the
inte
rnat
iona
lbo
dies
whi
ch h
ave
the
rele
vant
pow
ers.
It am
ount
s to
revi
ewin
g th
e le
galit
y of
Sec
urity
Cou
ncil
reso
lutio
ns i
n th
e lig
ht o
f Eu
rope
an U
nion
law
. Th
e un
iform
, un
cond
ition
al a
nd i
mm
edia
teap
plic
atio
n of
tho
se r
esol
utio
ns i
s je
opar
dise
d. S
tate
s w
hich
are
mem
bers
bot
h of
the
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
and
of
the
Euro
pean
Uni
on f
ind
them
selv
es i
n an
im
poss
ible
pos
ition
as
rega
rds
mee
ting
thei
r int
erna
tiona
l obl
igat
ions
.
62
The
refu
sal t
o gr
ant t
he c
onte
sted
reg
ulat
ion
imm
unity
fro
m ju
risdi
ctio
n is
als
o co
ntra
ry to
Euro
pean
Uni
on l
aw.
It w
holly
ign
ores
the
fac
t th
at,
unde
r th
at l
aw,
the
Euro
pean
Uni
onin
stitu
tions
are
bou
nd to
com
ply
with
inte
rnat
iona
l law
and
with
the
deci
sion
s of
org
ans
of th
eU
N,
whe
re t
hose
ins
titut
ions
exe
rcis
e, o
n th
e in
tern
atio
nal
stag
e, p
ower
s th
at h
ave
been
trans
ferr
ed to
them
by
the
Mem
ber S
tate
s. It
disr
egar
ds th
e ne
ed to
stri
ke a
bal
ance
bet
wee
n th
em
aint
enan
ce o
f int
erna
tiona
l pea
ce a
nd s
ecur
ity, o
n th
e on
e ha
nd, a
nd th
e pr
otec
tion
of h
uman
right
s and
fund
amen
tal f
reed
oms,
on th
e ot
her.
63
M
r Kad
i con
tend
s tha
t any
cha
lleng
e to
the
posi
tion
that
a E
urop
ean
Uni
on m
easu
re su
ch a
s the
cont
este
d re
gula
tion
does
not
hav
e im
mun
ity fr
om ju
risdi
ctio
n is
con
trary
to th
e pr
inci
ple
of re
sju
dica
ta, g
iven
that
that
cha
lleng
e co
ncer
ns a
que
stio
n of
law
whi
ch w
as s
ettle
d be
twee
n th
esa
me
parti
es b
y th
e K
adij
udgm
ent
follo
win
g co
nsid
erat
ion
of t
he s
ame
argu
men
ts a
s th
ose
rais
ed in
the
pres
ent c
ase.
64
R
efer
ring
to v
ario
us p
assa
ges
in th
at ju
dgm
ent,
Mr K
adi d
ispu
tes,
in a
ny e
vent
, tha
t the
refu
sal
to g
rant
the
cont
este
d re
gula
tion
imm
unity
from
juris
dict
ion
is c
ontra
ry to
inte
rnat
iona
l law
and
to E
urop
ean
Uni
on la
w.
Fin
ding
s of t
he C
ourt
65
In
par
agra
ph 1
26 o
f the
judg
men
t und
er a
ppea
l, th
e G
ener
al C
ourt
held
that
, in
acco
rdan
ce w
ithpa
ragr
aphs
326
and
327
of
the
Kad
ijud
gmen
t, th
e co
ntes
ted
regu
latio
n co
uld
not b
e af
ford
edan
y im
mun
ity f
rom
jur
isdi
ctio
n on
the
gro
und
that
its
obj
ectiv
e is
to
impl
emen
t re
solu
tions
adop
ted
by th
e Se
curit
y C
ounc
il un
der C
hapt
er V
II o
f the
Cha
rter o
f the
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
.
66
Var
ious
fac
tors
, set
out
in p
arag
raph
s 29
1 to
327
of
the
Kad
ijud
gmen
t, w
ere
adva
nced
insu
ppor
t of
the
posi
tion
stat
ed b
y th
e C
ourt
in th
at ju
dgm
ent,
and
ther
e ha
s be
en n
o ch
ange
inth
ose
fact
ors
whi
ch
coul
d ju
stify
re
cons
ider
atio
n of
th
at
posi
tion,
th
ose
fact
ors
bein
g,es
sent
ially
, bou
nd u
p w
ith th
e co
nstit
utio
nal g
uara
ntee
whi
ch is
exe
rcis
ed, i
n a
Uni
on b
ased
on
the
rule
of l
aw (s
ee C
ase
C55
0/09
E a
nd F
[201
0] E
CR
I62
13, p
arag
raph
44,
and
judg
men
t of
26 J
une
2012
in C
ase
C33
5/09
P P
olan
d v
Com
mis
sion
, par
agra
ph 4
8), b
y ju
dici
al r
evie
w o
fth
e la
wfu
lnes
s of
all
Euro
pean
Uni
on m
easu
res,
incl
udin
g th
ose
whi
ch, a
s in
the
pres
ent c
ase,
impl
emen
t an
inte
rnat
iona
l law
mea
sure
, in
the
light
of t
he fu
ndam
enta
l rig
hts g
uara
ntee
d by
the
Euro
pean
Uni
on.
67
That
Eur
opea
n U
nion
mea
sure
s im
plem
entin
g re
stric
tive
mea
sure
s de
cide
d at
int
erna
tiona
lle
vel
enjo
y no
im
mun
ity f
rom
jur
isdi
ctio
n ha
s m
oreo
ver
been
con
firm
ed i
n Jo
ined
Cas
esC
399/
06 P
and
C40
3/06
P H
assa
n an
d Ay
adi v
Cou
ncil
and
Com
mis
sion
[200
9] E
CR
I11
393,
para
grap
hs 6
9 to
75,
and
, m
ore
rece
ntly
, in
the
jud
gmen
t of
16
Nov
embe
r 20
11 i
n C
ase
C54
8/09
P B
ank
Mel
li Ir
an v
Cou
ncil
[201
1] E
CR
I11
381,
whe
re it
is st
ated
, in
para
grap
h 10
5,
with
refe
renc
e to
the
Kad
i jud
gmen
t, th
at, w
ithou
t the
prim
acy
of a
Sec
urity
Cou
ncil
reso
lutio
nat
the
inte
rnat
iona
l lev
el th
ereb
y be
ing
calle
d in
to q
uest
ion,
the
requ
irem
ent t
hat t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on in
stitu
tions
shou
ld p
ay d
ue re
gard
to th
e in
stitu
tions
of t
he U
nite
d N
atio
ns m
ust n
ot re
sult
in th
ere
bein
g no
revi
ew o
f the
law
fuln
ess
of s
uch
Euro
pean
Uni
on m
easu
res,
in th
e lig
ht o
f the
fund
amen
tal r
ight
s whi
ch a
re a
n in
tegr
al p
art o
f the
gen
eral
prin
cipl
es o
f Eur
opea
n U
nion
law
.
68
It
follo
ws t
hat t
he ju
dgm
ent u
nder
app
eal,
in p
artic
ular
par
agra
ph 1
26 th
ereo
f, is
not
viti
ated
by
any
erro
r of
law
with
reg
ard
to t
he G
ener
al C
ourt’
s re
fusa
l, in
acc
orda
nce
with
the
Kad
iju
dgm
ent,
to a
ffor
d th
e co
ntes
ted
regu
latio
n im
mun
ity fr
om ju
risdi
ctio
n.
69
Th
e fir
st g
roun
d of
app
eal m
ust t
here
fore
be
reje
cted
.
The
sec
ond
and
thir
d gr
ound
s of
app
eal:
resp
ectiv
ely,
err
ors
of l
aw r
elat
ing
to t
he l
evel
of
inte
nsity
of j
udic
ial r
evie
w d
efin
ed in
the
judg
men
t und
er a
ppea
l and
err
ors
com
mitt
ed b
y th
eG
ener
al C
ourt
in th
e ex
amin
atio
n of
the
plea
s for
ann
ulm
ent b
ased
on
infr
inge
men
t of t
he ri
ghts
of th
e de
fenc
e, th
e ri
ght t
o ef
fect
ive
judi
cial
pro
tect
ion
and
the
prin
cipl
e of
pro
port
iona
lity
70
Th
e se
cond
and
third
gro
unds
of a
ppea
l sho
uld
be e
xam
ined
toge
ther
, sin
ce th
e su
bjec
t of b
oth
is, i
n es
senc
e, a
crit
icis
m o
f err
ors
of la
w v
itiat
ing
the
inte
rpre
tatio
n of
the
right
s of
the
defe
nce
and
the
right
to e
ffec
tive
judi
cial
pro
tect
ion
adop
ted
by th
e G
ener
al C
ourt
in th
e ju
dgm
ent u
nder
appe
al.
Arg
umen
ts o
f the
par
ties
71
In r
elat
ion
to th
e se
cond
and
third
gro
unds
of
appe
al, t
he C
omm
issi
on, t
he C
ounc
il an
d th
eU
nite
d K
ingd
om, s
uppo
rted
by th
e R
epub
lic o
f Bul
garia
, the
Cze
ch R
epub
lic, t
he K
ingd
om o
fD
enm
ark,
Irel
and,
the
Kin
gdom
of S
pain
, the
Fre
nch
Rep
ublic
, the
Ital
ian
Rep
ublic
, the
Gra
ndD
uchy
of L
uxem
bour
g, H
unga
ry, t
he K
ingd
om o
f the
Net
herla
nds,
the
Rep
ublic
of A
ustri
a, th
eSl
ovak
Rep
ublic
and
the
Rep
ublic
of
Finl
and,
cla
im, f
irst,
that
the
jud
gmen
t un
der
appe
al i
svi
tiate
d by
an
erro
r of
law
in th
at, c
ontra
ry to
wha
t is
stat
ed in
par
agra
phs
132
to 1
47 o
f th
atju
dgm
ent,
the
Kad
ijud
gmen
t con
tain
s no
indi
catio
n su
ppor
ting
the
Gen
eral
Cou
rt’s
appr
oach
conc
erni
ng th
e le
vel o
f int
ensi
ty o
f jud
icia
l rev
iew
to b
e ap
plie
d to
a E
urop
ean
Uni
on m
easu
resu
ch a
s the
con
test
ed re
gula
tion.
72
In th
e fir
st p
lace
, the
req
uire
men
t, se
t out
in p
arag
raph
326
of
the
Kad
i jud
gmen
t, th
at th
ere
shou
ld b
e ‘r
evie
w, i
n pr
inci
ple
full
revi
ew’,
of th
e la
wfu
lnes
s of
the
cont
este
d re
gula
tion
shou
ldbe
pla
ced
in th
e in
tern
atio
nal c
onte
xt to
the
adop
tion
of th
at m
easu
re, a
s des
crib
ed, i
n pa
rticu
lar,
in p
arag
raph
s 292
to 2
97 o
f tha
t jud
gmen
t.
73
In
the
seco
nd p
lace
, it i
s cl
aim
ed th
at th
e G
ener
al C
ourt
wro
ngly
hel
d, in
par
agra
ph 1
38 o
f the
judg
men
t un
der
appe
al,
that
the
Cou
rt ha
d, i
n th
e K
adi
judg
men
t, en
dors
ed t
he s
tand
ard
ofre
view
det
erm
ined
by
the
Gen
eral
Cou
rt in
its
cas
e-la
w r
elat
ing
to t
he r
egim
e re
ferr
ed t
o in
para
grap
hs 1
4 an
d 15
of t
his
judg
men
t. Th
e fa
ct is
that
the
Kad
i jud
gmen
t con
tain
s no
refe
renc
eto
that
cas
ela
w o
f th
e G
ener
al C
ourt.
Fur
ther
, tha
t arg
umen
t who
lly ig
nore
s th
e fu
ndam
enta
ldi
ffer
ence
s be
twee
n th
at r
egim
e an
d th
e re
gim
e at
issu
e in
the
pres
ent c
ase,
with
reg
ard
to th
edi
scre
tion
of t
he i
nstit
utio
ns o
f th
e Eu
rope
an U
nion
and
the
ir ac
cess
to
the
info
rmat
ion
and
evid
ence
per
tain
ing
to th
e re
stric
tive
mea
sure
s ado
pted
.
74
Se
cond
, the
Com
mis
sion
, the
Cou
ncil
and
the
Uni
ted
Kin
gdom
, sup
porte
d by
all
the
Mem
ber
Stat
es in
terv
enin
g in
the
appe
als,
clai
m, o
n th
e ba
sis
of a
rgum
ents
take
n fr
om in
tern
atio
nal l
awan
d Eu
rope
an U
nion
law
bro
adly
com
para
ble
to th
ose
set o
ut in
par
agra
phs
61 a
nd 6
2 of
this
judg
men
t, th
at th
e de
finiti
on o
f the
leve
l of i
nten
sity
of j
udic
ial r
evie
w se
t out
in p
arag
raph
s 123
to 1
47 o
f th
e ju
dgm
ent
unde
r ap
peal
is
wro
ng i
n la
w.
They
add
tha
t th
e ex
cess
ivel
yin
terv
entio
nist
app
roac
h fo
llow
ed b
y th
e G
ener
al C
ourt
in th
e ju
dgm
ent u
nder
app
eal c
anno
t be
reco
ncile
d w
ith s
ettle
d ca
se-la
w in
favo
ur o
f res
trict
ed ju
dici
al re
view
, lim
ited
to m
anife
st e
rror
500
of a
sses
smen
t, w
hen
the
mea
sure
s con
cern
ed a
re th
e ou
tcom
e of
cho
ices
resu
lting
from
com
plex
asse
ssm
ents
and
the
exer
cise
of a
wid
e di
scre
tion
exer
cise
d in
pur
suit
of b
road
ly d
efin
ed g
oals
.
75
Third
, the
Com
mis
sion
, the
Cou
ncil
and
the
Uni
ted
Kin
gdom
cla
im th
at th
e G
ener
al C
ourt
erre
d, in
par
agra
phs
148
to 1
51 o
f the
judg
men
t und
er a
ppea
l, in
sug
gest
ing
that
the
rest
rictiv
em
easu
res
at i
ssue
in
this
cas
e sh
ould
now
be
rega
rded
as
equi
vale
nt t
o a
crim
inal
pen
alty
.Su
ppor
ted
by th
e C
zech
Rep
ublic
, Ire
land
, the
Fre
nch
Rep
ublic
, the
Ital
ian
Rep
ublic
, Hun
gary
and
the
Rep
ublic
of A
ustri
a, th
ey c
laim
that
the
purp
ose
of th
ose
mea
sure
s, w
hich
are
ess
entia
llypr
ecau
tiona
ry, i
s to
ant
icip
ate
and
prev
ent c
urre
nt o
r fu
ture
thre
ats
to in
tern
atio
nal p
eace
and
secu
rity,
and
that
they
can
be
dist
ingu
ishe
d fr
om c
rimin
al p
enal
ties,
whi
ch a
re im
pose
d, fo
r the
irpa
rt, in
resp
ect o
f pun
isha
ble
past
act
s w
hich
hav
e be
en o
bjec
tivel
y es
tabl
ishe
d. M
oreo
ver,
the
mea
sure
s at i
ssue
are
inte
nded
to b
e te
mpo
rary
and
are
acc
ompa
nied
by
dero
gatio
ns.
76
Fo
urth
, the
Com
mis
sion
, the
Cou
ncil
and
the
Uni
ted
Kin
gdom
cla
im th
at th
e G
ener
al C
ourt’
sin
terp
reta
tion,
in p
arag
raph
s 171
to 1
88 a
nd 1
92 to
194
of t
he ju
dgm
ent u
nder
app
eal,
rela
ting
toth
e re
quire
men
ts, s
tem
min
g fr
om r
espe
ct f
or M
r K
adi’s
fun
dam
enta
l rig
hts,
appl
icab
le t
o th
elis
ting
of M
r Kad
i’s n
ame
in A
nnex
I to
Reg
ulat
ion
No
881/
2002
follo
win
g th
e K
adi j
udgm
ent
is le
gally
err
oneo
us.
77
Su
ppor
ted
by th
e R
epub
lic o
f Bul
garia
, the
Cze
ch R
epub
lic, I
rela
nd, t
he K
ingd
om o
f Spa
in, t
heFr
ench
Rep
ublic
, the
Ital
ian
Rep
ublic
, Hun
gary
, the
Kin
gdom
of t
he N
ethe
rland
s, th
e R
epub
licof
Aus
tria,
the
Slov
ak R
epub
lic a
nd th
e R
epub
lic o
f Fin
land
, the
y cl
aim
that
the
Gen
eral
Cou
rter
red
in h
oldi
ng t
hat
resp
ect
for
thos
e fu
ndam
enta
l rig
hts
requ
ired
the
disc
losu
re o
f th
ein
form
atio
n an
d ev
iden
ce re
lied
on a
gain
st M
r Kad
i.
78
That
inte
rpre
tatio
n by
the
Gen
eral
Cou
rt w
holly
igno
res
the
poss
ibili
ty, s
tate
d in
par
agra
phs
342
to 3
44 o
f th
e K
adi
judg
men
t, th
at t
he r
ight
of
a pa
rty c
once
rned
to
the
disc
losu
re o
fev
iden
ce r
elie
d on
aga
inst
him
mig
ht b
e re
stric
ted
in o
rder
to
ensu
re t
hat
the
disc
losu
re o
fse
nsiti
ve in
form
atio
n ca
nnot
lead
to th
ird p
artie
s bec
omin
g pr
ivy
to th
at in
form
atio
n an
d th
ereb
yev
adin
g m
easu
res
take
n to
com
bat
inte
rnat
iona
l te
rror
ism
. M
oreo
ver,
the
criti
cism
s m
ade
inpa
ragr
aphs
345
to 3
52 o
f th
at ju
dgm
ent r
elat
ed to
the
failu
re to
com
mun
icat
e to
Mr
Kad
i the
reas
ons
for t
he li
stin
g of
his
nam
e in
Ann
ex I
to R
egul
atio
n N
o 88
1/20
02, a
nd n
ot to
the
failu
reto
dis
clos
e in
form
atio
n an
d ev
iden
ce h
eld
by th
e Sa
nctio
ns C
omm
ittee
.
79
Fu
rther
, the
Gen
eral
Cou
rt’s
appr
oach
doe
s no
t tak
e in
to a
ccou
nt th
e m
any
mat
eria
l obs
tacl
esth
at e
xist
to
the
com
mun
icat
ion
of s
uch
info
rmat
ion
and
evid
ence
to
the
Euro
pean
Uni
onin
stitu
tions
, in
parti
cula
r the
fact
that
the
sour
ce o
f tha
t inf
orm
atio
n an
d ev
iden
ce is
a s
tate
men
tof
cas
e se
nt t
o th
e Sa
nctio
ns C
omm
ittee
by
a M
embe
r of
the
UN
, ge
nera
lly s
ubje
ct t
o a
requ
irem
ent o
f con
fiden
tialit
y du
e to
its s
ensi
tivity
.
80
In
the
pres
ent c
ase,
the
sum
mar
y of
reas
ons
prov
ided
by
the
Sanc
tions
Com
mitt
ee w
hich
was
disc
lose
d to
Mr
Kad
i en
able
d hi
m t
o un
ders
tand
why
his
nam
e w
as l
iste
d in
Ann
ex I
to
Reg
ulat
ion
No
881/
2002
. Far
from
bei
ng li
mite
d to
alle
gatio
ns a
gain
st h
im w
hich
wer
e ge
nera
l,un
subs
tant
iate
d, v
ague
and
lac
king
in
deta
il, t
hat
sum
mar
y, c
ontra
ry t
o w
hat
is s
tate
d in
para
grap
hs 1
57 a
nd 1
77 o
f the
judg
men
t und
er a
ppea
l, se
t out
in d
etai
l the
evi
denc
e w
hich
had
led
the
Sanc
tions
Com
mitt
ee to
take
the
view
that
Mr
Kad
i had
per
sona
l and
dire
ct li
nks
with
the
Al-Q
aeda
net
wor
k an
d w
ith U
sam
a bi
n La
den.
81
Fi
fth, t
he C
omm
issi
on c
onte
nds
that
the
Gen
eral
Cou
rt er
red
by fa
iling
, exc
ept a
s re
gard
s th
efin
ding
of
fact
mad
e in
par
agra
ph 6
7 of
the
jud
gmen
t un
der
appe
al, t
o ta
ke i
nto
acco
unt
the
para
llel p
roce
edin
gs b
roug
ht b
y M
r Kad
i bef
ore
cour
ts in
the
Uni
ted
Stat
es in
ord
er to
dis
mis
sM
r Kad
i’s o
bjec
tions
con
cern
ing
the
alle
ged
lack
of e
ffec
tive
judi
cial
pro
tect
ion
and
the
alle
ged
impo
ssib
ility
of o
btai
ning
acc
ess t
o th
e re
leva
nt in
form
atio
n an
d ev
iden
ce.
82
Si
xth,
the
Com
mis
sion
, the
Cou
ncil
and
the
Uni
ted
Kin
gdom
cla
im th
at th
e an
alys
is c
arrie
d ou
t
by t
he G
ener
al C
ourt,
in
para
grap
hs 1
27 a
nd 1
28 o
f th
e ju
dgm
ent
unde
r ap
peal
, of
the
alte
ratio
ns m
ade
to t
he r
eex
amin
atio
n pr
oced
ures
est
ablis
hed
at U
nite
d N
atio
ns l
evel
is
defe
ctiv
e.
83
Su
ppor
ted
by a
ll th
e M
embe
r St
ates
inte
rven
ing
in th
e ap
peal
s, th
ey c
laim
that
the
ex o
ffici
ope
riodi
c re
exam
inat
ion
proc
edur
e in
trodu
ced
by R
esol
utio
n 18
22 (2
008)
has
con
tribu
ted
to a
nim
prov
emen
t in
the
prot
ectio
n of
fund
amen
tal r
ight
s, as
dem
onst
rate
d by
the
fact
that
the
nam
esof
a g
reat
man
y pe
rson
s an
d en
titie
s ha
ve b
een
rem
oved
fro
m t
he S
anct
ions
Com
mitt
eeC
onso
lidat
ed L
ist.
As
rega
rds
the
Off
ice
of t
he O
mbu
dspe
rson
est
ablis
hed
by R
esol
utio
n19
04 (2
009)
, its
cre
atio
n re
pres
ents
a d
ecis
ive
new
dep
artu
re in
this
are
a by
ena
blin
g th
e pe
rson
conc
erne
d to
arg
ue h
is c
ase
befo
re a
n in
depe
nden
t and
impa
rtial
aut
horit
y, w
hich
has
the
task
of
subm
ittin
g, i
f ap
prop
riate
, to
the
San
ctio
ns C
omm
ittee
rea
sons
sup
porti
ng t
he r
eque
sted
delis
ting.
84
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil
Res
olut
ion
1989
(20
11)
of 1
7 Ju
ne 2
011
conf
irms
the
desi
re c
onst
antly
toim
prov
e th
e pr
oces
s fo
r de
alin
g w
ith r
eque
sts
for
rem
oval
fro
m t
he S
anct
ions
Com
mitt
eeC
onso
lidat
ed L
ist.
In p
artic
ular
, su
ch a
del
istin
g is
no
long
er d
epen
dent
on
the
unan
imou
sco
nsen
t of
the
mem
bers
of
the
Sanc
tions
Com
mitt
ee. I
t be
com
es e
ffec
tive
60 d
ays
afte
r th
atC
omm
ittee
ha
s co
mpl
eted
co
nsid
erat
ion
of
a re
com
men
datio
n to
th
at
effe
ct
and
of
aco
mpr
ehen
sive
rep
ort b
oth
subm
itted
by
the
Om
buds
pers
on, u
nles
s th
ere
is a
con
sens
us to
the
cont
rary
with
in th
e Sa
nctio
ns C
omm
ittee
or t
here
is a
requ
est t
hat t
he fi
le b
e re
ferr
ed b
ack
to th
eSe
curit
y C
ounc
il. I
n th
e ev
ent t
hat t
he O
mbu
dspe
rson
’s r
ecom
men
datio
n is
not
fol
low
ed, t
heob
ligat
ion
on th
e Sa
nctio
ns C
omm
ittee
to s
tate
rea
sons
and
its
duty
of
trans
pare
ncy
have
bee
nex
tend
ed. R
esol
utio
n 19
89 (2
011)
is a
lso
inte
nded
to im
prov
e th
e ac
cess
of t
he O
mbu
dspe
rson
to c
onfid
entia
l inf
orm
atio
n he
ld b
y th
e M
embe
rs o
f the
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
and
the
disc
losu
re o
f the
iden
tity
of th
e St
ates
whi
ch re
ques
ted
the
listin
g.
85
M
r K
adi r
espo
nds,
first
, tha
t the
Gen
eral
Cou
rt co
rrec
tly h
eld,
in th
e ju
dgm
ent u
nder
app
eal,
that
the
Cou
rt ga
ve a
per
fect
ly c
lear
indi
catio
n, in
the
Kad
i jud
gmen
t, of
the
scop
e an
d in
tens
ityof
judi
cial
revi
ew a
pplic
able
in th
is c
ase.
The
Cou
rt ex
plic
itly
stat
ed, i
n th
e K
adi j
udgm
ent,
that
the
revi
ew o
f la
wfu
lnes
s sh
ould
be
a fu
ll re
view
, ex
tend
ing,
sub
ject
onl
y to
con
fiden
tialit
yre
quire
men
ts r
elat
ing
to p
ublic
sec
urity
, to
the
info
rmat
ion
and
evid
ence
rel
ied
on a
gain
st M
rK
adi.
Furth
er,
the
fact
tha
t, un
like
the
regi
me
refe
rred
to
in p
arag
raph
s 14
and
15
of t
his
judg
men
t, th
e re
gim
e at
issu
e in
this
cas
e do
es n
ot in
volv
e, p
rior t
o th
e pr
oced
ure
at E
urop
ean
Uni
on le
vel,
any
proc
edur
e sa
fegu
ardi
ng re
spec
t for
the
right
s of t
he d
efen
ce su
bjec
t to
effe
ctiv
eju
dici
al re
view
is a
n ar
gum
ent w
hich
sup
ports
the
enha
ncem
ent o
f eff
ectiv
e ju
dici
al p
rote
ctio
nat
Eur
opea
n U
nion
lev
el,
as s
tate
d by
the
Gen
eral
Cou
rt in
par
agra
phs
186
and
187
of t
heju
dgm
ent u
nder
app
eal.
86
Se
cond
, Mr K
adi d
oes
not a
ccep
t tha
t the
requ
irem
ent s
tate
d in
the
judg
men
t und
er a
ppea
l in
rela
tion
to th
e le
vel o
f int
ensi
ty o
f jud
icia
l rev
iew
app
licab
le in
this
cas
e is
inco
rrec
t.
87
In
the
first
pla
ce, t
he G
ener
al C
ourt’
s ap
proa
ch d
oes
not d
isre
gard
inte
rnat
iona
l law
. Jud
icia
lre
view
of t
he la
wfu
lnes
s of t
he c
onte
sted
regu
latio
n is
not
equ
ival
ent t
o re
view
of t
he v
alid
ity o
fth
e re
solu
tion
whi
ch t
hat
regu
latio
n im
plem
ents
. Th
at r
evie
w d
oes
not
chal
leng
e ei
ther
the
prim
ary
resp
onsi
bilit
y of
the
Sec
urity
Cou
ncil
in t
he a
rea
conc
erne
d or
the
prim
acy
of t
heC
harte
r of
the
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
ove
r an
y ot
her
inte
rnat
iona
l ag
reem
ent.
Nor
is
such
jud
icia
lre
view
inte
nded
to su
bstit
ute
the
polit
ical
judg
men
t of t
he C
ourts
of t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on fo
r tha
tof
the
com
pete
nt i
nter
natio
nal
auth
oriti
es.
Its p
urpo
se i
s so
lely
to
ensu
re o
bser
vanc
e of
the
requ
irem
ent t
hat S
ecur
ity C
ounc
il R
esol
utio
ns a
re im
plem
ente
d w
ithin
the
Euro
pean
Uni
on in
am
anne
r com
patib
le w
ith th
e fu
ndam
enta
l prin
cipl
es o
f Eur
opea
n U
nion
law
. Mor
e sp
ecifi
cally
,su
ch r
evie
w c
ontri
bute
s to
ens
urin
g th
at a
bal
ance
is
stru
ck b
etw
een
the
requ
irem
ents
of
inte
rnat
iona
l pea
ce a
nd s
ecur
ity, o
n th
e on
e ha
nd, a
nd th
e pr
otec
tion
of f
unda
men
tal r
ight
s, on
the
othe
r.
501
88
In th
e se
cond
pla
ce, t
he G
ener
al C
ourt’
s ap
proa
ch is
con
sist
ent w
ith E
urop
ean
Uni
on la
w,
whi
ch r
equi
res
resp
ect f
or f
unda
men
tal r
ight
s an
d th
e gu
aran
tee
of in
depe
nden
t and
impa
rtial
judi
cial
revi
ew, i
nclu
ding
revi
ew o
f Eur
opea
n U
nion
mea
sure
s bas
ed o
n in
tern
atio
nal l
aw.
89
Th
ird, a
fter n
otin
g th
at th
e co
nsid
erat
ions
of t
he G
ener
al C
ourt
on th
e na
ture
of t
he re
stric
tive
mea
sure
s at
issu
e ar
e su
pple
men
tary
, Mr
Kad
i non
e th
e le
ss a
rgue
s th
at, i
n hi
s pa
rticu
lar
case
,th
ose
mea
sure
s ca
n no
long
er b
e de
scrib
ed a
s pr
even
tive
and
have
bec
ome
puni
tive,
by
reas
onbo
th o
f the
ir ge
nera
l sco
pe a
nd th
e fa
ct th
at h
e ha
s be
en s
ubje
ct to
them
for a
ver
y lo
ng ti
me,
afa
ctor
whi
ch ju
stifi
es fu
ll an
d rig
orou
s rev
iew
of t
he c
onte
sted
regu
latio
n.
90
Fo
urth
, Mr
Kad
i doe
s no
t acc
ept t
hat t
he r
equi
rem
ents
impo
sed
by th
e G
ener
al C
ourt
for
the
purp
oses
of r
espe
ct fo
r his
fund
amen
tal r
ight
s are
viti
ated
by
an e
rror
of l
aw.
91
Mr
Kad
i con
tend
s, in
this
reg
ard,
that
eff
ectiv
e ju
dici
al r
evie
w is
impo
ssib
le w
hen
ther
e is
aco
mpl
ete
failu
re to
dis
clos
e th
e in
form
atio
n an
d ev
iden
ce h
eld
by th
e bo
dies
of t
he U
N. A
s the
seve
ry b
odie
s ac
cept
, the
nar
rativ
e su
mm
ary
of r
easo
ns p
rovi
ded
by th
e Sa
nctio
ns C
omm
ittee
isno
t des
igne
d to
be
used
as e
vide
nce.
It m
erel
y co
mpr
ises
a u
sefu
l ind
icat
ion
of th
e pa
st a
ctiv
ities
of th
e pe
rson
con
cern
ed a
nd o
f the
exi
sten
ce o
f evi
denc
e kn
own
to m
embe
rs o
f tha
t com
mitt
ee.
92
Th
e fa
ct th
at th
ere
is n
o fo
rmal
pro
cedu
re fo
r the
exc
hang
e of
info
rmat
ion
betw
een
the
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil
and
the
inst
itutio
ns o
f the
Eur
opea
n U
nion
is n
o ba
r to
an e
xcha
nge
of th
e in
form
atio
nne
cess
ary
to e
nsur
ing
the
achi
evem
ent
of t
heir
com
mon
goa
l of
saf
egua
rdin
g fu
ndam
enta
lhu
man
righ
ts w
hen
appl
ying
rest
rictiv
e m
easu
res.
In th
e pr
esen
t cas
e, d
espi
te M
r Kad
i’s e
xpre
ssre
ques
t, th
e C
omm
issi
on h
as n
ot e
ven
atte
mpt
ed t
o ob
tain
dis
clos
ure
by t
he S
anct
ions
Com
mitt
ee o
f a
deta
iled
stat
emen
t of
the
fact
s or
evi
denc
e ju
stify
ing
the
listin
g of
Mr
Kad
i’sna
me
on th
e lis
ts a
t iss
ue.
93
A
s re
gard
s th
e na
rrat
ive
sum
mar
y of
reas
ons
prov
ided
by
the
Sanc
tions
Com
mitt
ee, i
t con
tain
sa
num
ber o
f gen
eral
and
uns
ubst
antia
ted
alle
gatio
ns, w
hich
Mr K
adi h
as n
ot b
een
in a
pos
ition
effe
ctiv
ely
to re
but.
94
Fi
fth, M
r Kad
i con
tend
s th
at th
e le
gal p
roce
edin
gs in
the
Uni
ted
Stat
es a
re o
f no
rele
vanc
e to
this
cas
e, g
iven
that
the
purp
ose
of th
ose
proc
eedi
ngs i
s the
ann
ulm
ent o
f his
list
ing
on th
e lis
t of
the
Off
ice
of F
orei
gn A
sset
s C
ontro
l, of
the
Uni
ted
Stat
es T
reas
ury
Dep
artm
ent,
for
reas
ons
who
lly d
istin
ct f
rom
the
grou
nds
at is
sue
in th
is c
ase.
Tho
se p
roce
edin
gs c
once
rn n
eith
er th
eco
ntes
ted
regu
latio
n no
r th
e Se
curit
y C
ounc
il R
esol
utio
ns w
hich
that
reg
ulat
ion
is d
esig
ned
toim
plem
ent.
95
Sixt
h, M
r K
adi
cont
ends
tha
t, w
hen
the
cont
este
d re
gula
tion
was
ado
pted
, th
e on
ly r
e-ex
amin
atio
n pr
oced
ure
esta
blis
hed
at U
nite
d N
atio
ns l
evel
was
tha
t of
the
Foc
al P
oint
. A
sre
gard
s th
e cr
eatio
n of
the
Off
ice
of t
he O
mbu
dspe
rson
, w
hich
, al
thou
gh p
ost-d
atin
g th
atad
optio
n, w
as t
aken
int
o ac
coun
t by
the
Gen
eral
Cou
rt, t
hat
does
not
off
er a
ny g
uara
ntee
of
judi
cial
pro
tect
ion.
In p
artic
ular
, the
per
son
seek
ing
the
delis
ting
of h
is n
ame
from
the
Sanc
tions
Com
mitt
ee C
onso
lidat
ed L
ist d
oes
not h
ave
avai
labl
e to
him
a d
etai
led
stat
emen
t of t
he re
ason
sfo
r his
bei
ng p
lace
d on
that
list
, nor
the
evid
ence
relie
d on
aga
inst
him
, and
he
does
not
hav
e th
erig
ht to
be
hear
d by
the
Sanc
tions
Com
mitt
ee, t
he b
ody
that
will
exc
lusi
vely
mak
e th
e de
cisi
onon
del
istin
g. M
oreo
ver,
the
Om
buds
pers
on h
as n
o po
wer
to c
ompe
l any
act
ion
by th
e M
embe
rsof
the
UN
or
by t
he S
anct
ions
Com
mitt
ee,
whi
ch e
njoy
s a
disc
retio
n. T
he p
ersi
sten
tsh
ortc
omin
gs o
f th
is p
roce
dure
hav
e be
en e
mph
asis
ed b
y, a
mon
g ot
hers
, th
e O
ffic
e of
the
Om
buds
pers
on it
self
in it
s fir
st r
epor
t of
Janu
ary
2011
, whi
ch d
rew
par
ticul
ar a
ttent
ion
to th
ela
ck o
f ac
cess
to c
lass
ified
or
conf
iden
tial i
nfor
mat
ion
and
the
fact
that
the
appl
ican
t rem
ains
unaw
are
of th
e id
entit
y of
the
Stat
e or
Sta
tes t
hat p
ropo
sed
his i
nclu
sion
in th
at li
st.
96
Th
ose
shor
tcom
ings
wer
e no
t rec
tifie
d by
Res
olut
ion
1989
(201
1). T
he re
com
men
datio
ns o
f the
Off
ice
of th
e O
mbu
dspe
rson
still
do
not h
ave
bind
ing
forc
e. T
he d
eter
min
atio
n of
the
crite
ria fo
r
delis
ting
from
the
San
ctio
ns C
omm
ittee
Con
solid
ated
Lis
t an
d th
e po
wer
to
deci
de t
o de
list
rem
ain
with
in th
e di
scre
tion
of th
e Sa
nctio
ns C
omm
ittee
. Whe
re a
del
istin
g re
com
men
datio
n is
mad
e by
the
Off
ice
of th
e O
mbu
dspe
rson
, any
mem
ber
of th
e Sa
nctio
ns C
omm
ittee
may
ref
erth
e m
atte
r to
the
Sec
urity
Cou
ncil,
the
fiv
e pe
rman
ent
mem
bers
of
whi
ch m
ay e
xerc
ise
thei
rve
to a
ccor
ding
to th
eir d
iscr
etio
n. T
he O
ffic
e of
the
Om
buds
pers
on d
epen
ds, m
oreo
ver,
on th
ew
illin
gnes
s of S
tate
s to
coop
erat
e in
gat
herin
g in
form
atio
n.
Fin
ding
s of t
he C
ourt
–Th
e ex
tent
of t
he ri
ghts
of t
he d
efen
ce a
nd o
f the
righ
t to
effe
ctiv
e ju
dici
al p
rote
ctio
n
97
A
s st
ated
by
the
Gen
eral
Cou
rt in
par
agra
phs
125,
126
and
171
of t
he ju
dgm
ent u
nder
app
eal,
the
Cou
rt he
ld, i
n pa
ragr
aph
326
of th
e K
adi j
udgm
ent,
that
the
Cou
rts o
f the
Eur
opea
n U
nion
mus
t, in
acc
orda
nce
with
the
pow
ers
conf
erre
d on
them
by
the
Trea
ties,
ensu
re th
e re
view
, in
prin
cipl
e th
e fu
ll re
view
, of
the
law
fuln
ess
of a
ll U
nion
act
s in
the
lig
ht o
f th
e fu
ndam
enta
lrig
hts
form
ing
an i
nteg
ral
part
of t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on l
egal
ord
er,
incl
udin
g re
view
of
such
mea
sure
s as
are
des
igne
d to
giv
e ef
fect
to r
esol
utio
ns a
dopt
ed b
y th
e Se
curit
y C
ounc
il un
der
Cha
pter
VII
of
the
Cha
rter
of th
e U
nite
d N
atio
ns (
see
also
, to
that
eff
ect,
Has
san
and
Ayad
i vC
ounc
il an
d C
omm
issi
on, p
arag
raph
71,
and
Ban
k M
elli
Iran
v C
ounc
il, p
arag
raph
105
). Th
atob
ligat
ion
is e
xpre
ssly
laid
dow
n by
the
seco
nd p
arag
raph
of A
rticl
e 27
5 TF
EU.
98
Th
ose
fund
amen
tal r
ight
s inc
lude
, int
er a
lia, r
espe
ct fo
r the
righ
ts o
f the
def
ence
and
the
right
toef
fect
ive
judi
cial
pro
tect
ion.
99
The
first
of
thos
e rig
hts,
whi
ch is
aff
irmed
in A
rticl
e 41
(2)
of th
e C
harte
r of
Fun
dam
enta
lR
ight
s of
the
Eur
opea
n U
nion
(‘th
e C
harte
r’)
(see
, to
tha
t ef
fect
, C
ase
C27
/09
P Fr
ance
vPe
ople
’s M
ojah
edin
Org
aniz
atio
n of
Ira
n [2
011]
EC
R I
1342
7, p
arag
raph
66)
, in
clud
es t
herig
ht t
o be
hea
rd a
nd t
he r
ight
to
have
acc
ess
to t
he f
ile,
subj
ect
to l
egiti
mat
e in
tere
sts
inm
aint
aini
ng c
onfid
entia
lity.
100
Th
e se
cond
of t
hose
fund
amen
tal r
ight
s, w
hich
is a
ffirm
ed in
Arti
cle
47 o
f the
Cha
rter,
requ
ires
that
the
pers
on c
once
rned
mus
t be
able
to a
scer
tain
the
reas
ons u
pon
whi
ch th
e de
cisi
on ta
ken
inre
latio
n to
him
is
base
d, e
ither
by
read
ing
the
deci
sion
its
elf
or b
y re
ques
ting
and
obta
inin
gdi
sclo
sure
of
thos
e re
ason
s, w
ithou
t pre
judi
ce to
the
pow
er o
f th
e co
urt h
avin
g ju
risdi
ctio
n to
requ
ire th
e au
thor
ity c
once
rned
to d
iscl
ose
that
info
rmat
ion,
so
as to
mak
e it
poss
ible
for h
im to
defe
nd h
is r
ight
s in
the
bes
t po
ssib
le c
ondi
tions
and
to
deci
de,
with
ful
l kn
owle
dge
of t
here
leva
nt fa
cts,
whe
ther
ther
e is
any
poi
nt in
his
app
lyin
g to
the
cour
t hav
ing
juris
dict
ion,
and
inor
der t
o pu
t the
latte
r ful
ly in
a p
ositi
on to
revi
ew th
e la
wfu
lnes
s of t
he d
ecis
ion
in q
uest
ion
(see
judg
men
t of 4
June
201
3 in
Cas
e C
300/
11 Z
Z, p
arag
raph
53
and
case
-law
cite
d).
101
A
rticl
e 52
(1)
of t
he C
harte
r ne
verth
eles
s al
low
s lim
itatio
ns o
n th
e ex
erci
se o
f th
e rig
hts
ensh
rined
in
the
Cha
rter,
subj
ect
to t
he c
ondi
tions
tha
t th
e lim
itatio
n co
ncer
ned
resp
ects
the
esse
nce
of th
e fu
ndam
enta
l rig
ht in
que
stio
n an
d, s
ubje
ct to
the
prin
cipl
e of
pro
porti
onal
ity, t
hat
it is
nec
essa
ry a
nd g
enui
nely
mee
ts o
bjec
tives
of
gene
ral i
nter
est r
ecog
nise
d by
the
Euro
pean
Uni
on (s
ee Z
Z, p
arag
raph
51)
.
102
F
urth
er, t
he q
uest
ion
whe
ther
ther
e is
an
infr
inge
men
t of
the
right
s of
the
defe
nce
and
of th
erig
ht to
eff
ectiv
e ju
dici
al p
rote
ctio
n m
ust b
e ex
amin
ed in
rela
tion
to th
e sp
ecifi
c ci
rcum
stan
ces
of e
ach
parti
cula
r cas
e (s
ee, t
o th
at e
ffec
t, C
ase
C11
0/10
P S
olva
y v
Com
mis
sion
[201
1] E
CR
I10
439,
par
agra
ph 6
3), i
nclu
ding
, the
nat
ure
of th
e ac
t at i
ssue
, the
con
text
of i
ts a
dopt
ion
and
the
lega
l rul
es g
over
ning
the
mat
ter i
n qu
estio
n (s
ee, t
o th
at e
ffec
t, as
rega
rds
com
plia
nce
with
the
duty
to s
tate
reas
ons,
the
judg
men
ts o
f 15
Nov
embe
r 201
2 in
Joi
ned
Cas
es C
539/
10 P
and
C55
0/10
P A
l-Aqs
a v
Cou
ncil
and
Net
herl
ands
v A
l-Aqs
a, p
arag
raph
s 139
and
140
, and
in C
ase
C41
7/11
P C
ounc
il v
Bam
ba, p
arag
raph
53)
.
502
103
I
n th
is c
ase,
it is
nec
essa
ry to
det
erm
ine
whe
ther
, in
the
light
of
the
requ
irem
ents
sta
ted,
inpa
rticu
lar,
in A
rticl
e 3(
1) a
nd (5
) TEU
and
Arti
cle
21(1
) and
(2)(
a) a
nd (c
) TEU
, rel
atin
g to
the
mai
nten
ance
of
inte
rnat
iona
l pe
ace
and
secu
rity
whi
le r
espe
ctin
g in
tern
atio
nal
law
, an
dsp
ecifi
cally
the
prin
cipl
es o
f th
e C
harte
r of
the
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
, the
fac
t tha
t Mr
Kad
i and
the
Cou
rts o
f th
e Eu
rope
an U
nion
did
not
hav
e ac
cess
to th
e in
form
atio
n an
d ev
iden
ce r
elie
d on
agai
nst h
im, t
o w
hich
the
Gen
eral
Cou
rt dr
aws a
ttent
ion,
par
ticul
arly
in p
arag
raph
s 173
, 181
and
182
of th
e ju
dgm
ent u
nder
app
eal,
cons
titut
es a
n in
frin
gem
ent o
f th
e rig
hts
of th
e de
fenc
e an
dth
e rig
ht to
eff
ectiv
e ju
dici
al p
rote
ctio
n.
104
I
n th
at r
egar
d, a
s th
e C
ourt
has
prev
ious
ly s
tate
d, s
peci
fical
ly in
par
agra
ph 2
94 o
f th
e K
adi
judg
men
t, it
mus
t be
emph
asis
ed th
at, i
n ac
cord
ance
with
Arti
cle
24 o
f the
Cha
rter o
f the
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
, the
Sec
urity
Cou
ncil
has
been
inve
sted
by
the
mem
bers
of
the
UN
with
the
prim
ary
resp
onsi
bilit
y fo
r the
mai
nten
ance
of i
nter
natio
nal p
eace
and
sec
urity
. To
that
end
, it i
s th
e ta
skof
the
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil
to d
eter
min
e w
hat c
onst
itute
s a th
reat
to in
tern
atio
nal p
eace
and
secu
rity
and
to ta
ke th
e m
easu
res
nece
ssar
y, b
y m
eans
of t
he a
dopt
ion
of re
solu
tions
und
er C
hapt
er V
IIof
that
Cha
rter,
to m
aint
ain
or r
esto
re in
tern
atio
nal p
eace
and
sec
urity
, in
acco
rdan
ce w
ith th
epu
rpos
es a
nd p
rinci
ples
of t
he U
nite
d N
atio
ns, i
nclu
ding
resp
ect f
or h
uman
righ
ts.
105
In
that
con
text
, as
is a
ppar
ent f
rom
the
reso
lutio
ns, r
efer
red
to in
par
agra
phs
10 a
nd 1
1 of
this
judg
men
t, go
vern
ing
the
regi
me
of re
stric
tive
mea
sure
s su
ch a
s th
ose
at is
sue
in th
is c
ase,
it is
the
task
of t
he S
anct
ions
Com
mitt
ee, o
n th
e pr
opos
al o
f a U
N m
embe
r sup
porte
d by
a ‘s
tate
men
tof
cas
e’ w
hich
sho
uld
prov
ide
‘as
muc
h de
tail
as p
ossi
ble
on th
e ba
sis(
es)
for
the
listin
g’, t
he‘n
atur
e of
the
info
rmat
ion’
and
‘sup
porti
ng in
form
atio
n or
doc
umen
ts th
at c
an b
e pr
ovid
ed’,
tode
sign
ate,
app
lyin
g th
e cr
iteria
laid
dow
n by
the
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil,
the
orga
nisa
tions
, ent
ities
and
indi
vidu
als
who
se f
unds
and
oth
er e
cono
mic
res
ourc
es a
re to
be
froz
en. T
hat d
esig
natio
n, p
utin
to e
ffec
t by
the
listin
g of
the
nam
e of
the
orga
nisa
tion,
ent
ity o
r ind
ivid
ual c
once
rned
on
the
Sanc
tions
Com
mitt
ee C
onso
lidat
ed L
ist w
hich
is m
aint
aine
d at
the
requ
est o
f the
Mem
ber S
tate
sof
the
UN
, is
to b
e ba
sed
on a
‘sum
mar
y of
reas
ons’
whi
ch is
to b
e pr
oduc
ed b
y th
e Sa
nctio
nsC
omm
ittee
in
the
light
of
the
mat
eria
l w
hich
the
Mem
ber
Stat
e pr
opos
ing
the
listin
g ha
sid
entif
ied
as c
apab
le o
f dis
clos
ure,
par
ticul
arly
to th
e pa
rty c
once
rned
, and
whi
ch is
to b
e m
ade
acce
ssib
le o
n its
web
site
.
106
W
hen
the
Euro
pean
Uni
on im
plem
ents
Sec
urity
Cou
ncil
reso
lutio
ns a
dopt
ed u
nder
Cha
pter
VII
of t
he C
harte
r of
the
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
, on
the
bas
is o
f a
Com
mon
Pos
ition
or
a jo
int
actio
nad
opte
d by
the
Mem
ber
Stat
es p
ursu
ant
to t
he p
rovi
sion
s of
the
EU
Tre
aty
rela
ting
to t
heco
mm
on f
orei
gn a
nd s
ecur
ity p
olic
y, t
he c
ompe
tent
Eur
opea
n U
nion
aut
horit
y m
ust
take
due
acco
unt o
f the
term
s an
d ob
ject
ives
of t
he re
solu
tion
conc
erne
d an
d of
the
rele
vant
obl
igat
ions
unde
r tha
t Cha
rter r
elat
ing
to s
uch
impl
emen
tatio
n (s
ee th
e K
adi j
udgm
ent,
para
grap
hs 2
95 a
nd29
6).
107
C
onse
quen
tly, w
here
, und
er th
e re
leva
nt S
ecur
ity C
ounc
il re
solu
tions
, the
San
ctio
ns C
omm
ittee
has
deci
ded
to li
st th
e na
me
of a
n or
gani
satio
n, e
ntity
or i
ndiv
idua
l on
its C
onso
lidat
ed L
ist,
the
com
pete
nt E
urop
ean
Uni
on a
utho
rity
mus
t, in
ord
er to
giv
e ef
fect
to th
at d
ecis
ion
on b
ehal
f of
the
Mem
ber S
tate
s, ta
ke th
e de
cisi
on to
list
the
nam
e of
that
org
anis
atio
n, e
ntity
or i
ndiv
idua
l, or
to m
aint
ain
such
list
ing,
in A
nnex
I to
Reg
ulat
ion
No
881/
2002
on
the
basi
s of
the
sum
mar
y of
reas
ons
prov
ided
by
the
Sanc
tions
Com
mitt
ee. O
n th
e ot
her h
and,
ther
e is
no
prov
isio
n in
thos
ere
solu
tions
to th
e ef
fect
that
the
Sanc
tions
Com
mitt
ee is
aut
omat
ical
ly to
mak
e av
aila
ble
to, i
npa
rticu
lar,
the
Euro
pean
Uni
on a
utho
rity
resp
onsi
ble
for t
he a
dopt
ion
by th
e Eu
rope
an U
nion
of
its d
ecis
ion
to li
st o
r mai
ntai
n a
listin
g, a
ny m
ater
ial o
ther
than
that
sum
mar
y of
reas
ons.
108
A
ccor
ding
ly, b
oth
in re
spec
t of a
n in
itial
dec
isio
n to
list
the
nam
e of
an
orga
nisa
tion,
ent
ity o
rin
divi
dual
in A
nnex
I to
Reg
ulat
ion
No
881/
2002
and
, as
in th
e pr
esen
t cas
e, in
res
pect
of
ade
cisi
on to
mai
ntai
n su
ch a
list
ing
orig
inal
ly a
dopt
ed b
efor
e 3
Sept
embe
r 200
8, th
e da
te o
f the
Kad
i ju
dgm
ent,
Arti
cle
7a(1
) an
d (2
) an
d A
rticl
e 7c
(1)
and
(2)
of R
egul
atio
n N
o 88
1/20
02,
inse
rted
by C
ounc
il R
egul
atio
n (E
U) N
o 12
86/2
009
of 2
2 D
ecem
ber 2
009
amen
ding
Reg
ulat
ion
No
881/
2002
(O
J 20
09 L
346
p.
42)
in o
rder
to
amen
d th
e lis
ting
proc
edur
e fo
llow
ing
that
judg
men
t, as
is
expl
aine
d in
rec
ital
4 of
the
pre
ambl
e to
Reg
ulat
ion
No
1286
/200
9, r
efer
excl
usiv
ely
to th
e ‘s
tate
men
t of r
easo
ns’ p
rovi
ded
by th
e Sa
nctio
ns C
omm
ittee
for t
he p
urpo
ses
of th
e ta
king
of s
uch
deci
sion
s.
109
In
the
parti
cula
r cas
e of
Mr K
adi,
it is
app
aren
t fro
m th
e fil
e th
at th
e in
itial
list
ing
of h
is n
ame,
on 1
7 O
ctob
er 2
001
in th
e Sa
nctio
ns C
omm
ittee
Con
solid
ated
Lis
t fol
low
ed a
req
uest
by
the
Uni
ted
Stat
es o
n th
e ba
sis
of th
e ad
optio
n on
12
Oct
ober
200
1 of
a d
ecis
ion
in w
hich
the
Off
ice
of F
orei
gn A
sset
Con
trol i
dent
ified
Mr K
adi a
s a ‘S
peci
ally
Des
igna
ted
Glo
bal T
erro
rist’.
110
A
s is
app
aren
t fr
om r
ecita
l 3
of t
he p
ream
ble
to t
he c
onte
sted
reg
ulat
ion
[Reg
ulat
ion
No
1190
/200
8],
follo
win
g th
e K
adi
judg
men
t th
e C
omm
issi
on,
by m
eans
of
that
reg
ulat
ion,
deci
ded
to m
aint
ain
the
nam
e of
Mr K
adi o
n th
e lis
t in
Ann
ex I
to R
egul
atio
n N
o 81
/200
2 on
the
basi
s of
the
nar
rativ
e su
mm
arie
s of
rea
sons
whi
ch h
ad b
een
trans
mitt
ed b
y th
e Sa
nctio
nsC
omm
ittee
. As
the
Gen
eral
Cou
rt re
cord
ed in
par
agra
ph 9
5 of
the
judg
men
t und
er a
ppea
l, an
das
the
Com
mis
sion
con
firm
ed a
t the
hea
ring
befo
re th
e C
ourt,
the
Com
mis
sion
was
not
, for
that
purp
ose,
put
in p
osse
ssio
n of
evi
denc
e ot
her t
han
such
a su
mm
ary
of re
ason
s.
111
In
pro
ceed
ings
rela
ting
to th
e ad
optio
n of
the
deci
sion
to li
st o
r mai
ntai
n th
e lis
ting
of th
e na
me
of a
n in
divi
dual
in A
nnex
I to
Reg
ulat
ion
No
881/
2002
, res
pect
for t
he ri
ghts
of t
he d
efen
ce a
ndth
e rig
ht to
eff
ectiv
e ju
dici
al p
rote
ctio
n re
quire
s th
at th
e co
mpe
tent
Uni
on a
utho
rity
disc
lose
toth
e in
divi
dual
con
cern
ed th
e ev
iden
ce a
gain
st th
at p
erso
n av
aila
ble
to th
at a
utho
rity
and
relie
don
as
the
basi
s of
its
deci
sion
, tha
t is
to s
ay, a
t the
ver
y le
ast,
the
sum
mar
y of
reas
ons
prov
ided
by th
e Sa
nctio
ns C
omm
ittee
(see
, to
that
eff
ect,
the
Kad
i jud
gmen
t, pa
ragr
aphs
336
and
337
), so
that
that
indi
vidu
al is
in a
pos
ition
to d
efen
d hi
s rig
hts
in th
e be
st p
ossi
ble
cond
ition
s an
d to
deci
de,
with
ful
l kn
owle
dge
of t
he r
elev
ant
fact
s, w
heth
er t
here
is
any
poin
t in
brin
ging
an
actio
n be
fore
the
Cou
rts o
f the
Eur
opea
n U
nion
.
112
W
hen
that
dis
clos
ure
take
s pl
ace,
the
com
pete
nt U
nion
aut
horit
y m
ust
ensu
re t
hat
that
indi
vidu
al i
s pl
aced
in
a po
sitio
n in
whi
ch h
e m
ay e
ffec
tivel
y m
ake
know
n hi
s vi
ews
on t
hegr
ound
s ad
vanc
ed a
gain
st h
im (s
ee, t
o th
at e
ffec
t, C
ase
C32
/95
P C
omm
issi
on v
Lis
rest
al a
ndO
ther
s[1
996]
EC
R I
5373
, par
agra
ph 2
1; C
ase
C46
2/98
P M
edio
curs
o v
Com
mis
sion
[200
0]EC
R I
7183
, par
agra
ph 3
6, a
nd ju
dgm
ent o
f 22
Nov
embe
r 201
2 in
Cas
e C
277/
11 M
., pa
ragr
aph
87 a
nd c
ase-
law
cite
d).
113
A
s re
gard
s a
deci
sion
whe
reby
, as
in th
is c
ase,
the
nam
e of
the
indi
vidu
al c
once
rned
is to
be
mai
ntai
ned
on t
he l
ist
in A
nnex
I t
o R
egul
atio
n N
o 88
1/20
02,
com
plia
nce
with
tha
t du
alpr
oced
ural
obl
igat
ion
mus
t, co
ntra
ry to
the
posi
tion
in r
espe
ct o
f an
initi
al li
stin
g (s
ee, i
n th
atre
gard
, th
e K
adi
judg
men
t, pa
ragr
aphs
336
to
341
and
345
to 3
49,
and
Fran
ce v
Peo
ple’
sM
ojah
edin
Org
aniz
atio
n of
Ira
n, p
arag
raph
61)
, pr
eced
e th
e ad
optio
n of
tha
t de
cisi
on (
see
Fran
ce v
Peo
ple’
s Moj
ahed
in O
rgan
izat
ion
of Ir
an, p
arag
raph
62)
. It i
s no
t dis
pute
d th
at, i
n th
epr
esen
t ca
se,
the
Com
mis
sion
, th
e au
thor
of
the
cont
este
d re
gula
tion,
com
plie
d w
ith t
hat
oblig
atio
n.
114
W
hen
com
men
ts a
re m
ade
by t
he i
ndiv
idua
l co
ncer
ned
on t
he s
umm
ary
of r
easo
ns,
the
com
pete
nt E
urop
ean
Uni
on a
utho
rity
is u
nder
an
oblig
atio
n to
exa
min
e, c
aref
ully
and
impa
rtial
ly, w
heth
er th
e al
lege
d re
ason
s ar
e w
ell f
ound
ed, i
n th
e lig
ht o
f th
ose
com
men
ts a
ndan
y ex
culp
ator
y ev
iden
ce p
rovi
ded
with
tho
se c
omm
ents
(se
e, b
y an
alog
y, C
ase
C26
9/90
Tech
nisc
he U
nive
rsitä
t Mün
chen
[199
1] E
CR
I54
69, p
arag
raph
14;
Cas
e C
-525
/04
P Sp
ain
vLe
nzin
g[2
007]
EC
R I
9947
, par
agra
ph 5
8, a
nd M
., pa
ragr
aph
88).
115
In
that
con
text
, it i
s fo
r tha
t aut
horit
y to
ass
ess,
havi
ng re
gard
, int
er a
lia, t
o th
e co
nten
t of a
nysu
ch c
omm
ents
, whe
ther
it is
nec
essa
ry to
see
k th
e as
sist
ance
of t
he S
anct
ions
Com
mitt
ee a
nd,
thro
ugh
that
com
mitt
ee, t
he M
embe
r of
the
UN
whi
ch p
ropo
sed
the
listin
g of
the
ind
ivid
ual
conc
erne
d on
that
com
mitt
ee’s
Con
solid
ated
Lis
t, in
ord
er to
obt
ain,
in th
at s
pirit
of
effe
ctiv
e
503
coop
erat
ion
whi
ch, u
nder
Arti
cle
220(
1) T
FEU
, mus
t gov
ern
rela
tions
bet
wee
n th
e U
nion
and
the
orga
ns o
f th
e U
nite
d N
atio
ns in
the
fight
aga
inst
inte
rnat
iona
l ter
roris
m, t
he d
iscl
osur
e of
info
rmat
ion
or e
vide
nce,
con
fiden
tial
or n
ot, t
o en
able
it
to d
isch
arge
its
dut
y of
car
eful
and
impa
rtial
exa
min
atio
n.
116
L
astly
, with
out g
oing
so
far
as to
req
uire
a d
etai
led
resp
onse
to th
e co
mm
ents
mad
e by
the
indi
vidu
al c
once
rned
(se
e, t
o th
at e
ffec
t, Al
Aqsa
v C
ounc
ilan
d N
ethe
rlan
ds v
Al-A
qsa,
para
grap
h 14
1), t
he o
blig
atio
n to
sta
te r
easo
ns l
aid
dow
n in
Arti
cle
296
TFEU
ent
ails
in
all
circ
umst
ance
s, no
t le
ast
whe
n th
e re
ason
s st
ated
for
the
Eur
opea
n U
nion
mea
sure
rep
rese
ntre
ason
s st
ated
by
an in
tern
atio
nal b
ody,
that
that
sta
tem
ent o
f rea
sons
iden
tifie
s th
e in
divi
dual
,sp
ecifi
c an
d co
ncre
te r
easo
ns w
hy t
he c
ompe
tent
aut
horit
ies
cons
ider
tha
t th
e in
divi
dual
conc
erne
d m
ust
be s
ubje
ct t
o re
stric
tive
mea
sure
s (s
ee, t
o th
at e
ffec
t, Al
-Aqs
a v
Cou
ncil
and
Net
herl
ands
v A
lAqs
a, p
arag
raph
s 140
and
142
, and
Cou
ncil
v Ba
mba
, par
agra
phs 4
9 to
53)
.
117
A
s re
gard
s co
urt p
roce
edin
gs, i
n th
e ev
ent t
hat t
he p
erso
n co
ncer
ned
chal
leng
es th
e la
wfu
lnes
sof
the
deci
sion
to li
st o
r mai
ntai
n th
e lis
ting
of h
is n
ame
in A
nnex
I to
Reg
ulat
ion
No
881/
2002
,th
e re
view
by
the
Cou
rts o
f th
e Eu
rope
an U
nion
mus
t ext
end
to w
heth
er r
ules
as
to p
roce
dure
and
rule
s as
to c
ompe
tenc
e, in
clud
ing
whe
ther
or
not t
he le
gal b
asis
is a
dequ
ate,
are
obs
erve
d(s
ee,
to t
hat
effe
ct,
the
Kad
i ju
dgm
ent,
para
grap
hs 1
21 t
o 23
6; s
ee a
lso,
by
anal
ogy,
the
judg
men
t of 1
3 M
arch
201
2 in
Cas
e C
376/
10 P
Tay
Za
v C
ounc
il, p
arag
raph
s 46
to 7
2).
118
Th
e C
ourts
of
the
Euro
pean
Uni
on m
ust,
furth
er, d
eter
min
e w
heth
er th
e co
mpe
tent
Eur
opea
nU
nion
aut
horit
y ha
s com
plie
d w
ith th
e pr
oced
ural
safe
guar
ds se
t out
in p
arag
raph
s 111
to 1
14 o
fth
is ju
dgm
ent a
nd th
e ob
ligat
ion
to s
tate
reas
ons
laid
dow
n in
Arti
cle
296
TFEU
, as
men
tione
din
par
agra
ph 1
16 o
f th
is j
udgm
ent,
and,
in
parti
cula
r, w
heth
er t
he r
easo
ns r
elie
d on
are
suff
icie
ntly
det
aile
d an
d sp
ecifi
c.
119
Th
e ef
fect
iven
ess
of th
e ju
dici
al re
view
gua
rant
eed
by A
rticl
e 47
of t
he C
harte
r als
o re
quire
sth
at, a
s pa
rt of
the
revi
ew o
f the
law
fuln
ess
of th
e gr
ound
s w
hich
are
the
basi
s of
the
deci
sion
tolis
t or t
o m
aint
ain
the
listin
g of
a g
iven
per
son
in A
nnex
I to
Reg
ulat
ion
No
881/
2002
(the
Kad
iju
dgm
ent,
para
grap
h 33
6), t
he C
ourts
of
the
Euro
pean
Uni
on a
re to
ens
ure
that
that
dec
isio
n,w
hich
aff
ects
that
per
son
indi
vidu
ally
(see
, to
that
eff
ect,
judg
men
t of 2
3 A
pril
2013
in J
oine
dC
ases
C47
8/11
P to
C48
2/11
P G
bagb
o an
d O
ther
s v
Cou
ncil,
par
agra
ph 5
6), i
s ta
ken
on a
suff
icie
ntly
solid
fact
ual b
asis
(see
, to
that
eff
ect,
Al-A
qsa
v C
ounc
il an
d N
ethe
rlan
ds v
Al-A
qsa,
para
grap
h 68
). Th
at e
ntai
ls a
ver
ifica
tion
of th
e fa
ctua
l alle
gatio
ns in
the
sum
mar
y of
rea
sons
unde
rpin
ning
that
dec
isio
n (s
ee to
that
eff
ect,
E an
d F,
par
agra
ph 5
7), w
ith th
e co
nseq
uenc
e th
atju
dici
al r
evie
w c
anno
t be
res
trict
ed t
o an
ass
essm
ent
of t
he c
ogen
cy i
n th
e ab
stra
ct o
f th
ere
ason
s re
lied
on, b
ut m
ust c
once
rn w
heth
er th
ose
reas
ons,
or, a
t the
ver
y le
ast,
one
of th
ose
reas
ons,
deem
ed su
ffic
ient
in it
self
to su
ppor
t tha
t dec
isio
n, is
subs
tant
iate
d.
120
To
that
end
, it i
s for
the
Cou
rts o
f the
Eur
opea
n U
nion
, in
orde
r to
carr
y ou
t tha
t exa
min
atio
n, to
requ
est
the
com
pete
nt E
urop
ean
Uni
on a
utho
rity,
whe
n ne
cess
ary,
to
prod
uce
info
rmat
ion
orev
iden
ce, c
onfid
entia
l or
not,
rele
vant
to s
uch
an e
xam
inat
ion
(see
, by
anal
ogy,
ZZ,
par
agra
ph59
).
121
T
hat i
s be
caus
e it
is th
e ta
sk o
f th
e co
mpe
tent
Eur
opea
n U
nion
aut
horit
y to
est
ablis
h, in
the
even
t of c
halle
nge,
that
the
reas
ons r
elie
d on
aga
inst
the
pers
on c
once
rned
are
wel
l fou
nded
, and
not t
he ta
sk o
f th
at p
erso
n to
add
uce
evid
ence
of
the
nega
tive,
that
thos
e re
ason
s ar
e no
t wel
lfo
unde
d.
122
F
or th
at p
urpo
se, t
here
is n
o re
quire
men
t tha
t tha
t aut
horit
y pr
oduc
e be
fore
the
Cou
rts o
f th
eEu
rope
an U
nion
all
the
info
rmat
ion
and
evid
ence
und
erly
ing
the
reas
ons a
llege
d in
the
sum
mar
ypr
ovid
ed b
y th
e Sa
nctio
ns C
omm
ittee
. It i
s ho
wev
er n
eces
sary
that
the
info
rmat
ion
or e
vide
nce
prod
uced
shou
ld su
ppor
t the
reas
ons r
elie
d on
aga
inst
the
pers
on c
once
rned
.
123
If
the
com
pete
nt E
urop
ean
Uni
on a
utho
rity
finds
itse
lf un
able
to c
ompl
y w
ith th
e re
ques
t by
the
Cou
rts o
f the
Eur
opea
n U
nion
, it i
s the
n th
e du
ty o
f tho
se C
ourts
to b
ase
thei
r dec
isio
n so
lely
on
the
mat
eria
l whi
ch h
as b
een
disc
lose
d to
them
, nam
ely,
in th
is c
ase,
the
indi
catio
ns c
onta
ined
inth
e na
rrat
ive
sum
mar
y of
rea
sons
pro
vide
d by
the
Sanc
tions
Com
mitt
ee, t
he o
bser
vatio
ns a
ndex
culp
ator
y ev
iden
ce th
at m
ay h
ave
been
pro
duce
d by
the
pers
on c
once
rned
and
the
resp
onse
of
the
com
pete
nt E
urop
ean
Uni
on a
utho
rity
to th
ose
obse
rvat
ions
. If t
hat m
ater
ial i
s in
suff
icie
nt to
allo
w a
find
ing
that
a re
ason
is w
ell f
ound
ed, t
he C
ourts
of t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on s
hall
disr
egar
dth
at re
ason
as a
pos
sibl
e ba
sis f
or th
e co
ntes
ted
deci
sion
to li
st o
r mai
ntai
n a
listin
g.
124
If
, on
the
othe
r han
d, th
e co
mpe
tent
Eur
opea
n U
nion
aut
horit
y pr
ovid
es re
leva
nt in
form
atio
n or
evid
ence
, the
Cou
rts o
f the
Eur
opea
n U
nion
mus
t the
n de
term
ine
whe
ther
the
fact
s al
lege
d ar
em
ade
out
in t
he l
ight
of
that
inf
orm
atio
n or
evi
denc
e an
d as
sess
the
pro
bativ
e va
lue
of t
hat
info
rmat
ion
or e
vide
nce
in t
he c
ircum
stan
ces
of t
he p
artic
ular
cas
e an
d in
the
lig
ht o
f an
yob
serv
atio
ns su
bmitt
ed in
rela
tion
to th
em b
y, a
mon
g ot
hers
, the
per
son
conc
erne
d.
125
A
dmitt
edly
, ove
rrid
ing
cons
ider
atio
ns to
do
with
the
secu
rity
of th
e Eu
rope
an U
nion
or o
f its
Mem
ber
Stat
es o
r w
ith th
e co
nduc
t of
thei
r in
tern
atio
nal r
elat
ions
may
pre
clud
e th
e di
sclo
sure
of so
me
info
rmat
ion
or so
me
evid
ence
to th
e pe
rson
con
cern
ed. I
n su
ch c
ircum
stan
ces,
it is
non
eth
e le
ss t
he t
ask
of t
he C
ourts
of
the
Euro
pean
Uni
on,
befo
re w
hom
the
sec
recy
or
conf
iden
tialit
y of
that
info
rmat
ion
or e
vide
nce
is n
o va
lid o
bjec
tion,
to a
pply
, in
the
cour
se o
fth
e ju
dici
al r
evie
w t
o be
car
ried
out,
tech
niqu
es w
hich
acc
omm
odat
e, o
n th
e on
e ha
nd,
legi
timat
e se
curit
y co
nsid
erat
ions
abo
ut t
he n
atur
e an
d so
urce
s of
inf
orm
atio
n ta
ken
into
acco
unt i
n th
e ad
optio
n of
the
act c
once
rned
and
, on
the
othe
r, th
e ne
ed su
ffic
ient
ly to
gua
rant
eeto
an
indi
vidu
al r
espe
ct f
or h
is p
roce
dura
l rig
hts,
such
as
the
right
to
be h
eard
and
the
requ
irem
ent f
or a
n ad
vers
aria
l pro
cess
(se
e, to
that
eff
ect,
the
Kad
i jud
gmen
t, pa
ragr
aphs
342
and
344;
see
also
, by
anal
ogy,
ZZ,
par
agra
phs 5
4, 5
7 an
d 59
).
126
To
that
end
, it i
s for
the
Cou
rts o
f the
Eur
opea
n U
nion
, whe
n ca
rryi
ng o
ut a
n ex
amin
atio
n of
all
the
mat
ters
of
fact
or
law
pro
duce
d by
the
com
pete
nt E
urop
ean
Uni
on a
utho
rity,
to d
eter
min
ew
heth
er th
e re
ason
s re
lied
on b
y th
at a
utho
rity
as g
roun
ds to
pre
clud
e th
at d
iscl
osur
e ar
e w
ell
foun
ded
(see
, by
anal
ogy,
ZZ,
par
agra
phs 6
1 an
d 62
).
127
If
the
Cou
rts o
f the
Eur
opea
n U
nion
con
clud
e th
at th
ose
reas
ons
do n
ot p
recl
ude
disc
losu
re, a
tth
e ve
ry l
east
par
tial
disc
losu
re,
of t
he i
nfor
mat
ion
or e
vide
nce
conc
erne
d, i
t sh
all
give
the
com
pete
nt E
urop
ean
Uni
on a
utho
rity
the
oppo
rtuni
ty t
o m
ake
such
dis
clos
ure
to t
he p
erso
nco
ncer
ned.
If
that
aut
horit
y do
es n
ot p
erm
it th
e di
sclo
sure
of
that
info
rmat
ion
or e
vide
nce,
inw
hole
or i
n pa
rt, th
e C
ourts
of t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on s
hall
then
und
erta
ke a
n ex
amin
atio
n of
the
law
fuln
ess o
f the
con
test
ed m
easu
re so
lely
on
the
basi
s of t
he m
ater
ial w
hich
has
bee
n di
sclo
sed
(see
, by
anal
ogy,
ZZ,
par
agra
ph 6
3).
128
O
n th
e ot
her h
and,
if it
turn
s ou
t tha
t the
reas
ons
relie
d on
by
the
com
pete
nt E
urop
ean
Uni
onau
thor
ity d
o in
deed
pre
clud
e th
e di
sclo
sure
to th
e pe
rson
con
cern
ed o
f inf
orm
atio
n or
evi
denc
epr
oduc
ed b
efor
e th
e C
ourts
of
the
Euro
pean
Uni
on,
it is
nec
essa
ry t
o st
rike
an a
ppro
pria
teba
lanc
e be
twee
n th
e re
quire
men
ts a
ttach
ed t
o th
e rig
ht t
o ef
fect
ive
judi
cial
pro
tect
ion,
in
parti
cula
r res
pect
for t
he p
rinci
ple
of a
n ad
vers
aria
l pro
cess
, and
thos
e flo
win
g fr
om th
e se
curit
yof
the
Euro
pean
Uni
on o
r its
Mem
ber S
tate
s or
the
cond
uct o
f the
ir in
tern
atio
nal r
elat
ions
(see
,by
ana
logy
, ZZ,
par
agra
ph 6
4).
129
In
ord
er to
stri
ke s
uch
a ba
lanc
e, it
is le
gitim
ate
to c
onsi
der p
ossi
bilit
ies
such
as
the
disc
losu
reof
a s
umm
ary
outli
ning
the
inf
orm
atio
n’s
cont
ent
or t
hat
of t
he e
vide
nce
in q
uest
ion.
Irre
spec
tive
of w
heth
er su
ch p
ossi
bilit
ies a
re ta
ken,
it is
for t
he C
ourts
of t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on to
asse
ss w
heth
er a
nd t
o w
hat
the
exte
nt t
he f
ailu
re t
o di
sclo
se c
onfid
entia
l in
form
atio
n or
evid
ence
to th
e pe
rson
con
cern
ed a
nd h
is c
onse
quen
tial i
nabi
lity
to s
ubm
it hi
s ob
serv
atio
ns o
nth
em a
re s
uch
as to
aff
ect t
he p
roba
tive
valu
e of
the
conf
iden
tial e
vide
nce
(see
, by
anal
ogy,
ZZ,
para
grap
h 67
).
504
130
H
avin
g re
gard
to th
e pr
even
tive
natu
re o
f the
rest
rictiv
e m
easu
res
at is
sue,
if, i
n th
e co
urse
of
its r
evie
w o
f th
e la
wfu
lnes
s of
the
cont
este
d de
cisi
on, a
s de
fined
in p
arag
raph
s 11
7 to
129
of
this
jud
gmen
t, th
e C
ourts
of
the
Euro
pean
Uni
on c
onsi
der
that
, at
the
very
lea
st, o
ne o
f th
ere
ason
s m
entio
ned
in th
e su
mm
ary
prov
ided
by
the
Sanc
tions
Com
mitt
ee is
suf
ficie
ntly
det
aile
dan
d sp
ecifi
c, th
at it
is s
ubst
antia
ted
and
that
it c
onst
itute
s in
itse
lf su
ffic
ient
bas
is to
sup
port
that
deci
sion
, the
fact
that
the
sam
e ca
nnot
be
said
of o
ther
such
reas
ons c
anno
t jus
tify
the
annu
lmen
tof
that
dec
isio
n. In
the
abse
nce
of o
ne su
ch re
ason
, the
Cou
rts o
f the
Eur
opea
n U
nion
will
ann
ulth
e co
ntes
ted
deci
sion
.
131
S
uch
a ju
dici
al r
evie
w is
indi
spen
sabl
e to
ens
ure
a fa
ir ba
lanc
e be
twee
n th
e m
aint
enan
ce o
fin
tern
atio
nal p
eace
and
sec
urity
and
the
prot
ectio
n of
the
fund
amen
tal r
ight
s an
d fr
eedo
ms
ofth
e pe
rson
con
cern
ed (s
ee, t
o th
at e
ffec
t, E
and
F, p
arag
raph
57)
, tho
se b
eing
sha
red
valu
es o
fth
e U
N a
nd th
e Eu
rope
an U
nion
.
132
N
otw
ithst
andi
ng th
eir p
reve
ntiv
e na
ture
, the
rest
rictiv
e m
easu
res a
t iss
ue h
ave,
as r
egar
ds th
ose
right
s an
d fr
eedo
ms,
a su
bsta
ntia
l neg
ativ
e im
pact
rela
ted,
firs
t, to
the
serio
us d
isru
ptio
n of
the
wor
king
and
fam
ily li
fe o
f th
e pe
rson
con
cern
ed d
ue to
the
rest
rictio
ns o
n th
e ex
erci
se o
f hi
srig
ht to
pro
perty
whi
ch s
tem
from
thei
r gen
eral
sco
pe c
ombi
ned,
as
in th
is c
ase,
with
the
actu
aldu
ratio
n of
the
ir ap
plic
atio
n, a
nd,
on t
he o
ther
, th
e pu
blic
opp
robr
ium
and
sus
pici
on o
f th
atpe
rson
whi
ch th
ose
mea
sure
s pr
ovok
e (s
ee, t
o th
at e
ffec
t, th
e K
adi j
udgm
ent,
para
grap
hs 3
58,
369
and
375;
Fra
nce
v Pe
ople
’s M
ojah
edin
Org
aniz
atio
n of
Ira
n, p
arag
raph
64;
Al-A
qsa
vC
ounc
il an
d N
ethe
rlan
ds v
Al-A
qsa,
par
agra
ph 1
20,
and
judg
men
t of
28
May
201
3 in
Cas
eC
239/
12 P
Abd
ulra
him
v C
ounc
il an
d C
omm
issi
on, p
arag
raph
70
and
case
-law
cite
d).
133
S
uch
a re
view
is a
ll th
e m
ore
esse
ntia
l sin
ce, d
espi
te th
e im
prov
emen
ts a
dded
, in
parti
cula
raf
ter
the
adop
tion
of t
he c
onte
sted
reg
ulat
ion,
the
pro
cedu
re f
or d
elis
ting
and
ex o
ffici
o re
-ex
amin
atio
n at
UN
leve
l the
y do
not
pro
vide
to th
e pe
rson
who
se n
ame
is li
sted
on
the
Sanc
tions
Com
mitt
ee C
onso
lidat
ed L
ist
and,
sub
sequ
ently
, in
Ann
ex I
to
Reg
ulat
ion
No
881/
2002
, the
guar
ante
e of
eff
ectiv
e ju
dici
al p
rote
ctio
n, a
s th
e Eu
rope
an C
ourt
of H
uman
Rig
hts,
endo
rsin
gth
e as
sess
men
t of
the
Fede
ral S
upre
me
Cou
rt of
Sw
itzer
land
, has
rec
ently
sta
ted
in p
arag
raph
211
of i
ts j
udgm
ent
of 1
2 Se
ptem
ber
2012
, N
ada
v. S
witz
erla
nd (
No
1059
3/08
, no
t ye
tpu
blis
hed
in th
e Re
port
s of J
udgm
ents
and
Dec
isio
ns).
134
Th
e es
senc
e of
eff
ectiv
e ju
dici
al p
rote
ctio
n m
ust b
e th
at it
sho
uld
enab
le th
e pe
rson
con
cern
edto
obt
ain
a de
clar
atio
n fr
om a
cou
rt, b
y m
eans
of
a ju
dgm
ent o
rder
ing
annu
lmen
t whe
reby
the
cont
este
d m
easu
re i
s re
troac
tivel
y er
ased
fro
m t
he l
egal
ord
er a
nd i
s de
emed
nev
er t
o ha
veex
iste
d, th
at th
e lis
ting
of h
is n
ame,
or t
he c
ontin
ued
listin
g of
his
nam
e, o
n th
e lis
t con
cern
edw
as v
itiat
ed b
y ill
egal
ity, t
he re
cogn
ition
of w
hich
may
rees
tabl
ish
the
repu
tatio
n of
that
per
son
or c
onst
itute
for h
im a
form
of r
epar
atio
n fo
r the
non
-mat
eria
l har
m h
e ha
s su
ffer
ed (s
ee, t
o th
atef
fect
, Abd
ulra
him
v C
ounc
il an
d C
omm
issi
on, p
arag
raph
s 67
to 8
4).
–Th
e er
rors
of l
aw a
ffec
ting
the
judg
men
t und
er a
ppea
l
135
I
t fol
low
s fr
om th
e cr
iteria
ana
lyse
d ab
ove
that
, for
the
right
s of
the
defe
nce
and
the
right
toef
fect
ive
judi
cial
pro
tect
ion
to b
e re
spec
ted
first
, the
com
pete
nt E
urop
ean
Uni
on a
utho
rity
mus
t(i)
dis
clos
e to
the
per
son
conc
erne
d th
e su
mm
ary
of r
easo
ns p
rovi
ded
by t
he S
anct
ions
Com
mitt
ee w
hich
is
the
basi
s fo
r lis
ting
or m
aint
aini
ng t
he l
istin
g of
tha
t pe
rson
’s n
ame
inA
nnex
I to
Reg
ulat
ion
No
881/
2002
, (ii)
ena
ble
him
eff
ectiv
ely
to m
ake
know
n hi
s obs
erva
tions
on th
at s
ubje
ct a
nd (i
ii) e
xam
ine,
car
eful
ly a
nd im
parti
ally
, whe
ther
the
reas
ons
alle
ged
are
wel
lfo
unde
d, in
the
light
of t
he o
bser
vatio
ns p
rese
nted
by
that
per
son
and
any
excu
lpat
ory
evid
ence
that
may
be
prod
uced
by
him
.
136
Se
cond
, res
pect
for t
hose
righ
ts im
plie
s th
at, i
n th
e ev
ent o
f a le
gal c
halle
nge,
the
Cou
rts o
f the
Euro
pean
Uni
on a
re to
rev
iew
, in
the
light
of
the
info
rmat
ion
and
evid
ence
whi
ch h
ave
been
disc
lose
d in
ter
alia
whe
ther
the
rea
sons
rel
ied
on i
n th
e su
mm
ary
prov
ided
by
the
Sanc
tions
Com
mitt
ee a
re s
uffic
ient
ly d
etai
led
and
spec
ific
and,
whe
re a
ppro
pria
te, w
heth
er th
e ac
cura
cyof
the
fact
s rel
atin
g to
the
reas
on c
once
rned
has
bee
n es
tabl
ishe
d.
137
O
n th
e ot
her
hand
, th
e fa
ct t
hat
the
com
pete
nt E
urop
ean
Uni
on a
utho
rity
does
not
mak
eac
cess
ible
to
the
pers
on c
once
rned
and
, su
bseq
uent
ly,
to t
he C
ourts
of
the
Euro
pean
Uni
onin
form
atio
n or
evi
denc
e w
hich
is
in t
he s
ole
poss
essi
on o
f th
e Sa
nctio
ns C
omm
ittee
or
the
Mem
ber
of th
e U
N c
once
rned
and
whi
ch r
elat
es to
the
sum
mar
y of
rea
sons
und
erpi
nnin
g th
ede
cisi
on a
t is
sue,
can
not,
as s
uch,
jus
tify
a fin
ding
tha
t th
ose
right
s ha
ve b
een
infr
inge
d.H
owev
er,
in s
uch
a si
tuat
ion,
the
Cou
rts o
f th
e Eu
rope
an U
nion
, w
hich
are
cal
led
upon
to
revi
ew w
heth
er th
e re
ason
s co
ntai
ned
in th
e su
mm
ary
prov
ided
by
the
Sanc
tions
Com
mitt
ee a
rew
ell
foun
ded
in f
act,
taki
ng i
nto
cons
ider
atio
n an
y ob
serv
atio
ns a
nd e
xcul
pato
ry e
vide
nce
prod
uced
by
the
pers
on c
once
rned
and
the
resp
onse
of t
he c
ompe
tent
Eur
opea
n U
nion
aut
horit
yto
tho
se o
bser
vatio
ns,
will
not
hav
e av
aila
ble
to i
t su
pple
men
tary
inf
orm
atio
n or
evi
denc
e.C
onse
quen
tly, i
f it i
s im
poss
ible
for t
he C
ourts
to fi
nd th
at th
ose
reas
ons a
re w
ell f
ound
ed, t
hose
reas
ons c
anno
t be
relie
d on
as t
he b
asis
for t
he c
onte
sted
list
ing
deci
sion
.
138
H
ence
, in
para
grap
hs 1
73, 1
81 to
184
, 188
and
192
to 1
94 o
f the
judg
men
t und
er a
ppea
l, th
eG
ener
al C
ourt
erre
d in
law
by
basi
ng it
s fin
ding
that
the
right
s of
the
defe
nce
and
the
right
toef
fect
ive
judi
cial
pro
tect
ion
and,
con
sequ
ently
, th
e pr
inci
ple
of p
ropo
rtion
ality
had
bee
nin
frin
ged,
on
the
failu
re o
f th
e C
omm
issi
on to
dis
clos
e to
Mr
Kad
i and
to th
e G
ener
al C
ourt
itsel
f th
e in
form
atio
n an
d ev
iden
ce u
nder
lyin
g th
e re
ason
s fo
r m
aint
aini
ng t
he l
istin
g of
Mr
Kad
i’s n
ame
in A
nnex
I to
Reg
ulat
ion
No
881/
2002
, whe
n, a
s is
app
aren
t fro
m p
arag
raph
s 81
and
95 o
f the
judg
men
t und
er a
ppea
l, th
e G
ener
al C
ourt
had
reco
gnis
ed, b
oth
in o
rder
to re
ject
Mr
Kad
i’s a
pplic
atio
n fo
r a
mea
sure
of
orga
nisa
tion
of p
roce
dure
in
orde
r to
sec
ure
that
disc
losu
re a
nd in
the
cour
se o
f th
e he
arin
g, th
at th
e C
omm
issi
on w
as n
ot in
pos
sess
ion
of th
atin
form
atio
n an
d ev
iden
ce.
139
C
ontra
ry to
wha
t is
stat
ed in
par
agra
phs
181,
183
and
184
of
the
judg
men
t und
er a
ppea
l, th
epa
ssag
es in
the
Kad
ijud
gmen
t to
whi
ch th
e G
ener
al C
ourt
refe
rred
in th
ose
para
grap
hs d
o no
tin
dica
te th
at th
e fa
ct th
at th
e pa
rty c
once
rned
and
the
Cou
rts o
f the
Eur
opea
n U
nion
do
not h
ave
acce
ss t
o in
form
atio
n or
evi
denc
e w
hich
the
com
pete
nt U
nion
aut
horit
y do
es n
ot h
ave
in i
tspo
sses
sion
con
stitu
tes,
as s
uch,
an
infr
inge
men
t of
the
rig
hts
of t
he d
efen
ce o
r th
e rig
ht t
oef
fect
ive
judi
cial
pro
tect
ion.
140
F
urth
er,
and
bear
ing
in m
ind
that
the
ass
essm
ent,
by t
he G
ener
al C
ourt,
of
whe
ther
the
stat
emen
t of r
easo
ns is
or i
s no
t suf
ficie
nt is
sub
ject
to re
view
by
the
Cou
rt on
an
appe
al (s
ee, t
oth
at e
ffec
t, C
ounc
ilv
Bam
ba, p
arag
raph
41
and
case
-law
cite
d), t
he G
ener
al C
ourt
erre
d in
law
by b
asin
g, a
s is
app
aren
t fro
m p
arag
raph
s 17
4, 1
77, 1
88 a
nd 1
92 to
194
of t
he ju
dgm
ent u
nder
appe
al, i
ts fi
ndin
g th
at th
ere
had
been
suc
h an
infr
inge
men
t on
the
fact
that
, in
its o
pini
on, t
heal
lega
tions
mad
e in
the
sum
mar
y of
reas
ons
prov
ided
by
the
Sanc
tions
Com
mitt
ee w
ere
vagu
ean
d la
ckin
g in
det
ail,
even
thou
gh s
uch
a ge
nera
l con
clus
ion
cann
ot b
e dr
awn
if ea
ch o
f th
ose
reas
ons i
s exa
min
ed se
para
tely
.
141
A
dmitt
edly
, as
the
Gen
eral
Cou
rt co
rrec
tly r
uled
by
endo
rsin
g, i
n pa
ragr
aph
177
of t
heju
dgm
ent u
nder
app
eal,
the
argu
men
t of M
r Kad
i set
out
in th
e fo
urth
inde
nt o
f par
agra
ph 1
57 o
fth
at j
udgm
ent,
the
last
of
the
reas
ons
stat
ed i
n th
e su
mm
ary
prov
ided
by
the
Sanc
tions
Com
mitt
ee, n
amel
y th
e al
lega
tion
that
Mr K
adi h
ad b
een
the
owne
r in
Alb
ania
of s
ever
al fi
rms
whi
ch f
unne
lled
mon
ey t
o ex
trem
ists
or
empl
oyed
tho
se e
xtre
mis
ts i
n po
sitio
ns w
here
the
yco
ntro
lled
the
fund
s of
thos
e fir
ms,
up to
fiv
e of
whi
ch r
ecei
ved
wor
king
cap
ital f
rom
Usa
ma
bin
Lade
n, i
s in
suff
icie
ntly
det
aile
d an
d sp
ecifi
c gi
ven
that
it
cont
ains
no
indi
catio
n of
the
iden
tity
of th
e fir
ms c
once
rned
, of w
hen
the
alle
ged
cond
uct t
ook
plac
e an
d of
the
iden
tity
of th
e‘e
xtre
mis
ts’ w
ho a
llege
dly
bene
fitte
d fr
om th
at c
ondu
ct.
142
O
n th
e ot
her h
and,
the
sam
e ca
nnot
be
said
of t
he o
ther
reas
ons s
tate
d in
the
sum
mar
y pr
ovid
edby
the
Sanc
tions
Com
mitt
ee.
505
143
T
he f
irst
reas
on,
base
d on
Mr
Kad
i’s a
ckno
wle
dgem
ent
that
he
is a
fou
ndin
g tru
stee
and
dire
cted
the
activ
ities
of t
he M
uwaf
aq F
ound
atio
n, w
hich
alw
ays o
pera
ted
unde
r the
um
brel
la o
fM
akht
ab a
lKhi
dam
at/A
l Kifa
h –
foun
ded
by, a
mon
g ot
hers
, was
Usa
ma
bin
Lade
n, w
hich
was
the
pred
eces
sor
to A
l-Qae
da a
nd w
hich
, fol
low
ing
the
diss
olut
ion
of M
akht
ab a
lKhi
dam
at/A
lK
ifah
in J
une
2001
, was
abs
orbe
d in
to A
lQae
da –
is s
uffic
ient
ly d
etai
led
and
spec
ific,
in th
at it
iden
tifie
s th
e en
tity
conc
erne
d an
d M
r Kad
i’s ro
le in
rela
tion
to it
, tog
ethe
r with
men
tion
of a
nal
lege
d lin
k be
twee
n th
at e
ntity
, on
the
one
hand
, and
Usa
ma
bin
Lade
n an
d A
l-Qae
da, o
n th
eot
her.
144
T
he s
econ
d re
ason
is b
ased
on
the
fact
that
, in
orde
r to
man
age
the
Euro
pean
off
ices
of
the
Muw
afaq
Fou
ndat
ion,
Mr K
adi a
ppoi
nted
, in
1992
, Mr A
l-Aya
di o
n th
e re
com
men
datio
n of
Mr
Jula
idan
, a f
inan
cier
who
had
fou
ght a
long
side
Usa
ma
bin
Lade
n in
Afg
hani
stan
in th
e 19
80s.
Whe
n he
was
app
oint
ed, M
r Al-A
yadi
was
said
to b
e on
e of
the
prin
cipa
l lea
ders
of t
he T
unis
ian
Isla
mic
Fro
nt a
nd to
be
oper
ated
und
er a
gree
men
ts w
ith U
sam
a bi
n La
den.
Mr A
l-Aya
di is
sai
dto
hav
e go
ne to
Afg
hani
stan
, in
the
early
199
0s, t
o re
ceiv
e pa
ram
ilita
ry tr
aini
ng th
ere,
then
, with
othe
r ind
ivid
uals
, to
Suda
n to
con
clud
e th
ere
with
Usa
ma
bin
Lade
n an
agr
eem
ent r
egar
ding
the
rece
ptio
n an
d tra
inin
g of
Tun
isia
ns a
nd, l
ater
, an
agre
emen
t reg
ardi
ng th
e re
cept
ion
of T
unis
ian
muj
ahid
in fr
om It
aly
by U
sam
a bi
n La
den’
s col
labo
rato
rs in
Bos
nia
and
Her
zego
vina
.
145
Th
at s
econ
d re
ason
is s
uffic
ient
ly d
etai
led
and
spec
ific,
in th
at it
con
tain
s th
e ne
cess
ary
deta
ilco
ncer
ning
the
tim
e an
d co
ntex
t of
the
app
oint
men
t in
que
stio
n an
d in
form
atio
n on
the
indi
vidu
als
invo
lved
in
the
alle
gatio
n th
at t
hat
appo
intm
ent
was
con
nect
ed w
ith U
sam
a bi
nLa
den.
146
T
he th
ird r
easo
n, w
hich
is b
ased
on
a st
atem
ent a
llege
dly
mad
e in
199
5 by
Mr
Tala
d Fu
adK
asse
m, t
he le
ader
of t
he A
l-Gam
a’at
al I
slam
iyya
, to
the
effe
ct th
at th
e M
uwaf
aq F
ound
atio
npr
ovid
ed lo
gist
ical
and
fina
ncia
l sup
port
to a
muj
ahid
in b
atta
lion
in B
osni
a an
d H
erze
govi
na, i
sba
sed
on t
he f
act
that
, tha
t Fo
unda
tion
was
sai
d to
be
invo
lved
, in
the
mid
199
0s, a
long
side
Usa
ma
bin
Lade
n, in
pro
vidi
ng fi
nanc
ial s
uppo
rt fo
r ter
roris
t act
iviti
es o
f tho
se m
ujah
idin
and
toha
ve a
ssis
ted
in th
e tra
ffic
king
of a
rms f
rom
Alb
ania
to B
osni
a an
d H
erze
govi
na.
147
Th
at th
ird re
ason
is s
uffic
ient
ly d
etai
led
and
spec
ific,
sin
ce it
iden
tifie
s th
e pe
rson
who
mad
eth
e st
atem
ent
conc
erne
d, t
he f
orm
s of
act
ivity
rep
orte
d, t
he t
ime
whe
n th
ey w
ere
alle
gedl
yca
rrie
d ou
t and
thei
r alle
ged
link
with
the
activ
ities
of U
sam
a bi
n La
den.
148
Th
e fo
urth
reas
on is
bas
ed o
n th
e fa
ct th
at M
r Kad
i was
one
of t
he m
ajor
sha
reho
lder
s in
the
Bos
nian
ban
k D
epos
itna
Ban
ka, n
ow c
lose
d, in
whi
ch M
r AlA
yadi
hel
d a
posi
tion
and
acte
d as
nom
inee
for M
r Kad
i, an
d w
here
pla
nnin
g se
ssio
ns fo
r an
atta
ck a
gain
st a
Uni
ted
Stat
es fa
cilit
yin
Sau
di A
rabi
a m
ight
hav
e ta
ken
plac
e.
149
C
ontra
ry to
wha
t is
stat
ed in
par
agra
ph 1
75 o
f the
judg
men
t und
er a
ppea
l, th
at fo
urth
reas
on is
suff
icie
ntly
det
aile
d an
d sp
ecifi
c, in
that
it id
entif
ies
the
finan
cial
inst
itutio
n th
roug
h w
hich
Mr
Kad
i alle
gedl
y co
ntrib
uted
to te
rror
ist a
ctiv
ities
and
the
natu
re o
f th
e al
lege
d te
rror
ist p
roje
ctco
ncer
ned.
The
circ
umst
ance
tha
t th
e in
dica
tion
that
it
was
in
that
ins
titut
ion
that
pla
nnin
gse
ssio
ns fo
r tha
t alle
ged
proj
ect t
ook
plac
e is
exp
ress
ed a
s a
poss
ibili
ty is
not
inco
mpa
tible
with
the
esse
ntia
l re
quire
men
ts o
f th
e du
ty t
o st
ate
reas
ons,
sinc
e th
e re
ason
s fo
r lis
ting
on a
Euro
pean
Uni
on li
st m
ay b
e ba
sed
on s
uspi
cion
s of
invo
lvem
ent i
n te
rror
ist a
ctiv
ities
, with
out
prej
udic
e to
the
dete
rmin
atio
n of
whe
ther
thos
e su
spic
ions
are
just
ified
.
150
A
lthou
gh it
em
erge
s fr
om p
arag
raph
s 13
8 to
140
and
142
to 1
49 o
f thi
s ju
dgm
ent t
hat e
rror
s of
law
wer
e m
ade
by t
he G
ener
al C
ourt,
it
is n
eces
sary
to
dete
rmin
e w
heth
er,
notw
ithst
andi
ngth
ose
erro
rs, t
he o
pera
tive
part
of th
e ju
dgm
ent u
nder
app
eal c
an b
e se
en to
be
wel
l fou
nded
on
lega
l gro
unds
oth
er th
an th
ose
mai
ntai
ned
by th
e G
ener
al C
ourt,
in w
hich
eve
nt a
n ap
peal
mus
tbe
dis
mis
sed
(see
, to
that
eff
ect,
judg
men
t of
19 A
pril
2012
in C
ase
C22
1/10
P A
rteg
odan
vC
omm
issi
on, p
arag
raph
94
and
case
law
cite
d).
–Th
e un
law
fuln
ess o
f the
con
test
ed re
gula
tion
151
It
mus
t be
obse
rved
, as r
egar
ds th
e fir
st re
ason
relie
d on
in th
e su
mm
ary
of re
ason
s pro
vide
d by
the
Sanc
tions
Com
mitt
ee a
nd r
efer
red
to i
n pa
ragr
aph
143
of t
his
judg
men
t, th
at,
in h
isco
mm
ents
of
10 N
ovem
ber
2008
sub
mitt
ed in
sup
port
of h
is a
ctio
n be
fore
the
Gen
eral
Cou
rt,M
r Kad
i, w
hile
ack
now
ledg
ing
that
he
had
been
a fo
undi
ng tr
uste
e of
the
Muw
afaq
Fou
ndat
ion,
deni
ed th
at it
had
pro
vide
d an
y su
ppor
t to
terr
oris
m a
nd th
at th
ere
was
any
link
bet
wee
n it
and
Mak
htab
alK
hida
mat
/Al
Kifa
h. A
ttach
ing
to t
hose
com
men
ts t
he M
uwaf
aq F
ound
atio
n’s
Con
stitu
tion
and
Dec
lara
tion
of T
rust
, Mr
Kad
i cl
aim
ed t
hat
the
obje
cts
and
purp
ose
of t
hat
foun
datio
n w
ere
excl
usiv
ely
char
itabl
e an
d hu
man
itaria
n, d
irect
ed m
ainl
y to
war
ds p
rovi
ding
relie
f to
peop
le su
ffer
ing
fam
ine
in th
e w
orld
, in
parti
cula
r in
the
Suda
n. W
hile
adm
ittin
g th
at h
ew
as i
nvol
ved
in i
nter
natio
nal
stra
tegi
c de
cisi
ons
of t
he M
uwaf
aq F
ound
atio
n, h
e de
nied
any
invo
lvem
ent i
n th
e da
yto
day
man
agem
ent o
f its
act
iviti
es a
cros
s th
e w
orld
, par
ticul
arly
in th
ere
crui
tmen
t of
loca
l sta
ff. H
e al
so d
ispu
ted
that
the
Muw
afaq
Fou
ndat
ion
join
ed A
l-Qae
da in
June
200
1, s
tatin
g in
par
ticul
ar, a
nd p
rovi
ding
doc
umen
ts in
sup
port
of h
is c
onte
ntio
n, th
at th
efo
unda
tion
had
ceas
ed o
pera
tions
by
1998
at t
he la
test
.
152
I
n its
rep
ly o
f 8
Dec
embe
r 20
08 to
the
com
men
ts o
f M
r K
adi,
also
sub
mitt
ed to
the
Gen
eral
Cou
rt, t
he C
omm
issi
on c
onte
nded
tha
t th
e fa
ct t
hat
som
e or
all
of t
he a
ctiv
ities
of
the
entit
yco
ncer
ned
had
ceas
ed d
id n
ot r
ule
out t
he p
ossi
bilit
y th
at th
at e
ntity
, hav
ing
cont
inuo
us le
gal
pers
onal
ity, h
ad jo
ined
Al-Q
aeda
.
153
I
t is
how
ever
cle
ar t
hat
no i
nfor
mat
ion
or e
vide
nce
has
been
pro
duce
d to
sub
stan
tiate
the
alle
gatio
ns o
f the
Muw
afaq
Fou
ndat
ion’
s in
volv
emen
t in
inte
rnat
iona
l ter
roris
m in
the
form
of
links
with
Mak
htab
alK
hida
mat
/Al K
ifah
and
Al-Q
aeda
. In
such
circ
umst
ance
s, th
e in
dica
tions
of th
e ro
le a
nd d
utie
s of
Mr
Kad
i in
rela
tion
to th
at f
ound
atio
n ar
e no
t suc
h as
to ju
stify
the
adop
tion,
at E
urop
ean
Uni
on le
vel,
of re
stric
tive
mea
sure
s aga
inst
him
.
154
A
s re
gard
s th
e se
cond
rea
son
relie
d on
in th
e su
mm
ary
of r
easo
ns p
rovi
ded
by th
e Sa
nctio
nsC
omm
ittee
and
refe
rred
to in
par
agra
ph 1
44 o
f thi
s ju
dgm
ent,
Mr K
adi,
in h
is c
omm
ents
of 1
0N
ovem
ber 2
008,
whi
le a
ccep
ting
that
he
had
recr
uite
d, in
199
2, o
n th
e re
com
men
datio
n of
Mr
Jula
idan
, Mr A
lAya
di to
hea
d th
e Eu
rope
an o
ffic
es o
f the
Muw
afaq
Fou
ndat
ion,
non
e th
e le
ssas
serte
d th
at th
e so
le a
im o
f tha
t fou
ndat
ion
in E
urop
e w
as to
pro
vide
sup
port
to re
fuge
es fr
omB
osni
a an
d C
roat
ia d
urin
g th
e B
alka
ns c
onfli
ct in
the
1990
s. M
r K
adi s
tate
d th
at M
r Ju
laid
an,
who
, at t
hat t
ime,
was
wor
king
with
him
on
a pr
ojec
t sup
porti
ng v
ocat
iona
l tra
inin
g fo
r ref
ugee
sfr
om C
roat
ia, h
ad re
com
men
ded
Mr A
l-Aya
di to
him
bec
ause
of h
is p
rofe
ssio
nal e
xper
ienc
e in
the
man
agem
ent o
f hum
anita
rian
wor
k an
d be
caus
e of
his
inte
grity
. Mr K
adi a
lso
clai
med
that
,in
199
2, h
e ha
d no
gro
unds
to
susp
ect
that
Mr
Al-A
yadi
and
Mr
Jula
idan
wer
e su
ppor
ting
terr
oris
t act
iviti
es, s
tatin
g th
at, i
n th
e 19
80s,
Usa
ma
bin
Lade
n w
as r
egar
ded
as a
n al
ly o
f th
eW
est a
gain
st th
e So
viet
Uni
on, t
hat o
nly
afte
r 199
6 w
as U
sam
a bi
n La
den
desc
ribed
as
a th
reat
to in
tern
atio
nal s
ecur
ity, a
nd th
at o
nly
in O
ctob
er 2
001
and
Sept
embe
r 200
2 re
spec
tivel
y w
ere
Mr A
lAya
di a
nd M
r Jul
aida
n lis
ted
on th
e Sa
nctio
ns C
omm
ittee
Con
solid
ated
Lis
t. La
stly
, Mr
Kad
i as
serts
tha
t he
had
no
know
ledg
e of
the
Tun
isia
n Is
lam
ic F
ront
and
the
alle
ged
links
betw
een
Mr A
lAya
di a
nd th
at o
rgan
isat
ion.
155
I
n its
rep
ly o
f 8
Dec
embe
r 20
08 to
Mr
Kad
i’s c
omm
ents
, the
Com
mis
sion
ass
erte
d th
at th
ere
crui
tmen
t of M
r Al-A
yadi
by
Mr K
adi o
n th
e re
com
men
datio
n of
Mr J
ulai
dan,
com
bine
d w
ithth
e fa
ct th
at M
r A
l-Aya
di a
nd M
r Ju
laid
an h
ad c
onta
cts
with
Usa
ma
bin
Lade
n, ju
stifi
ed th
eco
nclu
sion
tha
t th
ose
vario
us i
ndiv
idua
ls h
ad a
cted
in
conc
ert
or w
ere
part
of o
ne s
ingl
ene
twor
k. T
he C
omm
issi
on a
dded
that
, in
such
circ
umst
ance
s, it
was
of n
o co
nseq
uenc
e th
at M
rK
adi c
laim
ed to
hav
e be
en u
naw
are
of th
e al
lege
d lin
ks b
etw
een
Mr A
l-Aya
di a
nd th
e Tu
nisi
anIs
lam
ic F
ront
.
156
I
n th
at r
egar
d, w
hile
it is
con
ceiv
able
that
the
mat
eria
l rel
ied
on in
the
sum
mar
y of
rea
sons
prov
ided
by
the
Sanc
tions
Com
mitt
ee a
s reg
ards
the
recr
uitm
ent b
y M
r Kad
i, in
199
2, o
f Mr A
l-
506
Aya
di o
n th
e re
com
men
datio
n of
Mr J
ulai
dan
and
the
alle
ged
invo
lvem
ent o
f Mr A
lAya
di a
ndM
r Jul
aida
n in
terr
oris
t act
iviti
es in
ass
ocia
tion
with
Usa
ma
bin
Lade
n m
ight
hav
e be
en d
eem
edsu
ffic
ient
to ju
stify
the
initi
al in
clus
ion,
in 2
002,
of M
r Kad
i’s n
ame
in th
e lis
t of p
erso
ns in
the
anne
x to
Reg
ulat
ion
No
881/
2002
, it m
ust b
e ob
serv
ed th
at th
at s
ame
mat
eria
l, no
t oth
erw
ise
subs
tant
iate
d, c
anno
t ju
stify
mai
ntai
ning
, af
ter
2008
, th
e lis
ting
of M
r K
adi’s
nam
e in
tha
tre
gula
tion,
as
amen
ded
by t
he c
onte
sted
reg
ulat
ion.
Giv
en h
ow f
ar a
part
in t
ime
thos
e tw
om
easu
res
are,
that
mat
eria
l, w
hich
ref
ers
to 1
992,
is n
o lo
nger
suf
ficie
nt in
itse
lf to
just
ify, i
n20
08, m
aint
aini
ng, a
t Eu
rope
an U
nion
lev
el, t
he n
ame
of M
r K
adi
in t
he l
ist
of p
erso
ns a
nden
titie
s sub
ject
to th
e re
stric
tive
mea
sure
s at i
ssue
.
157
A
s re
gard
s th
e th
ird r
easo
n re
lied
on in
the
sum
mar
y of
rea
sons
pro
vide
d by
the
Sanc
tions
Com
mitt
ee a
nd re
ferr
ed to
in p
arag
raph
146
of t
his
judg
men
t, in
his
com
men
ts o
f 10
Nov
embe
r20
08, M
r Kad
i ass
erte
d th
at h
e ha
d no
kno
wle
dge
of M
r Tal
ad F
uad
Kas
sem
. He
also
stat
ed th
athe
had
nev
er p
rovi
ded
finan
cial
, log
istic
or a
ny o
ther
sup
port
of a
ny k
ind
to th
at in
divi
dual
, to
the
orga
nisa
tion
whi
ch h
e le
d or
to
muj
ahid
in i
n B
osni
a an
d H
erze
govi
na.
Mr
Kad
i al
som
aint
aine
d th
at,
so f
ar a
s he
was
aw
are,
nei
ther
the
Muw
afaq
Fou
ndat
ion
nor
any
of i
tsem
ploy
ees h
ad e
ver p
rovi
ded
any
such
supp
ort o
f tha
t kin
d.
158
I
n its
rep
ly o
f 8
Dec
embe
r 20
08 to
Mr
Kad
i’s c
omm
ents
, the
Com
mis
sion
ass
erte
d th
at th
est
atem
ent o
f Mr T
alad
Fua
d K
asse
m se
rved
as p
artia
l cor
robo
ratio
n of
the
fact
that
Mr K
adi h
adus
ed h
is p
ositi
on f
or p
urpo
ses
othe
r th
an o
rdin
ary
busi
ness
pur
pose
s. Th
e C
omm
issi
on a
dded
that
, in
suc
h ci
rcum
stan
ces,
it w
as i
rrel
evan
t w
heth
er o
r no
t M
r K
adi
knew
Mr
Tala
d Fu
adK
asse
m.
159
H
owev
er, n
o in
form
atio
n or
evi
denc
e ha
s be
en s
ubm
itted
whi
ch m
akes
it p
ossi
ble
to d
eter
min
eth
e ac
cura
cy o
f th
e st
atem
ent a
ttrib
uted
to M
r Ta
lad
Fuad
Kas
sem
in th
e su
mm
ary
of r
easo
nspr
ovid
ed b
y th
e Sa
nctio
ns C
omm
ittee
and
to a
sses
s, ha
ving
reg
ard,
in p
artic
ular
, to
Mr
Kad
i’scl
aim
that
he
had
no k
now
ledg
e of
Mr T
alad
Fua
d K
asse
m, t
he p
roba
tive
valu
e of
that
stat
emen
tin
res
pect
of
the
alle
gatio
ns t
hat
the
Muw
afaq
Fou
ndat
ion
was
pro
vidi
ng s
uppo
rt to
ter
roris
tac
tiviti
es
in
Bos
nia
and
Her
zego
vina
in
as
soci
atio
n w
ith
Usa
ma
bin
Lade
n.
In
such
circ
umst
ance
s, th
e in
dica
tion
rela
ting
to t
he s
tate
men
t of
Mr
Tala
d Fu
ad K
asse
m d
oes
not
cons
titut
e su
ffic
ient
bas
is t
o ju
stify
the
ado
ptio
n, a
t Eu
rope
an U
nion
lev
el,
of r
estri
ctiv
em
easu
res a
gain
st M
r Kad
i.
160
A
s re
gard
s th
e fo
urth
rea
son
relie
d on
in th
e su
mm
ary
of r
easo
ns p
rovi
ded
by th
e Sa
nctio
nsC
omm
ittee
and
refe
rred
to in
par
agra
ph 1
48 o
f thi
s ju
dgm
ent,
in h
is c
omm
ents
of 1
0 N
ovem
ber
2008
, Mr K
adi d
enie
d ev
er h
avin
g pr
ovid
ed fi
nanc
ial s
uppo
rt to
inte
rnat
iona
l ter
roris
m th
roug
hD
epos
itna
Ban
ka o
r th
roug
h an
y ot
her
entit
y. H
e ex
plai
ned
that
he
had
acqu
ired
an in
tere
st in
that
ban
k fo
r ent
irely
com
mer
cial
reas
ons h
avin
g re
gard
to th
e pr
ospe
cts o
f soc
ial a
nd e
cono
mic
reco
nstru
ctio
n in
Bos
nia
afte
r th
e D
ayto
n Pe
ace
Acc
ord
of 1
995,
and
that
he
had,
in o
rder
toco
mpl
y w
ith lo
cal l
aw, a
ppoi
nted
Mr A
l-Aya
di, a
Bos
nian
nat
iona
l, as
his
nom
inee
to h
old
his
shar
es in
that
ban
k. R
elyi
ng o
n re
ports
from
inte
rnat
iona
l firm
s of a
udito
rs re
latin
g to
the
perio
dfr
om 1
999
until
200
2 an
d on
the
repo
rt of
a f
inan
cial
ana
lyst
eng
aged
by
a Sw
iss
mag
istra
teco
verin
g th
e pe
riod
from
199
7 to
200
1, h
e cl
aim
ed t
hat
none
of
thos
e re
ports
sug
gest
tha
tD
epos
itna
Ban
ka w
as i
nvol
ved
in a
ny w
ay i
n th
e fu
ndin
g or
sup
port
of t
erro
rism
. M
r K
adi
disp
uted
that
that
ban
k ha
d be
en c
lose
d, e
xpla
inin
g, a
nd p
rovi
ding
sup
porti
ng d
ocum
ents
, tha
t it
had
mer
ged
with
ano
ther
ban
k in
200
2. F
urth
er, h
e pr
oduc
ed d
ocum
ents
rela
ting
to a
n oc
casi
on,
in 1
999,
whe
n U
nite
d St
ates
aut
horit
ies,
the
man
ager
of
Dep
ositn
a B
anka
and
the
pol
itica
lau
thor
ities
in
Bos
nia
wer
e in
con
tact
to
disc
uss
lega
l is
sues
rel
atin
g to
the
ban
king
sec
tor
inB
osni
a an
d H
erze
govi
na. L
astly
, Mr K
adi c
laim
ed th
at if
the
Saud
i Ara
bian
aut
horit
ies
had
had
grou
nds
to s
uspe
ct th
at a
ny a
ttack
s w
ere
plan
ned,
with
in th
e D
epos
itna
Ban
ka, a
gain
st U
nite
dSt
ates
int
eres
ts i
n Sa
udi
Ara
bia,
the
y w
ould
ine
vita
bly
have
que
stio
ned
him
, as
the
Sau
diA
rabi
an o
wne
r of
tha
t in
stitu
tion.
Acc
ordi
ng t
o M
r K
adi
the
Saud
i A
rabi
an a
utho
ritie
s ha
vene
ver d
one
so.
161
I
n its
rep
ly o
f 8
Dec
embe
r 20
08 to
Mr
Kad
i’s c
omm
ents
, the
Com
mis
sion
ass
erte
d th
at th
ein
dica
tions
that
Dep
ositn
a B
anka
was
use
d fo
r the
pla
nnin
g of
an
atta
ck in
Sau
di A
rabi
a se
rve
aspa
rtial
cor
robo
ratio
n th
at M
r K
adi
had
used
his
pos
ition
for
pur
pose
s ot
her
than
ord
inar
ybu
sine
ss p
urpo
ses.
162
H
owev
er,
sinc
e no
inf
orm
atio
n or
evi
denc
e ha
s be
en p
rodu
ced
to s
uppo
rt th
e cl
aim
tha
tpl
anni
ng s
essi
ons
mig
ht h
ave
take
n pl
ace
in th
e pr
emis
es o
f Dep
ozitn
a B
anka
for t
erro
rist a
cts
in a
ssoc
iatio
n w
ith A
lQae
da o
r Usa
ma
bin
Lade
n, th
e in
dica
tions
rela
ting
to th
e as
soci
atio
n of
Mr
Kad
i w
ith t
hat
bank
are
ins
uffic
ient
to
sust
ain
the
adop
tion,
at
Euro
pean
Uni
on l
evel
, of
rest
rictiv
e m
easu
res a
gain
st h
im.
163
I
t fo
llow
s, fr
om t
he a
naly
sis
set
out
in p
arag
raph
141
and
par
agra
phs
151
to 1
62 o
f th
isju
dgm
ent,
that
non
e of
the
alle
gatio
ns p
rese
nted
aga
inst
Mr
Kad
i in
the
sum
mar
y pr
ovid
ed b
yth
e Sa
nctio
ns C
omm
ittee
are
suc
h as
to
just
ify t
he a
dopt
ion,
at
Euro
pean
Uni
on l
evel
, of
rest
rictiv
e m
easu
res
agai
nst
him
, ei
ther
bec
ause
the
sta
tem
ent
of r
easo
ns i
s in
suff
icie
nt,
orbe
caus
e in
form
atio
n or
evi
denc
e w
hich
mig
ht s
ubst
antia
te th
e re
ason
con
cern
ed, i
n th
e fa
ce o
fde
taile
d re
butta
ls su
bmitt
ed b
y th
e pa
rty c
once
rned
, is l
acki
ng.
164
In
thos
e ci
rcum
stan
ces,
the
erro
rs o
f law
, ide
ntifi
ed in
par
agra
phs 1
38 to
140
and
142
to 1
49 o
fth
is ju
dgm
ent,
whi
ch v
itiat
e th
e ju
dgm
ent u
nder
app
eal a
re n
ot s
uch
as to
aff
ect t
he v
alid
ity o
fth
at ju
dgm
ent,
give
n th
at it
s op
erat
ive
part,
whi
ch a
nnul
s th
e co
ntes
ted
regu
latio
n in
so
far a
s it
conc
erns
Mr K
adi,
is w
ell f
ound
ed o
n th
e le
gal g
roun
ds st
ated
in th
e pr
eced
ing
para
grap
h.
165
C
onse
quen
tly, t
he a
ppea
ls m
ust b
e di
smis
sed.
Cos
ts
166
I
n ac
cord
ance
with
Arti
cle
184(
2) o
f th
e R
ules
of
Proc
edur
e, w
here
the
appe
al is
unf
ound
ed,
the
Cou
rt is
to m
ake
a de
cisi
on a
s to
cos
ts. U
nder
Arti
cle
138(
1) o
f tho
se R
ules
, whi
ch a
pply
toth
e pr
oced
ure
on a
ppea
l by
virtu
e of
Arti
cle
184(
1) o
f tho
se R
ules
, an
unsu
cces
sful
par
ty is
to b
eor
dere
d to
pay
the
cost
s if
they
hav
e be
en a
pplie
d fo
r in
the
succ
essf
ul p
arty
’s p
lead
ings
. Sin
ceth
e ap
pella
nts
have
bee
n un
succ
essf
ul a
nd M
r Kad
i has
app
lied
for c
osts
, the
y m
ust b
e or
dere
dto
pay
the
cost
s. W
here
an
inte
rven
er a
t firs
t ins
tanc
e, w
hich
has
not
itse
lf br
ough
t an
appe
al,
parti
cipa
tes
in th
e pr
ocee
ding
s be
fore
the
Cou
rt, th
e C
ourt
may
, und
er A
rticl
e 18
4(4)
of
thos
eR
ules
, dec
ide
that
it is
to b
ear i
ts o
wn
cost
s. A
rticl
e 14
0(1)
of t
hose
Rul
es p
rovi
des t
hat M
embe
rSt
ates
whi
ch h
ave
inte
rven
ed in
the
proc
eedi
ngs a
re to
bea
r the
ir ow
n co
sts.
167
Si
nce
the
Com
mis
sion
, the
Cou
ncil
and
the
Uni
ted
Kin
gdom
hav
e be
en u
nsuc
cess
ful,
they
mus
tbe
ord
ered
, in
acco
rdan
ce w
ith M
r Kad
i’s p
lead
ings
, to
pay
the
cost
s.
168
Th
e R
epub
lic o
f Bul
garia
, the
Cze
ch R
epub
lic, t
he K
ingd
om o
f Den
mar
k, Ir
elan
d, th
e K
ingd
omof
Spa
in, t
he F
renc
h R
epub
lic, t
he It
alia
n R
epub
lic, t
he G
rand
Duc
hy o
f Lux
embo
urg,
Hun
gary
,th
e K
ingd
om o
f the
Net
herla
nds,
the
Rep
ublic
of A
ustri
a, th
e Sl
ovak
Rep
ublic
and
the
Rep
ublic
of F
inla
nd, a
s int
erve
ners
, are
to b
ear t
heir
own
cost
s.
On
thos
e gr
ound
s, th
e C
ourt
(Gra
nd C
ham
ber)
:
1.D
ism
isse
s the
app
eals
;
2.O
rder
s th
e E
urop
ean
Com
mis
sion
, th
e C
ounc
il of
the
Eur
opea
n U
nion
and
the
Uni
ted
Kin
gdom
of G
reat
Bri
tain
and
Nor
ther
n Ir
elan
d to
pay
the
cost
s;
3.O
rder
s th
e R
epub
lic o
f B
ulga
ria,
the
Cze
ch R
epub
lic, t
he K
ingd
om o
f D
enm
ark,
Irel
and,
the
Kin
gdom
of S
pain
, the
Fre
nch
Rep
ublic
, the
Ital
ian
Rep
ublic
, the
Gra
nd
507
Duc
hy o
f L
uxem
bour
g, H
unga
ry, t
he K
ingd
om o
f th
e N
ethe
rlan
ds, t
he R
epub
lic o
fA
ustr
ia, t
he S
lova
k R
epub
lic a
nd th
e R
epub
lic o
f Fin
land
to b
ear
thei
r ow
n co
sts.
[Sig
natu
res]
* La
ngua
ge o
f the
cas
e: E
nglis
h.
508
International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia
Prosecutor v. Duško Tadić a/k/a "Dule"
Decision on the Defence Motion for Interlocutory Appeal on
Jurisdiction of 2 October 1995 [Appeals Chamber]
Case No. IT-94-1-A, paras. 1-12, 26-48
Bef
ore:
Judg
e C
asse
se, P
resi
ding
Ju
dge
Li
Judg
e D
esch
ênes
Ju
dge
Abi
-Saa
b Ju
dge
Sidh
wa
Reg
istr
ar:
Mrs
. Dor
othe
e de
Sam
payo
Gar
rido
-Nijg
h
Dec
isio
n of
: 2
octo
bre
1995
PRO
SEC
UT
OR
v.
DU
SKO
TA
DIC
a/k
/a "
DU
LE
"
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
___
DE
CIS
ION
ON
TH
E D
EFE
NC
E M
OT
ION
FO
R
INT
ER
LO
CU
TO
RY
APP
EA
L O
N J
UR
ISD
ICT
ION
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
___
The
Off
ice
of th
e Pr
osec
utor
:
Mr.
Ric
hard
Gol
dsto
ne, P
rose
cuto
r M
r. G
rant
Nie
man
n M
r. A
lan
Tie
ger
M
r. M
icha
el K
eega
n M
s. B
rend
a H
ollis
Cou
nsel
for
the
Acc
used
:
Mr.
Mic
hail
Wla
dim
irof
f M
r. A
lpho
ns O
rie
Mr.
Mila
n V
ujin
M
r. K
rsta
n Si
mic
I. IN
TR
OD
UC
TIO
N
A. T
he J
udge
men
t Und
er A
ppea
l
1.Th
e A
ppea
ls C
ham
ber o
f the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
for t
he P
rose
cutio
n of
Per
sons
Res
pons
ible
for
Serio
us V
iola
tions
of I
nter
natio
nal H
uman
itaria
n La
w C
omm
itted
in th
e Te
rrito
ry o
f For
mer
Yug
osla
via
sinc
e 19
91 (h
erei
nafte
r "In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al")
is se
ized
of a
n ap
peal
lodg
ed b
y A
ppel
lant
the
Def
ence
ag
ains
t a ju
dgem
ent r
ende
red
by th
e Tr
ial C
ham
ber I
I on
10 A
ugus
t 199
5. B
y th
at ju
dgem
ent,
App
ella
nt's
mot
ion
chal
len g
ing
the
juris
dict
ion
of th
e In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al w
as d
enie
d.
2.B
efor
e th
e Tr
ial C
ham
ber,
App
ella
nt h
ad la
unch
ed a
thre
e-pr
onge
d at
tack
:
a)ill
egal
foun
datio
n of
the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
;b)
wro
ngfu
l prim
acy
of th
e In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al o
ver n
atio
nal c
ourts
;c)
lack
of j
uris
dict
ion
ratio
ne m
ater
iae.
The
judg
emen
t und
er a
ppea
l den
ied
the
relie
f sou
ght b
y A
ppel
lant
; in
its e
ssen
tial p
rovi
sion
s, it
read
s as
follo
ws:
"TH
E TR
IAL
CH
AM
BER
[. .
. ]H
EREB
Y D
ISM
ISSE
S th
e m
otio
n in
sofa
r as i
t rel
ates
to p
rimac
y ju
risdi
ctio
n an
d su
bjec
t-mat
ter j
uris
dict
ion
unde
r Arti
cles
2, 3
and
5 a
nd o
ther
wis
e de
cide
s it t
o be
in
com
pete
nt in
sofa
r as i
t cha
lleng
es th
e es
tabl
ishm
ent o
f the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
H
EREB
Y D
ENIE
S th
e re
lief s
ough
t by
the
Def
ence
in it
s Mot
ion
on th
e Ju
risdi
ctio
n of
the
Trib
unal
." (D
ecis
ion
on th
e D
efen
ce M
otio
n on
Juris
dict
ion
in th
e Tr
ial C
ham
ber o
f the
In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al, 1
0 A
ugus
t 199
5 (C
ase
No.
IT-9
4-1-
T), a
t 33
(her
eina
fter D
ecis
ion
at
Tria
l).)
App
ella
nt n
ow a
llege
s err
or o
f law
on
the
part
of th
e Tr
ial C
ham
ber.
3.A
s can
read
ily b
e se
en fr
om th
e op
erat
ive
part
of th
e ju
dgem
ent,
the
Tria
l Cha
mbe
r too
k a
diff
eren
tap
proa
ch to
the
first
gro
und
of c
onte
stat
ion,
on
whi
ch it
refu
sed
to ru
le, f
rom
the
rout
e it
follo
wed
with
re
spec
t to
the
last
two
grou
nds,
whi
ch it
dis
mis
sed.
Thi
s dis
tinct
ion
ough
t to
be o
bser
ved
and
will
be
refe
rred
to b
elow
. Fr
om th
e de
velo
pmen
t of t
he p
roce
edin
gs, h
owev
er, i
t now
app
ears
that
the
ques
tion
of ju
risdi
ctio
n ha
s ac
quire
d, b
efor
e th
is C
ham
ber,
a tw
o-tie
r dim
ensi
on:
a)th
e ju
risdi
ctio
n of
the
App
eals
Cha
mbe
r to
hear
this
app
eal;
b)th
e ju
risdi
ctio
n of
the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
to h
ear t
his c
ase
on th
e m
erits
.
Bef
ore
anyt
hing
mor
e is
said
on
the
mer
its, c
onsi
dera
tion
mus
t be
give
n to
the
prel
imin
ary
ques
tion:
w
heth
er th
e A
ppea
ls C
ham
ber i
s end
owed
with
the
juris
dict
ion
to h
ear t
his a
ppea
l at a
ll.
B. J
uris
dict
ion
Of T
he A
ppea
ls C
ham
ber
4.A
rticl
e 25
of t
he S
tatu
te o
f the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
(Sta
tute
of t
he In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al (o
rigin
ally
publ
ishe
d as
ann
ex to
the
Repo
rt o
f the
Sec
reta
ry-G
ener
al p
ursu
ant t
o pa
ragr
aph
2 of
Sec
urity
Cou
ncil
reso
lutio
n 80
8 (1
993)
(U.N
. Doc
. S/2
5704
) and
ado
pted
pur
suan
t to
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil
reso
lutio
n 82
7 (2
5 M
ay 1
993)
(her
eina
fter S
tatu
te o
f the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Tri
buna
l)) a
dopt
ed b
y th
e U
nite
d N
atio
ns S
ecur
ity
Cou
ncil
open
s up
the
poss
ibili
ty o
f app
ella
te p
roce
edin
gs w
ithin
the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
. Thi
s pr
ovis
ion
stan
ds in
con
form
ity w
ith th
e In
tern
atio
nal C
oven
ant o
n C
ivil
and
Polit
ical
Rig
hts w
hich
insi
sts
upon
a ri
ght o
f app
eal (
Inte
rnat
iona
l Cov
enan
t on
Civ
il an
d Po
litic
al R
ight
s, 19
Dec
embe
r 196
6, a
rt. 1
4,
para
. 5, G
.A. R
es. 2
200
(XX
I), 2
1 U
.N. G
AO
R, S
upp.
(No.
16)
52,
U.N
. Doc
. A/6
316
(196
6) (h
erei
nafte
r IC
CPR
)).
As t
he P
rose
cuto
r of t
he In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al h
as a
ckno
wle
dged
at t
he h
earin
g of
7 a
nd 8
Sep
tem
ber
1995
, the
Sta
tute
is g
ener
al in
nat
ure
and
the
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil
sure
ly e
xpec
ted
that
it w
ould
be
supp
lem
ente
d, w
here
adv
isab
le, b
y th
e ru
les w
hich
the
Judg
es w
ere
man
date
d to
ado
pt, e
spec
ially
for
"Tri
als a
nd A
ppea
ls"
(Art.
15).
The
Judg
es d
id in
deed
ado
pt su
ch ru
les:
Par
t Sev
en o
f the
Rul
es o
f Pr
oced
ure
and
Evid
ence
(Rul
es o
f Pro
cedu
re a
nd E
vide
nce,
107
-08
(ado
pted
on
11 F
ebru
ary
1994
pu
rsua
nt to
Arti
cle
15 o
f the
Sta
tute
of t
he In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al, a
s am
ende
d (I
T/32
/Rev
. 5))
(her
eina
fter
Rule
s of P
roce
dure
)).
444
5.H
owev
er, R
ule
73 h
ad a
lread
y pr
ovid
ed fo
r "Pr
elim
inar
y M
otio
ns b
y Ac
cuse
d", i
nclu
ding
five
head
ings
. The
firs
t one
is: "
obje
ctio
ns b
ased
on
lack
of j
uris
dict
ion.
" Rul
e 72
(B) t
hen
prov
ides
:
"The
Tria
l Cha
mbe
r sha
ll di
spos
e of
pre
limin
ary
mot
ions
in li
min
e lit
is a
nd w
ithou
t int
erlo
cuto
ry
appe
al, s
ave
in th
e ca
se o
f dis
mis
sal o
f an
obje
ctio
n ba
sed
on la
ck o
f jur
isdi
ctio
n."
(Rul
es o
f Pr
oced
ure,
Rul
e 72
(B).)
This
is e
asily
und
erst
anda
ble
and
the
Pros
ecut
or p
ut it
cle
arly
in h
is a
rgum
ent:
"I w
ould
subm
it, fi
rstly
, tha
t cle
arly
with
in th
e fo
ur c
orne
rs o
f the
Sta
tute
the
Judg
es m
ust b
e fr
ee
to c
omm
ent,
to su
pple
men
t, to
mak
e ru
les n
ot in
cons
iste
nt a
nd, t
o th
e ex
tent
I m
entio
ned
yest
erda
y,
it w
ould
als
o en
title
the
Judg
es to
que
stio
n th
e St
atut
e an
d to
ass
ure
them
selv
es th
at th
ey c
an d
o ju
stic
e in
the
inte
rnat
iona
l con
text
ope
ratin
g un
der t
he S
tatu
te. T
here
is n
o qu
estio
n ab
out t
hat.
Rul
e 72
goe
s no
furth
er, i
n m
y su
bmis
sion
, tha
n pr
ovid
ing
a us
eful
veh
icle
for a
chie
ving
- re
ally
it
is a
pro
visi
on w
hich
ach
ieve
s jus
tice
beca
use
but f
or it
, one
cou
ld g
o th
roug
h, a
s Mr.
Orie
m
entio
ned
in a
diff
eren
t con
text
, adm
itted
ly, y
este
rday
, one
cou
ld h
ave
the
unfo
rtuna
te p
ositi
on o
f ha
ving
mon
ths o
f tria
l, of
the
Trib
unal
hea
ring
witn
esse
s onl
y to
find
out
at t
he a
ppea
l sta
ge th
at, i
n fa
ct, t
here
shou
ld n
ot h
ave
been
a tr
ial a
t all
beca
use
of so
me
lack
of j
uris
dict
ion
for w
hate
ver
reas
on.
So it
is re
ally
a ru
le o
f fai
rnes
s for
bot
h si
des i
n a
way
, but
par
ticul
arly
in fa
vour
of t
he a
ccus
ed in
or
der t
hat s
omeb
ody
shou
ld n
ot b
e pu
t to
the
terr
ible
inco
nven
ienc
e of
hav
ing
to si
t thr
ough
a tr
ial
whi
ch sh
ould
not
take
pla
ce. S
o, it
is re
ally
like
man
y of
the
rule
s tha
t You
r Hon
ours
and
you
r co
lleag
ues m
ade
with
rega
rd to
rule
s of e
vide
nce
and
proc
edur
e. It
is to
an
exte
nt su
pple
men
ting
the
Stat
ute,
but
that
is w
hat w
as in
tend
ed w
hen
the
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil
gave
to th
e Ju
dges
the
pow
er
to m
ake
rule
s. Th
ey d
id it
kno
win
g th
at th
ere
wer
e sp
aces
in th
e St
atut
e th
at w
ould
nee
d to
be
fille
d by
hav
ing
rule
s of p
roce
dure
and
evi
denc
e.
[. . .
]
So, i
t is r
eally
a ru
le o
f con
veni
ence
and
, if I
may
say
so, a
sens
ible
rule
in th
e in
tere
sts o
f jus
tice,
in
the
inte
rest
s of b
oth
side
s and
in th
e in
tere
sts o
f the
Trib
unal
as a
who
le."
(Tra
nscr
ipt o
f the
H
earin
g of
the
Inte
rlocu
tory
App
eal o
n Ju
risdi
ctio
n, 8
Sep
tem
ber 1
995,
at 4
(her
eina
fter A
ppea
l Tr
ansc
ript).
)
The
ques
tion
has,
how
ever
, bee
n pu
t whe
ther
the
thre
e gr
ound
s rel
ied
upon
by
App
ella
nt re
ally
go
to th
e ju
risdi
ctio
n of
the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
, in
whi
ch c
ase
only
, cou
ld th
ey fo
rm th
e ba
sis o
f an
inte
rlocu
tory
app
eal.
Mor
e sp
ecifi
cally
, can
the
lega
lity
of th
e fo
unda
tion
of th
e In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al
and
its p
rimac
y be
use
d as
the
build
ing
bric
ks o
f suc
h an
app
eal?
In h
is B
rief i
n ap
peal
, at p
age
2, th
e Pr
osec
utor
has
arg
ued
in su
ppor
t of a
neg
ativ
e an
swer
, bas
ed o
n th
e di
stin
ctio
n be
twee
n th
e va
lidity
of t
he c
reat
ion
of th
e In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al a
nd it
s jur
isdi
ctio
n. T
he
seco
nd a
spec
t alo
ne w
ould
be
appe
alab
le w
hils
t the
lega
lity
and
prim
acy
of th
e In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al
coul
d no
t be
chal
leng
ed in
app
eal.
(Res
pons
e to
the
Mot
ion
of th
e D
efen
ce o
n th
e Ju
risdi
ctio
n of
the
Trib
unal
bef
ore
the
Tria
l Cha
mbe
r of t
he In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al, 7
July
199
5 (C
ase
No.
IT-9
4-1-
T), a
t 4
(her
eina
fter P
rose
cuto
r Tri
al B
rief
).)
6.Th
is n
arro
w in
terp
reta
tion
of th
e co
ncep
t of j
uris
dict
ion,
whi
ch h
as b
een
advo
cate
d by
the
Pros
ecut
oran
d on
e am
icus
cur
iae,
falls
foul
of a
mod
ern
visi
on o
f the
adm
inis
tratio
n of
just
ice.
Suc
h a
fund
amen
tal
mat
ter a
s the
juris
dict
ion
of th
e In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al sh
ould
not
be
kept
for d
ecis
ion
at th
e en
d of
a
pote
ntia
lly le
ngth
y, e
mot
iona
l and
exp
ensi
ve tr
ial.
All
the
grou
nds o
f con
test
atio
n re
lied
upon
by
App
ella
nt re
sult,
in fi
nal a
naly
sis,
in a
n as
sess
men
t of t
he le
gal c
apab
ility
of t
he In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al to
try
his
cas
e. W
hat i
s thi
s, if
not i
n th
e en
d a
ques
tion
of ju
risdi
ctio
n? A
nd w
hat b
ody
is le
gally
aut
horiz
ed
to p
ass o
n th
at is
sue,
if n
ot th
e A
ppea
ls C
ham
ber o
f the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
? In
deed
- th
is is
by
no
mea
ns c
oncl
usiv
e, b
ut in
tere
stin
g ne
verth
eles
s: w
ere
not t
hose
que
stio
ns to
be
deal
t with
in li
min
e lit
is,
they
cou
ld o
bvio
usly
be
rais
ed o
n an
app
eal o
n th
e m
erits
. Wou
ld th
e hi
gher
inte
rest
of j
ustic
e be
serv
ed
by a
dec
isio
n in
favo
ur o
f the
acc
used
, afte
r the
latte
r had
und
ergo
ne w
hat w
ould
then
hav
e to
be
bran
ded
as a
n un
war
rant
ed tr
ial.
Afte
r all,
in a
cou
rt of
law
, com
mon
sens
e ou
ght t
o be
hon
oure
d no
t onl
y w
hen
fact
s are
wei
ghed
, but
equ
ally
whe
n la
ws a
re su
rvey
ed a
nd th
e pr
oper
rule
is se
lect
ed. I
n th
e pr
esen
t cas
e,
the
juris
dict
ion
of th
is C
ham
ber t
o he
ar a
nd d
ispo
se o
f App
ella
nt's
inte
rlocu
tory
app
eal i
s ind
ispu
tabl
e.
C. G
roun
ds O
f App
eal
7.Th
e A
ppea
ls C
ham
ber h
as a
ccor
ding
ly h
eard
the
parti
es o
n al
l poi
nts r
aise
d in
the
writ
ten
plea
ding
s. It
has a
lso
read
the
amic
us c
uria
e br
iefs
subm
itted
by
Juri
stes
sans
Fro
ntiè
res a
nd th
e G
over
nmen
t of t
he
Uni
ted
Stat
es o
f Am
eric
a, to
who
m it
exp
ress
es it
s gra
titud
e.
8.A
ppel
lant
has
subm
itted
two
succ
essi
ve B
riefs
in a
ppea
l. Th
e se
cond
Brie
f was
late
but
, in
the
abse
nce
of a
ny o
bjec
tion
by th
e Pr
osec
utor
, the
App
eals
Cha
mbe
r gra
nted
the
exte
nsio
n of
tim
e re
ques
ted
by
App
ella
nt u
nder
Rul
e 11
6.
The
seco
nd B
rief t
ends
ess
entia
lly to
bol
ster
the
argu
men
ts d
evel
oped
by
App
ella
nt in
his
orig
inal
Brie
f. Th
ey a
re o
ffer
ed u
nder
the
follo
win
g he
adin
gs:
a)un
law
ful e
stab
lishm
ent o
f the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
;b)
unju
stifi
ed p
rimac
y of
the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
ove
r com
pete
nt d
omes
tic c
ourts
;c)
lack
of s
ubje
ct-m
atte
r jur
isdi
ctio
n.
The
App
eals
Cha
mbe
r pro
pose
s to
exam
ine
each
of t
he g
roun
ds o
f app
eal i
n th
e or
der i
n w
hich
they
are
ra
ised
by
App
ella
nt.
II.U
NL
AW
FUL
EST
AB
LIS
HM
EN
T O
F T
HE
INT
ER
NA
TIO
NA
L T
RIB
UN
AL
9.Th
e fir
st g
roun
d of
app
eal a
ttack
s the
val
idity
of t
he e
stab
lishm
ent o
f the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
.
A. M
eani
ng O
f Jur
isdi
ctio
n
10.I
n di
scus
sing
the
Def
ence
ple
a to
the
juris
dict
ion
of th
e In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al o
n gr
ound
s of
inva
lidity
of i
ts e
stab
lishm
ent b
y th
e Se
curit
y C
ounc
il, th
e Tr
ial C
ham
ber d
ecla
red:
"The
re a
re c
lear
ly e
noug
h m
atte
rs o
f jur
isdi
ctio
n w
hich
are
ope
n to
det
erm
inat
ion
by th
e In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al, q
uest
ions
of t
ime,
pla
ce a
nd n
atur
e of
an
offe
nce
char
ged.
The
se a
re
prop
erly
des
crib
ed a
s jur
isdi
ctio
nal,
whe
reas
the
valid
ity o
f the
cre
atio
n of
the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Tr
ibun
al is
not
trul
y a
mat
ter o
f jur
isdi
ctio
n bu
t rat
her t
he la
wfu
lnes
s of i
ts c
reat
ion
[. .
.]" (D
ecis
ion
at T
rial,
at p
ara.
4.)
Ther
e is
a p
etiti
o pr
inci
pii u
nder
lyin
g th
is a
ffirm
atio
n an
d it
fails
to e
xpla
in th
e cr
iteria
by
whi
ch it
the
Tria
l Cha
mbe
r dis
qual
ifies
the
plea
of i
nval
idity
of t
he e
stab
lishm
ent o
f the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
as a
pl
ea to
juris
dict
ion.
Wha
t is m
ore
impo
rtant
, tha
t pro
posi
tion
impl
ies a
nar
row
con
cept
of j
uris
dict
ion
redu
ced
to p
leas
bas
ed o
n th
e lim
its o
f its
scop
e in
tim
e an
d sp
ace
and
as to
per
sons
and
subj
ect-m
atte
r (r
atio
ne te
mpo
ris,
loci
, per
sona
e an
d m
ater
iae)
. But
juris
dict
ion
is n
ot m
erel
y an
am
bit o
r sph
ere
(bet
ter
desc
ribed
in th
is c
ase
as "
com
pete
nce"
); it
is b
asic
ally
- as
is v
isib
le fr
om th
e La
tin o
rigin
of t
he w
ord
445
itsel
f, ju
risd
ictio
- a
lega
l pow
er, h
ence
nec
essa
rily
a le
gitim
ate
pow
er, "
to st
ate
the
law
" (di
re le
dro
it)
with
in th
is a
mbi
t, in
an
auth
orita
tive
and
final
man
ner.
This
is th
e m
eani
ng w
hich
it c
arrie
s in
all l
egal
syst
ems.
Thus
, his
toric
ally
, in
com
mon
law
, the
Ter
mes
de
la le
y pr
ovid
e th
e fo
llow
ing
defin
ition
:
"jur
isdi
ctio
n' is
a d
igni
ty w
hich
a m
an h
ath
by a
pow
er to
do
just
ice
in c
ause
s of c
ompl
aint
mad
e be
fore
him
." (S
troud
's Ju
dici
al D
ictio
nary
, 137
9 (5
th e
d. 1
986)
.)
The
sam
e co
ncep
t is f
ound
eve
n in
cur
rent
dic
tiona
ry d
efin
ition
s:
"[Ju
risdi
ctio
n] is
the
pow
er o
f a c
ourt
to d
ecid
e a
mat
ter i
n co
ntro
vers
y an
d pr
esup
pose
s the
ex
iste
nce
of a
dul
y co
nstit
uted
cou
rt w
ith c
ontro
l ove
r the
subj
ect m
atte
r and
the
parti
es."
Bla
ck's
Law
Dic
tiona
ry, 7
12 (6
th e
d. 1
990)
(citi
ng P
inne
r v. P
inne
r, 33
N.C
. App
. 204
, 234
S.E
.2d
633)
.)
11.A
nar
row
con
cept
of j
uris
dict
ion
may
, per
haps
, be
war
rant
ed in
a n
atio
nal c
onte
xt b
ut n
ot in
inte
rnat
iona
l law
. Int
erna
tiona
l law
, bec
ause
it la
cks a
cen
traliz
ed st
ruct
ure,
doe
s not
pro
vide
for a
n in
tegr
ated
judi
cial
syst
em o
pera
ting
an o
rder
ly d
ivis
ion
of la
bour
am
ong
a nu
mbe
r of t
ribun
als,
whe
re
certa
in a
spec
ts o
r com
pone
nts o
f jur
isdi
ctio
n as
a p
ower
cou
ld b
e ce
ntra
lized
or v
este
d in
one
of t
hem
but
no
t the
oth
ers.
In in
tern
atio
nal l
aw, e
very
trib
unal
is a
self-
cont
aine
d sy
stem
(unl
ess o
ther
wis
e pr
ovid
ed).
This
is in
com
patib
le w
ith a
nar
row
con
cept
of j
uris
dict
ion,
whi
ch p
resu
ppos
es a
cer
tain
div
isio
n of
la
bour
. Of c
ours
e, th
e co
nstit
utiv
e in
stru
men
t of a
n in
tern
atio
nal t
ribun
al c
an li
mit
som
e of
its
juris
dict
iona
l pow
ers,
but o
nly
to th
e ex
tent
to w
hich
such
lim
itatio
n do
es n
ot je
opar
dize
its "
judi
cial
ch
arac
ter"
, as s
hall
be d
iscu
ssed
late
r on.
Suc
h lim
itatio
ns c
anno
t, ho
wev
er, b
e pr
esum
ed a
nd, i
n an
y ca
se, t
hey
cann
ot b
e de
duce
d fr
om th
e co
ncep
t of j
uris
dict
ion
itsel
f.
12.I
n su
m, i
f the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
wer
e no
t val
idly
con
stitu
ted,
it w
ould
lack
the
legi
timat
e po
wer
to d
ecid
e in
tim
e or
spac
e or
ove
r any
per
son
or su
bjec
t-mat
ter.
The
plea
bas
ed o
n th
e in
valid
ity o
f co
nstit
utio
n of
the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
goe
s to
the
very
ess
ence
of j
uris
dict
ion
as a
pow
er to
ex
erci
se th
e ju
dici
al fu
nctio
n w
ithin
any
am
bit.
It is
mor
e ra
dica
l tha
n, in
the
sens
e th
at it
goe
s bey
ond
and
subs
umes
, all
the
othe
r ple
as c
once
rnin
g th
e sc
ope
of ju
risdi
ctio
n. T
his i
ssue
is a
pre
limin
ary
to
and
cond
ition
s all
othe
r asp
ects
of ju
risdi
ctio
n.
26.M
any
argu
men
ts h
ave
been
put
forw
ard
by A
ppel
lant
in su
ppor
t of t
he c
onte
ntio
n th
at th
ees
tabl
ishm
ent o
f the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
is in
valid
und
er th
e C
harte
r of t
he U
nite
d N
atio
ns o
r tha
t it
was
not
dul
y es
tabl
ishe
d by
law
. Man
y of
thes
e ar
gum
ents
wer
e pr
esen
ted
oral
ly a
nd in
writ
ten
subm
issi
ons b
efor
e th
e Tr
ial C
ham
ber.
App
ella
nt h
as a
sked
this
Cha
mbe
r to
inco
rpor
ate
into
the
argu
men
t bef
ore
the
App
eals
Cha
mbe
r all
the
poin
ts m
ade
at tr
ial.
(See
App
eal T
rans
crip
t, 7
Sept
embe
r 19
95, a
t 7.)
Apa
rt fr
om th
e is
sues
spec
ifica
lly d
ealt
with
bel
ow, t
he A
ppea
ls C
ham
ber i
s con
tent
to a
llow
th
e tre
atm
ent o
f the
se is
sues
by
the
Tria
l Cha
mbe
r to
stan
d.
27.T
he T
rial C
ham
ber s
umm
ariz
ed th
e cl
aim
s of t
he A
ppel
lant
as f
ollo
ws:
"It i
s sai
d th
at, t
o be
dul
y es
tabl
ishe
d by
law
, the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
shou
ld h
ave
been
cre
ated
ei
ther
by
treat
y, th
e co
nsen
sual
act
of n
atio
ns, o
r by
amen
dmen
t of t
he C
harte
r of t
he U
nite
d N
atio
ns, n
ot b
y re
solu
tion
of th
e Se
curit
y C
ounc
il. C
alle
d in
aid
of t
his g
ener
al p
ropo
sitio
n ar
e a
num
ber o
f con
side
ratio
ns: t
hat b
efor
e th
e cr
eatio
n of
the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
in 1
993
it w
as n
ever
en
visa
ged
that
such
an
ad h
oc c
rimin
al tr
ibun
al m
ight
be
set u
p; th
at th
e G
ener
al A
ssem
bly,
who
se
parti
cipa
tion
wou
ld a
t lea
st h
ave
guar
ante
ed fu
ll re
pres
enta
tion
of th
e in
tern
atio
nal c
omm
unity
, was
no
t inv
olve
d in
its c
reat
ion;
that
it w
as n
ever
inte
nded
by
the
Cha
rter t
hat t
he S
ecur
ity C
ounc
il sh
ould
, und
er C
hapt
er V
II, e
stab
lish
a ju
dici
al b
ody,
let a
lone
a c
rimin
al tr
ibun
al; t
hat t
he S
ecur
ity
Cou
ncil
had
been
inco
nsis
tent
in c
reat
ing
this
Trib
unal
whi
le n
ot ta
king
a si
mila
r ste
p in
the
case
of
othe
r are
as o
f con
flict
in w
hich
vio
latio
ns o
f int
erna
tiona
l hum
anita
rian
law
may
hav
e oc
curr
ed;
that
the
esta
blis
hmen
t of t
he In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al h
ad n
eith
er p
rom
oted
, nor
was
cap
able
of
prom
otin
g, in
tern
atio
nal p
eace
, as t
he c
urre
nt si
tuat
ion
in th
e fo
rmer
Yug
osla
via
dem
onst
rate
s; th
at
the
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil
coul
d no
t, in
any
eve
nt, c
reat
e cr
imin
al li
abili
ty o
n th
e pa
rt of
indi
vidu
als a
nd
that
this
is w
hat i
ts c
reat
ion
of th
e In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al d
id; t
hat t
here
exi
sted
and
exi
sts n
o su
ch
inte
rnat
iona
l em
erge
ncy
as w
ould
just
ify th
e ac
tion
of th
e Se
curit
y C
ounc
il; th
at n
o po
litic
al o
rgan
su
ch a
s the
Sec
urity
Cou
ncil
is c
apab
le o
f est
ablis
hing
an
inde
pend
ent a
nd im
parti
al tr
ibun
al; t
hat
ther
e is
an
inhe
rent
def
ect i
n th
e cr
eatio
n, a
fter t
he e
vent
, of a
d ho
c tri
buna
ls to
try
parti
cula
r typ
es
446
of o
ffen
ces a
nd, f
inal
ly, t
hat t
o gi
ve th
e In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al p
rimac
y ov
er n
atio
nal c
ourts
is, i
n an
y ev
ent a
nd in
itse
lf, in
here
ntly
wro
ng."
(Dec
isio
n at
Tria
l, at
par
a. 2
.)
Thes
e ar
gum
ents
rais
e a
serie
s of c
onst
itutio
nal i
ssue
s whi
ch a
ll tu
rn o
n th
e lim
its o
f the
pow
er o
f the
Se
curit
y C
ounc
il un
der C
hapt
er V
II o
f the
Cha
rter o
f the
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
and
det
erm
inin
g w
hat a
ctio
n or
m
easu
res c
an b
e ta
ken
unde
r thi
s Cha
pter
, par
ticul
arly
the
esta
blis
hmen
t of a
n in
tern
atio
nal c
rimin
al
tribu
nal.
Put i
n th
e in
terr
ogat
ive,
they
can
be
form
ulat
ed a
s fol
low
s:
1. w
as th
ere
real
ly a
thre
at to
the
peac
e ju
stify
ing
the
invo
catio
n of
Cha
pter
VII
as a
lega
l bas
is fo
r th
e es
tabl
ishm
ent o
f the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
?
2. a
ssum
ing
such
a th
reat
exi
sted
, was
the
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil
auth
oriz
ed, w
ith a
vie
w to
rest
orin
g or
m
aint
aini
ng p
eace
, to
take
any
mea
sure
s at i
ts o
wn
disc
retio
n, o
r was
it b
ound
to c
hoos
e am
ong
thos
e ex
pres
sly
prov
ided
for i
n A
rticl
es 4
1 an
d 42
(and
pos
sibl
y A
rticl
e 40
as w
ell)?
3.
in th
e la
tter c
ase,
how
can
the
esta
blis
hmen
t of a
n in
tern
atio
nal c
rimin
al tr
ibun
al b
e ju
stifi
ed, a
s it
does
not
figu
re a
mon
g th
e on
es m
entio
ned
in th
ose
Arti
cles
, and
is o
f a d
iffer
ent n
atur
e?
1. T
he P
ower
Of T
he S
ecur
ity C
ounc
il T
o In
voke
Cha
pter
VII
28. A
rticl
e 39
ope
ns C
hapt
er V
II o
f the
Cha
rter o
f the
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
and
det
erm
ines
the
cond
ition
s of
appl
icat
ion
of th
is C
hapt
er. I
t pro
vide
s:
"The
Sec
urity
Cou
ncil
shal
l det
erm
ine
the
exis
tenc
e of
any
thre
at to
the
peac
e, b
reac
h of
the
peac
e,
or a
ct o
f agg
ress
ion
and
shal
l mak
e re
com
men
datio
ns, o
r dec
ide
wha
t mea
sure
s sha
ll be
take
n in
ac
cord
ance
with
Arti
cles
41
and
42, t
o m
aint
ain
or re
stor
e in
tern
atio
nal p
eace
and
se
curit
y." (
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
Cha
rter,
26 Ju
ne 1
945,
Art.
39.
)
It is
cle
ar fr
om th
is te
xt th
at th
e Se
curit
y C
ounc
il pl
ays a
piv
otal
role
and
exe
rcis
es a
ver
y w
ide
disc
retio
n un
der t
his A
rticl
e. B
ut th
is d
oes n
ot m
ean
that
its p
ower
s are
unl
imite
d. T
he S
ecur
ity C
ounc
il is
an
orga
n of
an
inte
rnat
iona
l org
aniz
atio
n, e
stab
lishe
d by
a tr
eaty
whi
ch se
rves
as a
con
stitu
tiona
l fra
mew
ork
for
that
org
aniz
atio
n. T
he S
ecur
ity C
ounc
il is
thus
subj
ecte
d to
cer
tain
con
stitu
tiona
l lim
itatio
ns, h
owev
er
broa
d its
pow
ers u
nder
the
cons
titut
ion
may
be.
Tho
se p
ower
s can
not,
in a
ny c
ase,
go
beyo
nd th
e lim
its
of th
e ju
risdi
ctio
n of
the
Org
aniz
atio
n at
larg
e, n
ot to
men
tion
othe
r spe
cific
lim
itatio
ns o
r tho
se w
hich
m
ay d
eriv
e fr
om th
e in
tern
al d
ivis
ion
of p
ower
with
in th
e O
rgan
izat
ion.
In a
ny c
ase,
nei
ther
the
text
nor
th
e sp
irit o
f the
Cha
rter c
once
ives
of t
he S
ecur
ity C
ounc
il as
legi
bus s
olut
us (u
nbou
nd b
y la
w).
In p
artic
ular
, Arti
cle
24, a
fter d
ecla
ring,
in p
arag
raph
1, t
hat t
he M
embe
rs o
f the
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
"co
nfer
on
the
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil
prim
ary
resp
onsi
bilit
y fo
r the
mai
nten
ance
of i
nter
natio
nal p
eace
and
secu
rity"
, im
pose
s on
it, in
par
agra
ph 3
, the
obl
igat
ion
to re
port
annu
ally
(or m
ore
freq
uent
ly) t
o th
e G
ener
al
Ass
embl
y, a
nd p
rovi
des,
mor
e im
porta
ntly
, in
para
grap
h 2,
that
:
"In
disc
harg
ing
thes
e du
ties t
he S
ecur
ity C
ounc
il sh
all a
ct in
acc
orda
nce
with
the
Purp
oses
and
Pr
inci
ples
of t
he U
nite
d N
atio
ns. T
he sp
ecifi
c po
wer
s gra
nted
to th
e Se
curit
y C
ounc
il fo
r the
di
scha
rge
of th
ese
dutie
s are
laid
dow
n in
Cha
pter
s VI,
VII
, VII
I, an
d X
II."
(Id.
, Art.
24(
2).)
The
Cha
rter t
hus s
peak
s the
lang
uage
of s
peci
fic p
ower
s, no
t of a
bsol
ute
fiat.
29. W
hat i
s the
ext
ent o
f the
pow
ers o
f the
Sec
urity
Cou
ncil
unde
r Arti
cle
39 a
nd th
e lim
its th
ereo
n, if
an
y?
The
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil
play
s the
cen
tral r
ole
in th
e ap
plic
atio
n of
bot
h pa
rts o
f the
Arti
cle.
It is
the
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil
that
mak
es th
e de
term
inat
ion
that
ther
e ex
ists
one
of t
he si
tuat
ions
just
ifyin
g th
e us
e of
the
"exc
eptio
nal p
ower
s" o
f Cha
pter
VII
. And
it is
als
o th
e Se
curit
y C
ounc
il th
at c
hoos
es th
e re
actio
n to
such
a
situ
atio
n: it
eith
er m
akes
rec
omm
enda
tions
(i.e
., op
ts n
ot to
use
the
exce
ptio
nal p
ower
s but
to c
ontin
ue
to o
pera
te u
nder
Cha
pter
VI)
or d
ecid
es to
use
the
exce
ptio
nal p
ower
s by
orde
ring
mea
sure
s to
be ta
ken
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith A
rticl
es 4
1 an
d 42
with
a v
iew
to m
aint
aini
ng o
r res
torin
g in
tern
atio
nal p
eace
and
se
curit
y.
The
situ
atio
ns ju
stify
ing
reso
rt to
the
pow
ers p
rovi
ded
for i
n C
hapt
er V
II a
re a
"th
reat
to th
e pe
ace"
, a
"bre
ach
of th
e pe
ace"
or a
n "a
ct o
f agg
ress
ion.
" W
hile
the
"act
of a
ggre
ssio
n" is
mor
e am
enab
le to
a le
gal
dete
rmin
atio
n, th
e "t
hrea
t to
the
peac
e" is
mor
e of
a p
oliti
cal c
once
pt. B
ut th
e de
term
inat
ion
that
ther
e ex
ists
such
a th
reat
is n
ot a
tota
lly u
nfet
tere
d di
scre
tion,
as i
t has
to re
mai
n, a
t the
ver
y le
ast,
with
in th
e lim
its o
f the
Pur
pose
s and
Prin
cipl
es o
f the
Cha
rter.
30. I
t is n
ot n
eces
sary
for t
he p
urpo
ses o
f the
pre
sent
dec
isio
n to
exa
min
e an
y fu
rther
the
ques
tion
of th
e lim
its o
f the
dis
cret
ion
of th
e Se
curit
y C
ounc
il in
det
erm
inin
g th
e ex
iste
nce
of a
"th
reat
to th
e pe
ace"
, for
tw
o re
ason
s.
The
first
is th
at a
n ar
med
con
flict
(or a
serie
s of a
rmed
con
flict
s) h
as b
een
taki
ng p
lace
in th
e te
rrito
ry o
f th
e fo
rmer
Yug
osla
via
sinc
e lo
ng b
efor
e th
e de
cisi
on o
f the
Sec
urity
Cou
ncil
to e
stab
lish
this
In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al. I
f it i
s con
side
red
an in
tern
atio
nal a
rmed
con
flict
, the
re is
no
doub
t tha
t it f
alls
w
ithin
the
liter
al se
nse
of th
e w
ords
"br
each
of t
he p
eace
" (be
twee
n th
e pa
rties
or,
at th
e ve
ry le
ast,
wou
ld
be a
as a
"thr
eat t
o th
e pe
ace"
of o
ther
s).
But
eve
n if
it w
ere
cons
ider
ed m
erel
y as
an
"int
erna
l arm
ed c
onfli
ct",
it w
ould
still
con
stitu
te a
"th
reat
to
the
peac
e" a
ccor
ding
to th
e se
ttled
pra
ctic
e of
the
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil
and
the
com
mon
und
erst
andi
ng o
f the
U
nite
d N
atio
ns m
embe
rshi
p in
gen
eral
. Ind
eed,
the
prac
tice
of th
e Se
curit
y C
ounc
il is
rich
with
cas
es o
f ci
vil w
ar o
r int
erna
l stri
fe w
hich
it c
lass
ified
as a
"thr
eat t
o th
e pe
ace"
and
dea
lt w
ith u
nder
Cha
pter
VII
, w
ith th
e en
cour
agem
ent o
r eve
n at
the
behe
st o
f the
Gen
eral
Ass
embl
y, su
ch a
s the
Con
go c
risis
at t
he
begi
nnin
g of
the
1960
s and
, mor
e re
cent
ly, L
iber
ia a
nd S
omal
ia. I
t can
thus
be
said
that
ther
e is
a
com
mon
und
erst
andi
ng, m
anife
sted
by
the
"sub
sequ
ent p
ract
ice"
of t
he m
embe
rshi
p of
the
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
at l
arge
, tha
t the
"th
reat
to th
e pe
ace"
of A
rticl
e 39
may
incl
ude,
as o
ne o
f its
spec
ies,
inte
rnal
ar
med
con
flict
s.
The
seco
nd re
ason
, whi
ch is
mor
e pa
rticu
lar t
o th
e ca
se a
t han
d, is
that
App
ella
nt h
as a
men
ded
his
posi
tion
from
that
con
tain
ed in
the
Brie
f sub
mitt
ed to
the
Tria
l Cha
mbe
r. A
ppel
lant
no
long
er c
onte
sts t
he
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil'
s pow
er to
det
erm
ine
whe
ther
the
situ
atio
n in
the
form
er Y
ugos
lavi
a co
nstit
uted
a th
reat
to
the
peac
e, n
or th
e de
term
inat
ion
itsel
f. H
e fu
rther
ack
now
ledg
es th
at th
e Se
curit
y C
ounc
il "h
as th
e po
wer
to a
ddre
ss to
such
thre
ats [
. . .]
by
appr
opria
te m
easu
res."
[Def
ence
] Brie
f to
Supp
ort t
he N
otic
e of
(I
nter
locu
tory
) App
eal,
25 A
ugus
t 199
5 (C
ase
No.
IT-9
4-1-
AR
72),
at p
ara.
5.4
(her
eina
fter D
efen
ce
Appe
al B
rief
).) B
ut h
e co
ntin
ues t
o co
ntes
t the
lega
lity
and
appr
opria
tene
ss o
f the
mea
sure
s cho
sen
by th
e Se
curit
y C
ounc
il to
that
end
.
2. T
he R
ange
of M
easu
res E
nvis
aged
Und
er C
hapt
er V
II
31. O
nce
the
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil
dete
rmin
es th
at a
par
ticul
ar si
tuat
ion
pose
s a th
reat
to th
e pe
ace
or th
at
ther
e ex
ists
a b
reac
h of
the
peac
e or
an
act o
f agg
ress
ion,
it e
njoy
s a w
ide
mar
gin
of d
iscr
etio
n in
ch
oosi
ng th
e co
urse
of a
ctio
n: a
s not
ed a
bove
(see
par
a. 2
9) it
can
eith
er c
ontin
ue, i
n sp
ite o
f its
de
term
inat
ion,
to a
ct v
ia re
com
men
datio
ns, i
.e.,
as if
it w
ere
still
with
in C
hapt
er V
I ("P
acifi
c Se
ttlem
ent
of D
ispu
tes"
) or i
t can
exe
rcis
e its
exc
eptio
nal p
ower
s und
er C
hapt
er V
II. I
n th
e w
ords
of A
rticl
e 39
, it
wou
ld th
en "
deci
de w
hat m
easu
res s
hall
be ta
ken
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith A
rticl
es 4
1 an
d 42
, to
mai
ntai
n or
re
stor
e in
tern
atio
nal p
eace
and
secu
rity.
" (U
nite
d N
atio
ns C
harte
r, ar
t. 39
.)
A q
uest
ion
aris
es in
this
resp
ect a
s to
whe
ther
the
choi
ce o
f the
Sec
urity
Cou
ncil
is li
mite
d to
the
447
mea
sure
s pro
vide
d fo
r in
Arti
cles
41
and
42 o
f the
Cha
rter (
as th
e la
ngua
ge o
f Arti
cle
39 su
gges
ts),
or
whe
ther
it h
as e
ven
larg
er d
iscr
etio
n in
the
form
of g
ener
al p
ower
s to
mai
ntai
n an
d re
stor
e in
tern
atio
nal
peac
e an
d se
curit
y un
der C
hapt
er V
II a
t lar
ge. I
n th
e la
tter c
ase,
one
of c
ours
e do
es n
ot h
ave
to lo
cate
ev
ery
mea
sure
dec
ided
by
the
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil
unde
r Cha
pter
VII
with
in th
e co
nfin
es o
f Arti
cles
41
and
42, o
r pos
sibl
y A
rticl
e 40
. In
any
case
, und
er b
oth
inte
rpre
tatio
ns, t
he S
ecur
ity C
ounc
il ha
s a b
road
di
scre
tion
in d
ecid
ing
on th
e co
urse
of a
ctio
n an
d ev
alua
ting
the
appr
opria
tene
ss o
f the
mea
sure
s to
be
take
n. T
he la
ngua
ge o
f Arti
cle
39 is
qui
te c
lear
as t
o th
e ch
anne
lling
of t
he v
ery
broa
d an
d ex
cept
iona
l po
wer
s of t
he S
ecur
ity C
ounc
il un
der C
hapt
er V
II th
roug
h A
rticl
es 4
1 an
d 42
. The
se tw
o A
rticl
es le
ave
to th
e Se
curit
y C
ounc
il su
ch a
wid
e ch
oice
as n
ot to
war
rant
sear
chin
g, o
n fu
nctio
nal o
r oth
er g
roun
ds,
for e
ven
wid
er a
nd m
ore
gene
ral p
ower
s tha
n th
ose
alre
ady
expr
essl
y pr
ovid
ed fo
r in
the
Cha
rter.
Thes
e po
wer
s are
coe
rciv
e vi
s-à-
vis t
he c
ulpr
it St
ate
or e
ntity
. But
they
are
als
o m
anda
tory
vis
-à-v
is th
e ot
her M
embe
r Sta
tes,
who
are
und
er a
n ob
ligat
ion
to c
oope
rate
with
the
Org
aniz
atio
n (A
rticl
e 2,
pa
ragr
aph
5, A
rticl
es 2
5, 4
8) a
nd w
ith o
ne a
noth
er (A
rticl
es 4
9), i
n th
e im
plem
enta
tion
of th
e ac
tion
or
mea
sure
s dec
ided
by
the
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil.
3. T
he E
stab
lishm
ent O
f The
Inte
rnat
iona
l Tri
buna
l As A
Mea
sure
Und
er C
hapt
er V
II
32. A
s with
the
dete
rmin
atio
n of
the
exis
tenc
e of
a th
reat
to th
e pe
ace,
a b
reac
h of
the
peac
e or
an
act o
f ag
gres
sion
, the
Sec
urity
Cou
ncil
has a
ver
y w
ide
mar
gin
of d
iscr
etio
n un
der A
rticl
e 39
to c
hoos
e th
e ap
prop
riate
cou
rse
of a
ctio
n an
d to
eva
luat
e th
e su
itabi
lity
of th
e m
easu
res c
hose
n, a
s wel
l as t
heir
pote
ntia
l con
tribu
tion
to th
e re
stor
atio
n or
mai
nten
ance
of p
eace
. But
her
e ag
ain,
this
dis
cret
ion
is n
ot
unfe
ttere
d; m
oreo
ver,
it is
lim
ited
to th
e m
easu
res p
rovi
ded
for i
n A
rticl
es 4
1 an
d 42
. Ind
eed,
in th
e ca
se
at h
and,
this
last
poi
nt se
rves
as a
bas
is fo
r the
App
ella
nt's
cont
entio
n of
inva
lidity
of t
he e
stab
lishm
ent o
f th
e In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al.
In it
s res
olut
ion
827,
the
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil
cons
ider
s tha
t "in
the
parti
cula
r circ
umst
ance
s of t
he fo
rmer
Y
ugos
lavi
a", t
he e
stab
lishm
ent o
f the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
"w
ould
con
tribu
te to
the
rest
orat
ion
and
mai
nten
ance
of p
eace
" and
indi
cate
s tha
t, in
est
ablis
hing
it, t
he S
ecur
ity C
ounc
il w
as a
ctin
g un
der
Cha
pter
VII
(S.C
. Res
. 827
, U.N
. Doc
. S/R
ES/8
27 (1
993)
). H
owev
er, i
t did
not
spec
ify a
par
ticul
ar
Arti
cle
as a
bas
is fo
r thi
s act
ion.
App
ella
nt h
as a
ttack
ed th
e le
galit
y of
this
dec
isio
n at
diff
eren
t sta
ges b
efor
e th
e Tr
ial C
ham
ber a
s wel
l as
befo
re th
is C
ham
ber o
n at
leas
t thr
ee g
roun
ds:
a) th
at th
e es
tabl
ishm
ent o
f suc
h a
tribu
nal w
as n
ever
con
tem
plat
ed b
y th
e fr
amer
s of t
he C
harte
r as
one
of th
e m
easu
res t
o be
take
n un
der C
hapt
er V
II; a
s witn
esse
d by
the
fact
that
it fi
gure
s now
here
in
the
prov
isio
ns o
f tha
t Cha
pter
, and
mor
e pa
rticu
larly
in A
rticl
es 4
1 an
d 42
whi
ch d
etai
l the
se
mea
sure
s;
b) th
at th
e Se
curit
y C
ounc
il is
con
stitu
tiona
lly o
r inh
eren
tly in
capa
ble
of c
reat
ing
a ju
dici
al o
rgan
, as
it is
con
ceiv
ed in
the
Cha
rter a
s an
exec
utiv
e or
gan,
hen
ce n
ot p
osse
ssed
of j
udic
ial p
ower
s w
hich
can
be
exer
cise
d th
roug
h a
subs
idia
ry o
rgan
;
c) th
at th
e es
tabl
ishm
ent o
f the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
has
nei
ther
pro
mot
ed, n
or w
as c
apab
le o
f pr
omot
ing,
inte
rnat
iona
l pea
ce, a
s dem
onst
rate
d by
the
curr
ent s
ituat
ion
in th
e fo
rmer
Yug
osla
via.
(a) W
hat A
rtic
le o
f Cha
pter
VII
Ser
ves A
s A B
asis
For
The
Est
ablis
hmen
t Of A
Tri
buna
l?
33. T
he e
stab
lishm
ent o
f an
inte
rnat
iona
l crim
inal
trib
unal
is n
ot e
xpre
ssly
men
tione
d am
ong
the
enfo
rcem
ent m
easu
res p
rovi
ded
for i
n C
hapt
er V
II, a
nd m
ore
parti
cula
rly in
Arti
cles
41
and
42.
Obv
ious
ly, t
he e
stab
lishm
ent o
f the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
is n
ot a
mea
sure
und
er A
rticl
e 42
, as t
hese
are
m
easu
res o
f a m
ilita
ry n
atur
e, im
plyi
ng th
e us
e of
arm
ed fo
rce.
Nor
can
it b
e co
nsid
ered
a "
prov
isio
nal
mea
sure
" un
der A
rticl
e 40
. The
se m
easu
res,
as th
eir d
enom
inat
ion
indi
cate
s, ar
e in
tend
ed to
act
as a
"h
oldi
ng o
pera
tion"
, pro
duci
ng a
"sta
nd-s
till"
or a
"co
olin
g-of
f" e
ffec
t, "w
ithou
t pre
judi
ce to
the
right
s, cl
aim
s or p
ositi
on o
f the
par
ties c
once
rned
." (U
nite
d N
atio
ns C
harte
r, ar
t. 40
.) Th
ey a
re a
kin
to
emer
genc
y po
lice
actio
n ra
ther
than
to th
e ac
tivity
of a
judi
cial
org
an d
ispe
nsin
g ju
stic
e ac
cord
ing
to la
w.
Mor
eove
r, no
t bei
ng e
nfor
cem
ent a
ctio
n, a
ccor
ding
to th
e la
ngua
ge o
f Arti
cle
40 it
self
("be
fore
mak
ing
the
reco
mm
enda
tions
or d
ecid
ing
upon
the
mea
sure
s pro
vide
d fo
r in
Arti
cle
39")
, suc
h pr
ovis
iona
l m
easu
res a
re su
bjec
t to
the
Cha
rter l
imita
tion
of A
rticl
e 2,
par
agra
ph 7
, and
the
ques
tion
of th
eir
man
dato
ry o
r rec
omm
enda
tory
cha
ract
er is
subj
ect t
o gr
eat c
ontro
vers
y; a
ll of
whi
ch re
nder
s in
appr
opria
te th
e cl
assi
ficat
ion
of th
e In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al u
nder
thes
e m
easu
res.
34. P
rim
a fa
cie,
the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
mat
ches
per
fect
ly th
e de
scrip
tion
in A
rticl
e 41
of "
mea
sure
s no
t inv
olvi
ng th
e us
e of
forc
e." A
ppel
lant
, how
ever
, has
arg
ued
befo
re b
oth
the
Tria
l Cha
mbe
r and
this
A
ppea
ls C
ham
ber,
that
:"
...[I
]t is
cle
ar th
at th
e es
tabl
ishm
ent o
f a w
ar c
rimes
trib
unal
was
not
inte
nded
. The
exa
mpl
es
men
tione
d in
this
arti
cle
focu
s upo
n ec
onom
ic a
nd p
oliti
cal m
easu
res a
nd d
o no
t in
any
way
su
gges
t jud
icia
l mea
sure
s." (B
rief t
o Su
ppor
t the
Mot
ion
[of t
he D
efen
ce] o
n th
e Ju
risdi
ctio
n of
the
Trib
unal
bef
ore
the
Tria
l Cha
mbe
r of t
he In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al, 2
3 Ju
ne 1
995
(Cas
e N
o. IT
-94-
1-T)
, at p
ara.
3.2
.1 (h
erei
nafte
r Def
ence
Tri
al B
rief
).)
It ha
s als
o be
en a
rgue
d th
at th
e m
easu
res c
onte
mpl
ated
und
er A
rticl
e 41
are
all
mea
sure
s to
be u
nder
take
n by
Mem
ber S
tate
s, w
hich
is n
ot th
e ca
se w
ith th
e es
tabl
ishm
ent o
f the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
.
35. T
he fi
rst a
rgum
ent d
oes n
ot st
and
by it
s ow
n la
ngua
ge. A
rticl
e 41
read
s as f
ollo
ws:
"
The
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil
may
dec
ide
wha
t mea
sure
s not
invo
lvin
g th
e us
e of
arm
ed fo
rce
are
to b
e em
ploy
ed to
giv
e ef
fect
to it
s dec
isio
ns, a
nd it
may
cal
l upo
n th
e M
embe
rs o
f the
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
to
appl
y su
ch m
easu
res.
Thes
e m
ay in
clud
e co
mpl
ete
or p
artia
l int
erru
ptio
n of
eco
nom
ic re
latio
ns a
nd
of ra
il, se
a, a
ir, p
osta
l, te
legr
aphi
c, ra
dio,
and
oth
er m
eans
of c
omm
unic
atio
n, a
nd th
e se
vera
nce
of
dipl
omat
ic re
latio
ns."
(Uni
ted
Nat
ions
Cha
rter,
art.
41.)
It is
evi
dent
that
the
mea
sure
s set
out
in A
rticl
e 41
are
mer
ely
illus
trativ
e ex
ampl
es w
hich
obv
ious
ly d
o no
t exc
lude
oth
er m
easu
res.
All
the
Arti
cle
requ
ires i
s tha
t the
y do
not
invo
lve
"the
use
of f
orce
." It
is a
ne
gativ
e de
finiti
on.
That
the
exam
ples
do
not s
ugge
st ju
dici
al m
easu
res g
oes s
ome
way
tow
ards
the
othe
r arg
umen
t tha
t the
A
rticl
e do
es n
ot c
onte
mpl
ate
inst
itutio
nal m
easu
res i
mpl
emen
ted
dire
ctly
by
the
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
thro
ugh
one
of it
s org
ans b
ut, a
s the
giv
en e
xam
ples
sugg
est,
only
act
ion
by M
embe
r Sta
tes,
such
as e
cono
mic
sa
nctio
ns (t
houg
h po
ssib
ly c
oord
inat
ed th
roug
h an
org
an o
f the
Org
aniz
atio
n). H
owev
er, a
s men
tione
d ab
ove,
not
hing
in th
e A
rticl
e su
gges
ts th
e lim
itatio
n of
the
mea
sure
s to
thos
e im
plem
ente
d by
Sta
tes.
The
Arti
cle
only
pre
scrib
es w
hat t
hese
mea
sure
s can
not b
e. B
eyon
d th
at it
doe
s not
say
or su
gges
t wha
t the
y ha
ve to
be.
Mor
eove
r, ev
en a
sim
ple
liter
al a
naly
sis o
f the
Arti
cle
show
s tha
t the
firs
t phr
ase
of th
e fir
st se
nten
ce
carr
ies a
ver
y ge
nera
l pre
scrip
tion
whi
ch c
an a
ccom
mod
ate
both
inst
itutio
nal a
nd M
embe
r Sta
te a
ctio
n.
The
seco
nd p
hras
e ca
n be
read
as r
efer
ring
parti
cula
rly to
one
spec
ies o
f thi
s ver
y la
rge
cate
gory
of
mea
sure
s ref
erre
d to
in th
e fir
st p
hras
e, b
ut n
ot n
eces
saril
y th
e on
ly o
ne, n
amel
y, m
easu
res u
nder
take
n di
rect
ly b
y St
ates
. It i
s als
o cl
ear t
hat t
he se
cond
sent
ence
, sta
rting
with
"Th
ese
[mea
sure
s]"
not "
Thos
e [m
easu
res]
", re
fers
to th
e s p
ecie
s men
tione
d in
the
seco
nd p
hras
e ra
ther
than
to th
e "g
enus
" ref
erre
d to
in
448
the
first
phr
ase
of th
is se
nten
ce.
36. L
ogic
ally
, if t
he O
rgan
izat
ion
can
unde
rtake
mea
sure
s whi
ch h
ave
to b
e im
plem
ente
d th
roug
h th
e in
term
edia
ry o
f its
Mem
bers
, it c
an a
forti
ori u
nder
take
mea
sure
s whi
ch it
can
impl
emen
t dire
ctly
via
its
orga
ns, i
f it h
appe
ns to
hav
e th
e re
sour
ces t
o do
so. I
t is o
nly
for w
ant o
f suc
h re
sour
ces t
hat t
he U
nite
d N
atio
ns h
as to
act
thro
ugh
its M
embe
rs. B
ut it
is o
f the
ess
ence
of "
colle
ctiv
e m
easu
res"
that
they
are
co
llect
ivel
y un
derta
ken.
Act
ion
by M
embe
r Sta
tes o
n be
half
of th
e O
rgan
izat
ion
is b
ut a
poo
r sub
stitu
te
faut
e de
mie
ux, o
r a "
seco
nd b
est"
for w
ant o
f the
firs
t. Th
is is
als
o th
e pa
ttern
of A
rticl
e 42
on
mea
sure
s in
volv
ing
the
use
of a
rmed
forc
e.
In su
m, t
he e
stab
lishm
ent o
f the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
falls
squa
rely
with
in th
e po
wer
s of t
he S
ecur
ity
Cou
ncil
unde
r Arti
cle
41.
(b) C
an T
he S
ecur
ity C
ounc
il E
stab
lish
A S
ubsi
diar
y O
rgan
With
Jud
icia
l Pow
ers?
37. T
he a
rgum
ent t
hat t
he S
ecur
ity C
ounc
il, n
ot b
eing
end
owed
with
judi
cial
pow
ers,
cann
ot e
stab
lish
a su
bsid
iary
org
an p
osse
ssed
of s
uch
pow
ers i
s unt
enab
le: i
t res
ults
from
a fu
ndam
enta
l mis
unde
rsta
ndin
g of
the
cons
titut
iona
l set
-up
of th
e C
harte
r.
Plai
nly,
the
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil
is n
ot a
judi
cial
org
an a
nd is
not
pro
vide
d w
ith ju
dici
al p
ower
s (th
ough
it
may
inci
dent
ally
per
form
cer
tain
qua
si-ju
dici
al a
ctiv
ities
such
as e
ffec
ting
dete
rmin
atio
ns o
r fin
ding
s).
The
prin
cipa
l fun
ctio
n of
the
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil
is th
e m
aint
enan
ce o
f int
erna
tiona
l pea
ce a
nd se
curit
y, in
th
e di
scha
rge
of w
hich
the
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil
exer
cise
s bot
h de
cisi
on-m
akin
g an
d ex
ecut
ive
pow
ers.
38. T
he e
stab
lishm
ent o
f the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
by
the
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil
does
not
sign
ify, h
owev
er,
that
the
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil
has d
eleg
ated
to it
som
e of
its o
wn
func
tions
or t
he e
xerc
ise
of so
me
of it
s ow
n po
wer
s. N
or d
oes i
t mea
n, in
reve
rse,
that
the
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil
was
usu
rpin
g fo
r its
elf p
art o
f a ju
dici
al
func
tion
whi
ch d
oes n
ot b
elon
g to
it b
ut to
oth
er o
rgan
s of t
he U
nite
d N
atio
ns a
ccor
ding
to th
e C
harte
r. Th
e Se
curit
y C
ounc
il ha
s res
orte
d to
the
esta
blis
hmen
t of a
judi
cial
org
an in
the
form
of a
n in
tern
atio
nal
crim
inal
trib
unal
as a
n in
stru
men
t for
the
exer
cise
of i
ts o
wn
prin
cipa
l fun
ctio
n of
mai
nten
ance
of p
eace
an
d se
curit
y, i.
e., a
s a m
easu
re c
ontri
butin
g to
the
rest
orat
ion
and
mai
nten
ance
of p
eace
in th
e fo
rmer
Y
ugos
lavi
a.
The
Gen
eral
Ass
embl
y di
d no
t nee
d to
hav
e m
ilita
ry a
nd p
olic
e fu
nctio
ns a
nd p
ower
s in
orde
r to
be a
ble
to e
stab
lish
the
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
Em
erge
ncy
Forc
e in
the
Mid
dle
East
("U
NEF
") in
195
6. N
or d
id th
e G
ener
al A
ssem
bly
have
to b
e a
judi
cial
org
an p
osse
ssed
of j
udic
ial f
unct
ions
and
pow
ers i
n or
der t
o be
ab
le to
est
ablis
h U
NA
T. In
its a
dvis
ory
opin
ion
in th
e Ef
fect
of A
war
ds, t
he In
tern
atio
nal C
ourt
of Ju
stic
e,
in a
ddre
ssin
g pr
actic
ally
the
sam
e ob
ject
ion,
dec
lare
d:
"[T]
he C
harte
r doe
s not
con
fer j
udic
ial f
unct
ions
on
the
Gen
eral
Ass
embl
y [.
. .] B
y es
tabl
ishi
ng
the
Adm
inis
trativ
e Tr
ibun
al, t
he G
ener
al A
ssem
bly
was
not
del
egat
ing
the
perf
orm
ance
of i
ts o
wn
func
tions
: it w
as e
xerc
isin
g a
pow
er w
hich
it h
ad u
nder
the
Cha
rter t
o re
gula
te st
aff
rela
tions
." (E
ffec
t of A
war
ds, a
t 61.
)
(c) W
as T
he E
stab
lishm
ent O
f The
Inte
rnat
iona
l Tri
buna
l An
App
ropr
iate
Mea
sure
?
39. T
he th
ird a
rgum
ent i
s dire
cted
aga
inst
the
disc
retio
nary
pow
er o
f the
Sec
urity
Cou
ncil
in e
valu
atin
g th
e ap
prop
riate
ness
of t
he c
hose
n m
easu
re a
nd it
s eff
ectiv
enes
s in
achi
evin
g its
obj
ectiv
e, th
e re
stor
atio
n of
pea
ce.
Arti
cle
39 le
aves
the
choi
ce o
f mea
ns a
nd th
eir e
valu
atio
n to
the
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil,
whi
ch e
njoy
s wid
e
disc
retio
nary
pow
ers i
n th
is re
gard
; and
it c
ould
not
hav
e be
en o
ther
wis
e, a
s suc
h a
choi
ce in
volv
es
polit
ical
eva
luat
ion
of h
ighl
y co
mpl
ex a
nd d
ynam
ic si
tuat
ions
.
It w
ould
be
a to
tal m
isco
ncep
tion
of w
hat a
re th
e cr
iteria
of l
egal
ity a
nd v
alid
ity in
law
to te
st th
e le
galit
y of
such
mea
sure
s ex
post
fact
o by
thei
r suc
cess
or f
ailu
re to
ach
ieve
thei
r end
s (in
the
pres
ent c
ase,
the
rest
orat
ion
of p
eace
in th
e fo
rmer
Yug
osla
via,
in q
uest
of w
hich
the
esta
blis
hmen
t of t
he In
tern
atio
nal
Trib
unal
is b
ut o
ne o
f man
y m
easu
res a
dopt
ed b
y th
e Se
curit
y C
ounc
il).
40. F
or th
e af
orem
entio
ned
reas
ons,
the
App
eals
Cha
mbe
r con
side
rs th
at th
e In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al h
as
been
law
fully
est
ablis
hed
as a
mea
sure
und
er C
hapt
er V
II o
f the
Cha
rter.
4. W
as T
he E
stab
lishm
ent O
f The
Inte
rnat
iona
l Tri
buna
l Con
trar
y T
o T
he G
ener
al P
rinc
iple
W
here
by C
ourt
s Mus
t Be
"Est
ablis
hed
By
Law
"?
41. A
ppel
lant
cha
lleng
es th
e es
tabl
ishm
ent o
f the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
by
cont
endi
ng th
at it
has
not
be
en e
stab
lishe
d by
law
. The
ent
itlem
ent o
f an
indi
vidu
al to
hav
e a
crim
inal
cha
rge
agai
nst h
im
dete
rmin
ed b
y a
tribu
nal w
hich
has
bee
n es
tabl
ishe
d by
law
is p
rovi
ded
in A
rticl
e 14
, par
agra
ph 1
, of t
he
Inte
rnat
iona
l Cov
enan
t on
Civ
il an
d Po
litic
al R
ight
s. It
prov
ides
: "
In th
e de
term
inat
ion
of a
ny c
rimin
al c
harg
e ag
ains
t him
, or o
f his
righ
ts a
nd o
blig
atio
ns in
a su
it at
la
w, e
very
one
shal
l be
entit
led
to a
fair
and
publ
ic h
earin
g by
a c
ompe
tent
, ind
epen
dent
and
im
parti
al tr
ibun
al e
stab
lishe
d by
law
." (I
CC
PR, a
rt. 1
4, p
ara.
1.)
Sim
ilar p
rovi
sion
s can
be
foun
d in
Arti
cle
6(1)
of t
he E
urop
ean
Con
vent
ion
on H
uman
Rig
hts,
whi
ch
stat
es: "
In th
e de
term
inat
ion
of h
is c
ivil
right
s and
obl
igat
ions
or o
f any
crim
inal
cha
rge
agai
nst h
im,
ever
yone
is e
ntitl
ed to
a fa
ir an
d pu
blic
hea
ring
with
in a
reas
onab
le ti
me
by a
n in
depe
nden
t and
im
parti
al tr
ibun
al e
stab
lishe
d by
law
[. .
.]"(E
urop
ean
Con
vent
ion
for t
he P
rote
ctio
n of
Hum
an
Rig
hts a
nd F
unda
men
tal F
reed
oms,
4 N
ovem
ber 1
950,
art.
6, p
ara.
1, 2
13 U
.N.T
.S. 2
22
(her
eina
fter E
CH
R))
and
in A
rticl
e 8(
1) o
f the
Am
eric
an C
onve
ntio
n on
Hum
an R
ight
s, w
hich
pro
vide
s: "
Ever
y pe
rson
has
the
right
to a
hea
ring,
with
due
gua
rant
ees a
nd w
ithin
a re
ason
able
tim
e, b
y a
com
pete
nt, i
ndep
ende
nt a
nd im
parti
al tr
ibun
al, p
revi
ousl
y es
tabl
ishe
d by
law
." (A
mer
ican
C
onve
ntio
n on
Hum
an R
ight
s, 22
Nov
embe
r 196
9, a
rt. 8
, par
a. 1
, O.A
.S. T
reat
y Se
ries N
o. 3
6, a
t 1,
O.A
.S. O
ff. R
ec. O
EA/S
er. L
/V/II
.23
doc.
rev.
2 (h
erei
nafte
r AC
HR
).)"
App
ella
nt a
rgue
s tha
t the
righ
t to
have
a c
rimin
al c
harg
e de
term
ined
by
a tri
buna
l est
ablis
hed
by la
w is
on
e w
hich
form
s par
t of i
nter
natio
nal l
aw a
s a "
gene
ral p
rinci
ple
of la
w re
cogn
ized
by
civi
lized
nat
ions
",
one
of th
e so
urce
s of i
nter
natio
nal l
aw in
Arti
cle
38 o
f the
Sta
tute
of t
he In
tern
atio
nal C
ourt
of Ju
stic
e. In
su
ppor
t of t
his a
sser
tion,
App
ella
nt e
mph
asis
es th
e fu
ndam
enta
l nat
ure
of th
e "f
air t
rial"
or "
due
proc
ess"
gu
aran
tees
aff
orde
d in
the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Cov
enan
t on
Civ
il an
d Po
litic
al R
ight
s, th
e Eu
rope
an C
onve
ntio
n on
Hum
an R
ight
s and
the
Am
eric
an C
onve
ntio
n on
Hum
an R
ight
s. A
ppel
lant
ass
erts
that
they
are
m
inim
um re
quire
men
ts in
inte
rnat
iona
l law
for t
he a
dmin
istra
tion
of c
rimin
al ju
stic
e.
42. F
or th
e re
ason
s out
lined
bel
ow, A
ppel
lant
has
not
satis
fied
this
Cha
mbe
r tha
t the
requ
irem
ents
laid
do
wn
in th
ese
thre
e co
nven
tions
mus
t app
ly n
ot o
nly
in th
e co
ntex
t of n
atio
nal l
egal
syst
ems b
ut a
lso
with
re
spec
t to
proc
eedi
ngs c
ondu
cted
bef
ore
an in
tern
atio
nal c
ourt.
Thi
s Cha
mbe
r is,
how
ever
, sat
isfie
d th
at
the
prin
cipl
e th
at a
trib
unal
mus
t be
esta
blis
hed
by la
w, a
s exp
lain
ed b
elow
, is a
gen
eral
prin
cipl
e of
law
449
impo
sing
an
inte
rnat
iona
l obl
igat
ion
whi
ch o
nly
appl
ies t
o th
e ad
min
istra
tion
of c
rimin
al ju
stic
e in
a
mun
icip
al se
tting
. It f
ollo
ws f
rom
this
prin
cipl
e th
at it
is in
cum
bent
on
all S
tate
s to
orga
nize
thei
r sys
tem
of
crim
inal
just
ice
in su
ch a
way
as t
o en
sure
that
all
indi
vidu
als a
re g
uara
ntee
d th
e rig
ht to
hav
e a
crim
inal
cha
rge
dete
rmin
ed b
y a
tribu
nal e
stab
lishe
d by
law
. Thi
s doe
s not
mea
n, h
owev
er, t
hat,
by
cont
rast
, an
inte
rnat
iona
l crim
inal
cou
rt co
uld
be se
t up
at th
e m
ere
whi
m o
f a g
roup
of g
over
nmen
ts.
Such
a c
ourt
ough
t to
be ro
oted
in th
e ru
le o
f law
and
off
er a
ll gu
aran
tees
em
bodi
ed in
the
rele
vant
in
tern
atio
nal i
nstru
men
ts. T
hen
the
cour
t may
be
said
to b
e "e
stab
lishe
d by
law
."
43. I
ndee
d, th
ere
are
thre
e po
ssib
le in
terp
reta
tions
of t
he te
rm "
esta
blis
hed
by la
w."
Firs
t, as
App
ella
nt
argu
es, "
esta
blis
hed
by la
w"
coul
d m
ean
esta
blis
hed
by a
legi
slat
ure.
App
ella
nt c
laim
s tha
t the
In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al is
the
prod
uct o
f a "
mer
e ex
ecut
ive
orde
r" a
nd n
ot o
f a "
deci
sion
mak
ing
proc
ess
unde
r dem
ocra
tic c
ontro
l, ne
cess
ary
to c
reat
e a
judi
cial
org
anis
atio
n in
a d
emoc
ratic
soci
ety.
" Th
eref
ore
App
ella
nt m
aint
ains
that
the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
not
bee
n "e
stab
lishe
d by
law
." (D
efen
ce A
ppea
l Brie
f, at
par
a. 5
.4.)
The
case
law
app
lyin
g th
e w
ords
"es
tabl
ishe
d by
law
" in
the
Euro
pean
Con
vent
ion
on H
uman
Rig
hts h
as
favo
ured
this
inte
rpre
tatio
n of
the
expr
essi
on. T
his c
ase
law
bea
rs o
ut th
e vi
ew th
at th
e re
leva
nt p
rovi
sion
is
inte
nded
to e
nsur
e th
at tr
ibun
als i
n a
dem
ocra
tic so
ciet
y m
ust n
ot d
epen
d on
the
disc
retio
n of
the
exec
utiv
e; ra
ther
they
shou
ld b
e re
gula
ted
by la
w e
man
atin
g fr
om P
arlia
men
t. (S
ee Z
and
v. A
ustri
a, A
pp.
No.
736
0/76
, 15
Eur.
Com
m'n
H.R
. Dec
. & R
ep. 7
0, a
t 80
(197
9); P
iers
ack
v. B
elgi
um, A
pp. N
o.
8692
/79,
47
Eur.
Ct.
H.R
. (se
r. B
) at 1
2 (1
981)
; Cro
cian
i, Pa
lmio
tti, T
anas
si a
nd D
'Ovi
dio
v. It
aly,
App
. N
os. 8
603/
79, 8
722/
79, 8
723/
79 &
872
9/79
(joi
ned)
22
Eur.
Com
m'n
H.R
. Dec
. & R
ep. 1
47, a
t 219
(1
981)
.)
Or,
put a
noth
er w
ay, t
he g
uara
ntee
is in
tend
ed to
ens
ure
that
the
adm
inis
tratio
n of
just
ice
is n
ot a
mat
ter
of e
xecu
tive
disc
retio
n, b
ut is
regu
late
d by
law
s mad
e by
the
legi
slat
ure.
It is
cle
ar th
at th
e le
gisl
ativ
e, e
xecu
tive
and
judi
cial
div
isio
n of
pow
ers w
hich
is la
rgel
y fo
llow
ed in
mos
t m
unic
ipal
syst
ems d
oes n
ot a
pply
to th
e in
tern
atio
nal s
ettin
g no
r, m
ore
spec
ifica
lly, t
o th
e se
tting
of a
n in
tern
atio
nal o
rgan
izat
ion
such
as t
he U
nite
d N
atio
ns. A
mon
g th
e pr
inci
pal o
rgan
s of t
he U
nite
d N
atio
ns
the
divi
sion
s bet
wee
n ju
dici
al, e
xecu
tive
and
legi
slat
ive
func
tions
are
not
cle
ar c
ut. R
egar
ding
the
judi
cial
fu
nctio
n, th
e In
tern
atio
nal C
ourt
of Ju
stic
e is
cle
arly
the
"prin
cipa
l jud
icia
l org
an"
(see
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
C
harte
r, ar
t. 92
). Th
ere
is, h
owev
er, n
o le
gisl
atur
e, in
the
tech
nica
l sen
se o
f the
term
, in
the
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
syst
em a
nd, m
ore
gene
rally
, no
Parli
amen
t in
the
wor
ld c
omm
unity
. Tha
t is t
o sa
y, th
ere
exis
ts
no c
orpo
rate
org
an fo
rmal
ly e
mpo
wer
ed to
ena
ct la
ws d
irect
ly b
indi
ng o
n in
tern
atio
nal l
egal
subj
ects
.
It is
cle
arly
impo
ssib
le to
cla
ssify
the
orga
ns o
f the
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
into
the
abov
e-di
scus
sed
divi
sion
s w
hich
exi
st in
the
natio
nal l
aw o
f Sta
tes.
Inde
ed, A
ppel
lant
has
agr
eed
that
the
cons
titut
iona
l stru
ctur
e of
th
e U
nite
d N
atio
ns d
oes n
ot fo
llow
the
divi
sion
of p
ower
s ofte
n fo
und
in n
atio
nal c
onst
itutio
ns.
Con
sequ
ently
the
sepa
ratio
n of
pow
ers e
lem
ent o
f the
requ
irem
ent t
hat a
trib
unal
be
"est
ablis
hed
by la
w"
finds
no
appl
icat
ion
in a
n in
tern
atio
nal l
aw se
tting
. The
afo
rem
entio
ned
prin
cipl
e ca
n on
ly im
pose
an
oblig
atio
n on
Sta
tes c
once
rnin
g th
e fu
nctio
ning
of t
heir
own
natio
nal s
yste
ms.
44. A
seco
nd p
ossi
ble
inte
rpre
tatio
n is
that
the
wor
ds "e
stab
lishe
d by
law
" ref
er to
est
ablis
hmen
t of
inte
rnat
iona
l cou
rts b
y a
body
whi
ch, t
houg
h no
t a P
arlia
men
t, ha
s a li
mite
d po
wer
to ta
ke b
indi
ng
deci
sion
s. In
our
vie
w, o
ne su
ch b
ody
is th
e Se
curit
y C
ounc
il w
hen,
act
ing
unde
r Cha
pter
VII
of t
he
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
Cha
rter,
it m
akes
dec
isio
ns b
indi
ng b
y vi
rtue
of A
rticl
e 25
of t
he C
harte
r.
Acc
ordi
ng to
App
ella
nt, h
owev
er, t
here
mus
t be
som
ethi
ng m
ore
for a
trib
unal
to b
e "e
stab
lishe
d by
law
."
App
ella
nt ta
kes t
he p
ositi
on th
at, g
iven
the
diff
eren
ces b
etw
een
the
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
syst
em a
nd n
atio
nal
divi
sion
of p
ower
s, di
scus
sed
abov
e, th
e co
nclu
sion
mus
t be
that
the
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
syst
em is
not
capa
ble
of c
reat
ing
the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
unl
ess t
here
is a
n am
endm
ent t
o th
e U
nite
d N
atio
ns
Cha
rter.
We
disa
gree
. It d
oes n
ot fo
llow
from
the
fact
that
the
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
has
no
legi
slat
ure
that
the
Secu
rity
Cou
ncil
is n
ot e
mpo
wer
ed to
set u
p th
is In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al if
it is
act
ing
purs
uant
to a
n au
thor
ity fo
und
with
in it
s con
stitu
tion,
the
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
Cha
rter.
As s
et o
ut a
bove
(par
as. 2
8-40
) we
are
of th
e vi
ew th
at th
e Se
curit
y C
ounc
il w
as e
ndow
ed w
ith th
e po
wer
to c
reat
e th
is In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al a
s a
mea
sure
und
er C
hapt
er V
II in
the
light
of i
ts d
eter
min
atio
n th
at th
ere
exis
ts a
thre
at to
the
peac
e.
In a
dditi
on, t
he e
stab
lishm
ent o
f the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
has
bee
n re
peat
edly
app
rove
d an
d en
dors
ed b
y th
e "r
epre
sent
ativ
e" o
rgan
of t
he U
nite
d N
atio
ns, t
he G
ener
al A
ssem
bly:
this
bod
y no
t onl
y pa
rtici
pate
d in
its s
ettin
g up
, by
elec
ting
the
Judg
es a
nd a
ppro
ving
the
budg
et, b
ut a
lso
expr
esse
d its
satis
fact
ion
with
, an
d en
cour
agem
ent o
f the
act
iviti
es o
f the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
in v
ario
us re
solu
tions
. (Se
e G
.A. R
es.
48/8
8 (2
0 D
ecem
ber 1
993)
and
G.A
. Res
. 48/
143
(20
Dec
embe
r 199
3), G
.A. R
es. 4
9/10
(8 N
ovem
ber
1994
) and
G.A
. Res
. 49/
205
(23
Dec
embe
r 199
4).)
45. T
he th
ird p
ossi
ble
inte
rpre
tatio
n of
the
requ
irem
ent t
hat t
he In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al b
e "e
stab
lishe
d by
la
w"
is th
at it
s est
ablis
hmen
t mus
t be
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith th
e ru
le o
f law
. Thi
s app
ears
to b
e th
e m
ost
sens
ible
and
mos
t lik
ely
mea
ning
of t
he te
rm in
the
cont
ext o
f int
erna
tiona
l law
. For
a tr
ibun
al su
ch a
s th
is o
ne to
be
esta
blis
hed
acco
rdin
g to
the
rule
of l
aw, i
t mus
t be
esta
blis
hed
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith th
e pr
oper
inte
rnat
iona
l sta
ndar
ds; i
t mus
t pro
vide
all
the
guar
ante
es o
f fai
rnes
s, ju
stic
e an
d ev
en-h
ande
dnes
s, in
full
conf
orm
ity w
ith in
tern
atio
nally
reco
gniz
ed h
uman
righ
ts in
stru
men
ts.
This
inte
rpre
tatio
n of
the
guar
ante
e th
at a
trib
unal
be
"est
ablis
hed
by la
w" i
s bor
ne o
ut b
y an
ana
lysi
s of
the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Cov
enan
t on
Civ
il an
d Po
litic
al R
ight
s. A
s not
ed b
y th
e Tr
ial C
ham
ber,
at th
e tim
e A
rticl
e 14
of t
he In
tern
atio
nal C
oven
ant o
n C
ivil
and
Polit
ical
Rig
hts w
as b
eing
dra
fted,
it w
as so
ught
, un
succ
essf
ully
, to
amen
d it
to re
quire
that
trib
unal
s sho
uld
be "
pre-
esta
blis
hed"
by
law
and
not
mer
ely
"est
ablis
hed
by la
w"
(Dec
isio
n at
Tria
l, at
par
a. 3
4). T
wo
sim
ilar p
ropo
sals
to th
is e
ffec
t wer
e m
ade
(one
by
the
repr
esen
tativ
e of
Leb
anon
and
one
by
the
repr
esen
tativ
e of
Chi
le);
if ad
opte
d, th
eir e
ffec
t wou
ld
have
bee
n to
pre
vent
all
ad h
oc tr
ibun
als.
In re
spon
se, t
he d
eleg
ate
from
the
Phili
ppin
es n
oted
the
disa
dvan
tage
s of u
sing
the
lang
uage
of "
pre-
esta
blis
hed
by la
w":
"If [
the
Chi
lean
or L
eban
ese
prop
osal
was
app
rove
d], a
cou
ntry
wou
ld n
ever
be
able
to re
orga
nize
its
trib
unal
s. Si
mila
rly it
cou
ld b
e cl
aim
ed th
at th
e N
ürnb
erg
tribu
nal w
as n
ot in
exi
sten
ce a
t the
tim
e th
e w
ar c
rimin
als h
ad c
omm
itted
thei
r crim
es."
(See
E/C
N.4
/SR
109
. Uni
ted
Nat
ions
Ec
onom
ic a
nd S
ocia
l Cou
ncil,
Com
mis
sion
on
Hum
an R
ight
s, 5t
h Se
ss.,
Sum
. Rec
. 8 Ju
ne 1
949,
U
.N. D
oc. 6
.)
As n
oted
by
the
Tria
l Cha
mbe
r in
its D
ecis
ion,
ther
e is
wid
e ag
reem
ent t
hat,
in m
ost r
espe
cts,
the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Mili
tary
Trib
unal
s at N
urem
berg
and
Tok
yo g
ave
the
accu
sed
a fa
ir tri
al in
a p
roce
dura
l se
nse
(Dec
isio
n at
Tria
l, at
par
a. 3
4). T
he im
porta
nt c
onsi
dera
tion
in d
eter
min
ing
whe
ther
a tr
ibun
al h
as
been
"es
tabl
ishe
d by
law
" is n
ot w
heth
er it
was
pre
-est
ablis
hed
or e
stab
lishe
d fo
r a sp
ecifi
c pu
rpos
e or
si
tuat
ion;
wha
t is i
mpo
rtant
is th
at it
be
set u
p by
a c
ompe
tent
org
an in
kee
ping
with
the
rele
vant
lega
l pr
oced
ures
, and
shou
ld th
at it
obs
erve
s the
requ
irem
ents
of p
roce
dura
l fai
rnes
s.
This
con
cern
abo
ut a
d ho
c tri
buna
ls th
at fu
nctio
n in
such
a w
ay a
s not
to a
ffor
d th
e in
divi
dual
bef
ore
them
bas
ic fa
ir tri
al g
uara
ntee
s als
o un
derli
es U
nite
d N
atio
ns H
uman
Rig
hts C
omm
ittee
's in
terp
reta
tion
of th
e ph
rase
"es
tabl
ishe
d by
law
" con
tain
ed in
Arti
cle
14, p
arag
raph
1, o
f the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Cov
enan
t on
Civ
il an
d Po
litic
al R
ight
s. W
hile
the
Hum
an R
ight
s Com
mitt
ee h
as n
ot d
eter
min
ed th
at "
extra
ordi
nary
" tri
buna
ls o
r "sp
ecia
l" c
ourts
are
inco
mpa
tible
with
the
requ
irem
ent t
hat t
ribun
als b
e es
tabl
ishe
d by
law
, it
has t
aken
the
posi
tion
that
the
prov
isio
n is
inte
nded
to e
nsur
e th
at a
ny c
ourt,
be
it "e
xtra
ordi
nary
" or
not
, sh
ould
gen
uine
ly a
ffor
d th
e ac
cuse
d th
e fu
ll gu
aran
tees
of f
air t
rial s
et o
ut in
Arti
cle
14 o
f the
In
tern
atio
nal C
oven
ant o
n C
ivil
and
Polit
ical
Rig
hts.
(See
Gen
eral
Com
men
t on
Arti
cle
14, H
.R. C
omm
.
450
43rd
Ses
s., S
upp.
No.
40,
at p
ara.
4, U
.N. D
oc. A
/43/
40 (1
988)
, Car
ibon
i v. U
rugu
ay H
.R.C
omm
. 159
/83.
39
th S
ess.
Supp
. No.
40
U.N
. Doc
. A/3
9/40
.) A
sim
ilar a
ppro
ach
has b
een
take
n by
the
Inte
r-A
mer
ican
C
omm
issi
on. (
See,
e.g
., In
ter-
Am
C.H
.R.,
Ann
ual R
epor
t 197
2, O
EA/S
er. P
, AG
/doc
. 305
/73
rev.
1, 1
4 M
arch
197
3, a
t 1; I
nter
-Am
C.H
.R.,
Ann
ual R
epor
t 197
3, O
EA/S
er. P
, AG
/doc
. 409
/174
, 5 M
arch
197
4,
at 2
-4.)
The
prac
tice
of th
e H
uman
Rig
hts C
omm
ittee
with
resp
ect t
o St
ate
repo
rting
obl
igat
ions
indi
cate
s its
tend
ency
to sc
rutin
ise
clos
ely
"spe
cial
" or
"ex
traor
dina
ry"
crim
inal
cou
rts in
ord
er to
asc
erta
in w
heth
er
they
ens
ure
com
plia
nce
with
the
fair
trial
requ
irem
ents
of A
rticl
e 14
.
46. A
n ex
amin
atio
n of
the
Stat
ute
of th
e In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al, a
nd o
f the
Rul
es o
f Pro
cedu
re a
nd
Evid
ence
ado
pted
pur
suan
t to
that
Sta
tute
lead
s to
the
conc
lusi
on th
at it
has
bee
n es
tabl
ishe
d in
ac
cord
ance
with
the
rule
of l
aw. T
he fa
ir tri
al g
uara
ntee
s in
Arti
cle
14 o
f the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Cov
enan
t on
Civ
il an
d Po
litic
al R
ight
s hav
e be
en a
dopt
ed a
lmos
t ver
batim
in A
rticl
e 21
of t
he S
tatu
te. O
ther
fair
trial
gu
aran
tees
app
ear i
n th
e St
atut
e an
d th
e R
ules
of P
roce
dure
and
Evi
denc
e. F
or e
xam
ple,
Arti
cle
13,
para
grap
h 1,
of t
he S
tatu
te e
nsur
es th
e hi
gh m
oral
cha
ract
er, i
mpa
rtial
ity, i
nteg
rity
and
com
pete
nce
of th
e Ju
dges
of t
he In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al, w
hile
var
ious
oth
er p
rovi
sion
s in
the
Rul
es e
nsur
e eq
ualit
y of
arm
s an
d fa
ir tri
al.
47. I
n co
nclu
sion
, the
App
eals
Cha
mbe
r fin
ds th
at th
e In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al h
as b
een
esta
blis
hed
in
acco
rdan
ce w
ith th
e ap
prop
riate
pro
cedu
res u
nder
the
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
Cha
rter a
nd p
rovi
des a
ll th
e ne
cess
ary
safe
guar
ds o
f a fa
ir tri
al. I
t is t
hus "
esta
blis
hed
by la
w."
48. T
he fi
rst g
roun
d of
App
eal:
unla
wfu
l est
ablis
hmen
t of t
he In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al, i
s acc
ordi
ngly
di
smis
sed.
III.
UN
JUST
IFIE
D P
RIM
AC
Y O
F T
HE
INT
ER
NA
TIO
NA
L T
RIB
UN
AL
OV
ER
CO
MPE
TE
NT
D
OM
EST
IC C
OU
RT
S
49. T
he se
cond
gro
und
of a
ppea
l atta
cks t
he p
rimac
y of
the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
ove
r nat
iona
l cou
rts.
50. T
his p
rimac
y is
est
ablis
hed
by A
rticl
e 9
of th
e St
atut
e of
the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
, whi
ch p
rovi
des:
"Con
curr
ent j
uris
dict
ion
1. T
he In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al a
nd n
atio
nal c
ourts
shal
l hav
e co
ncur
rent
juris
dict
ion
to p
rose
cute
pe
rson
s for
serio
us v
iola
tions
of i
nter
natio
nal h
uman
itaria
n la
w c
omm
itted
in th
e te
rrito
ry o
f the
fo
rmer
Yug
osla
via
sinc
e 1
Janu
ary
1991
.
2. T
he In
tern
atio
nal T
ribu
nal s
hall
have
pri
mac
y ov
er n
atio
nal c
ourt
s. A
t any
stag
e of
the
proc
edur
e, th
e In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al m
ay fo
rmal
ly re
ques
t nat
iona
l cou
rts to
def
er to
the
com
pete
nce
of th
e In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al in
acc
orda
nce
with
the
pres
ent S
tatu
te a
nd th
e R
ules
of
Proc
edur
e an
d Ev
iden
ce o
f the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
." (E
mph
asis
add
ed.)
App
ella
nt's
subm
issi
on is
mat
eria
l to
the
issu
e, in
asm
uch
as A
ppel
lant
is e
xpec
ted
to st
and
trial
bef
ore
this
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
as a
con
sequ
ence
of a
requ
est f
or d
efer
ral w
hich
the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Trib
unal
su
bmitt
ed to
the
Gov
ernm
ent o
f the
Fed
eral
Rep
ublic
of G
erm
any
on 8
Nov
embe
r 199
4 an
d w
hich
this
G
over
nmen
t, as
it w
as b
ound
to d
o, a
gree
d to
hon
our b
y su
rren
derin
g A
ppel
lant
to th
e In
tern
atio
nal
Trib
unal
. (U
nite
d N
atio
ns C
harte
r, ar
t. 25
, 48
& 4
9; S
tatu
te o
f the
Trib
unal
, art.
29.
2(e)
; Rul
es o
f Pr
oced
ure,
Rul
e 10
.)
In re
leva
nt p
art,
App
ella
nt's
mot
ion
alle
ges:
" [T
he In
tern
atio
nal T
ribun
al's]
prim
acy
over
dom
estic
cou
rts
cons
titut
es a
n in
frin
gem
ent u
pon
the
sove
reig
nty
of th
e St
ates
dire
ctly
aff
ecte
d."
([D
efen
ce] M
otio
n on
451
Statute of the Administrative Tribunal of the International
Bank for Reconstruction and Development, International
Development Association and International Finance
Corporation
Adopted by the Board of Governors on 30 April 1980 and
amended on 31 July 2001 and on 18 June 2009
Stat
ute
of th
e Ad
min
istr
ativ
e Tr
ibun
al o
f the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Ban
k fo
r Rec
onst
ruct
ion
and
Dev
elop
men
t, In
tern
atio
nal
Dev
elop
men
t Ass
ocia
tion
and
Inte
rnat
iona
l Fin
ance
C
orpo
ratio
n
as a
dopt
ed b
y th
e B
oard
of G
over
nors
on
30 A
pril
1980
and
am
ende
d
on 3
1 Ju
ly 2
001
and
on 1
8 Ju
ne 2
009
Art
icle
I
1. T
here
is h
ereb
y es
tabl
ishe
d a
Trib
unal
of t
he In
tern
atio
nal B
ank
for R
econ
stru
ctio
n an
d D
evel
opm
ent
(her
eina
fter r
efer
red
to in
divi
dual
ly a
s th
e "B
ank"
), th
e In
tern
atio
nal D
evel
opm
ent A
ssoc
iatio
n an
d th
e In
tern
atio
nal F
inan
ce C
orpo
ratio
n (to
geth
er w
ith th
e B
ank
here
inaf
ter r
efer
red
to c
olle
ctiv
ely
as th
e "B
ank
Gro
up")
to
be
know
n as
the
Wor
ld B
ank
Adm
inis
trativ
e Tr
ibun
al.
2. T
he T
ribun
al is
a ju
dici
al b
ody
that
func
tions
inde
pend
ently
of t
he m
anag
emen
t of t
he B
ank
Gro
up. T
he
inde
pend
ence
of t
he T
ribun
al s
hall
be g
uara
ntee
d an
d re
spec
ted
by th
e B
ank
Gro
up a
t all
times
.
Art
icle
II
1. T
he T
ribun
al s
hall
hear
and
pas
s ju
dgm
ent u
pon
any
appl
icat
ion
by w
hich
a m
embe
r of t
he s
taff
of th
e B
ank
Gro
up a
llege
s no
n-ob
serv
ance
of t
he c
ontra
ct o
f em
ploy
men
t or t
erm
s of
app
oint
men
t of s
uch
staf
f mem
ber.
The
wor
ds "c
ontra
ct o
f em
ploy
men
t" an
d "te
rms
of a
ppoi
ntm
ent"
incl
ude
all p
ertin
ent r
egul
atio
ns a
nd ru
les
in fo
rce
at
the
time
of a
llege
d no
n-ob
serv
ance
incl
udin
g th
e pr
ovis
ions
of t
he S
taff
Ret
irem
ent P
lan.
2. N
o su
ch a
pplic
atio
n sh
all b
e ad
mis
sibl
e, e
xcep
t und
er e
xcep
tiona
l circ
umst
ance
s as
dec
ided
by
the
Trib
unal
, un
less
:
(i) th
e ap
plic
ant h
as e
xhau
sted
all
othe
r rem
edie
s av
aila
ble
with
in th
e Ba
nk G
roup
, exc
ept i
f the
app
lican
t and
the
resp
onde
nt in
stitu
tion
have
agr
eed
to s
ubm
it th
e ap
plic
atio
n di
rect
ly to
the
Trib
unal
; and
(ii) t
he a
pplic
atio
n is
file
d w
ithin
one
hun
dred
and
twen
ty d
ays
afte
r the
late
st o
f the
follo
win
g:
(a) t
he o
ccur
renc
e of
the
even
t giv
ing
rise
to th
e ap
plic
atio
n;
(b) r
ecei
pt o
f not
ice,
afte
r the
app
lican
t has
exh
aust
ed a
ll ot
her r
emed
ies
avai
labl
e w
ithin
the
Ban
k G
roup
, tha
t th
e re
lief a
sked
for o
r rec
omm
ende
d w
ill n
ot b
e gr
ante
d; o
r
(c) r
ecei
pt o
f not
ice
that
the
relie
f ask
ed fo
r or r
ecom
men
ded
will
be
gran
ted,
if s
uch
relie
f sha
ll no
t hav
e be
en
gran
ted
with
in th
irty
days
afte
r rec
eipt
of s
uch
notic
e.
3. F
or th
e pu
rpos
e of
this
sta
tute
:
the
expr
essi
on "m
embe
r of t
he s
taff"
mea
ns a
ny c
urre
nt o
r for
mer
mem
ber o
f the
sta
ff of
the
Ban
k G
roup
, any
pe
rson
who
is e
ntitl
ed to
cla
im u
pon
a rig
ht o
f a m
embe
r of t
he s
taff
as a
per
sona
l rep
rese
ntat
ive
or b
y re
ason
of
the
staf
f mem
ber's
dea
th, a
nd a
ny p
erso
n de
sign
ated
or o
ther
wis
e en
title
d to
rec
eive
a p
aym
ent u
nder
any
pr
ovis
ion
of th
e St
aff R
etire
men
t Pla
n.
Art
icle
III
In th
e ev
ent o
f a d
ispu
te a
s to
whe
ther
the
Trib
unal
has
com
pete
nce,
the
mat
ter s
hall
be s
ettle
d by
the
Trib
unal
.
Art
icle
IV
1. T
he T
ribun
al s
hall
be c
ompo
sed
of s
even
mem
bers
, all
of w
hom
sha
ll be
nat
iona
ls o
f Mem
ber S
tate
s of
the
Ban
k, b
ut n
o tw
o of
who
m s
hall
be n
atio
nals
of t
he s
ame
Stat
e. T
he m
embe
rs o
f the
Trib
unal
sha
ll be
per
sons
of
high
mor
al c
hara
cter
and
mus
t pos
sess
the
qual
ifica
tions
requ
ired
for a
ppoi
ntm
ent t
o hi
gh ju
dici
al o
ffice
or b
e ju
risco
nsul
ts o
f rec
ogni
zed
com
pete
nce
in re
leva
nt fi
elds
suc
h as
em
ploy
men
t rel
atio
ns, i
nter
natio
nal c
ivil
serv
ice
and
inte
rnat
iona
l org
aniz
atio
n ad
min
istra
tion.
Cur
rent
and
form
er s
taff
of th
e B
ank
Gro
up s
hall
not b
e el
igib
le to
se
rve
as m
embe
rs o
f the
Trib
unal
and
mem
bers
may
not
be
empl
oyed
by
the
Ban
k G
roup
follo
win
g th
eir s
ervi
ce
on th
e Tr
ibun
al.
2. T
he m
embe
rs o
f the
Trib
unal
sha
ll be
app
oint
ed b
y th
e E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
s of
the
Ban
k fro
m a
list
of
cand
idat
es n
omin
ated
by
the
Pre
side
nt o
f the
Ban
k af
ter a
ppro
pria
te c
onsu
ltatio
n. F
or th
is p
urpo
se, t
he P
resi
dent
sh
all a
ppoi
nt a
n ad
viso
ry c
omm
ittee
com
pose
d of
four
mem
bers
with
rele
vant
exp
erie
nce.
3. T
he m
embe
rs o
f the
Trib
unal
sha
ll be
app
oint
ed fo
r a te
rm o
f fiv
e ye
ars;
they
may
be
reap
poin
ted
for o
ne
addi
tiona
l ter
m o
f fiv
e ye
ars.
How
ever
, of t
he s
even
mem
bers
app
oint
ed in
200
1, th
e te
rms
of th
ree
mem
bers
sh
all e
xpire
at t
he e
nd o
f thr
ee y
ears
. Any
mem
ber w
ho s
hall
have
ser
ved
one
or m
ore
full
term
s of
offi
ce a
s of
O
ctob
er 1
, 200
1 sh
all b
e el
igib
le fo
r rea
ppoi
ntm
ent f
or o
ne a
dditi
onal
term
.
4. A
mem
ber a
ppoi
nted
to re
plac
e a
mem
ber w
hose
term
of o
ffice
has
not
exp
ired
shal
l hol
d of
fice
for t
he
rem
aind
er o
f his
pre
dece
ssor
's te
rm, a
nd m
ay b
e ap
poin
ted
and
reap
poin
ted
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith th
e pr
ovis
ions
of
para
grap
hs 2
and
3 o
f thi
s A
rticl
e IV
.
5. T
he m
embe
rs o
f the
Trib
unal
sha
ll ho
ld o
ffice
unt
il re
plac
ed.
6. M
embe
rs o
f the
Trib
unal
sha
ll en
joy
the
sam
e im
mun
ities
that
app
ly to
offi
cial
s of
the
Ban
k G
roup
with
resp
ect
to a
cts
perfo
rmed
by
them
in th
e ex
erci
se o
f the
ir fu
nctio
ns.
AR
TIC
LE V
1. A
quo
rum
of f
ive
mem
bers
sha
ll su
ffice
to c
onst
itute
the
Trib
unal
.
2. T
he T
ribun
al m
ay, h
owev
er, a
t any
tim
e fo
rm a
pan
el o
f not
less
than
thre
e of
its
mem
bers
for d
ealin
g w
ith a
pa
rticu
lar c
ase
or g
roup
of c
ases
. Dec
isio
ns o
f suc
h a
pane
l sha
ll be
dee
med
to b
e ta
ken
by th
e Tr
ibun
al.
AR
TIC
LE V
I
1. T
he T
ribun
al s
hall
elec
t a P
resi
dent
and
two
Vic
e-P
resi
dent
s fro
m a
mon
g its
mem
bers
.
2. T
he P
resi
dent
of t
he B
ank
shal
l mak
e th
e ad
min
istra
tive
arra
ngem
ents
nec
essa
ry fo
r the
func
tioni
ng o
f the
Tr
ibun
al, i
nclu
ding
des
igna
ting
an E
xecu
tive
Sec
reta
ry w
ho, i
n th
e di
scha
rge
of d
utie
s, s
hall
be re
spon
sibl
e on
ly
to th
e Tr
ibun
al.
3. T
he e
xpen
ses
of th
e Tr
ibun
al s
hall
be b
orne
by
the
Ban
k G
roup
. The
Trib
unal
sha
ll pr
epar
e an
d m
anag
e its
bu
dget
inde
pend
ently
.
AR
TIC
LE V
II
1. S
ubje
ct to
the
prov
isio
ns o
f the
pre
sent
Sta
tute
, the
Trib
unal
sha
ll es
tabl
ish
its ru
les.
2. T
he ru
les
shal
l inc
lude
pro
visi
ons
conc
erni
ng:
(a) e
lect
ion
of th
e P
resi
dent
and
Vic
e-P
resi
dent
s;
(b) c
onst
itutio
n of
pan
els
envi
sage
d in
Arti
cle
V a
bove
;
(c) p
rese
ntat
ion
of a
pplic
atio
ns a
nd th
e pr
oced
ure
to b
e fo
llow
ed in
resp
ect o
f the
m;
(d) i
nter
vent
ion
by p
erso
ns to
who
m th
e Tr
ibun
al is
ope
n un
der p
arag
raph
3 o
f Arti
cle
II, w
hose
righ
ts m
ay b
e af
fect
ed b
y th
e ju
dgm
ent;
(e) h
earin
g, fo
r pur
pose
s of
info
rmat
ion,
of p
erso
ns to
who
m th
e Tr
ibun
al is
ope
n un
der p
arag
raph
3 o
f Arti
cle
II;
and
(f) o
ther
mat
ters
rela
ting
to th
e fu
nctio
ning
of t
he T
ribun
al.
AR
TIC
LE V
III
1. T
he T
ribun
al s
hall
hold
ses
sion
s at
dat
es to
be
fixed
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith it
s ru
les.
2. T
he T
ribun
al s
hall
hold
its
sess
ions
at t
he p
rinci
pal o
ffice
of t
he B
ank,
unl
ess
it co
nsid
ers
that
the
effic
ient
co
nduc
t of t
he p
roce
edin
gs u
pon
an a
pplic
atio
n ne
cess
itate
s ho
ldin
g se
ssio
ns e
lsew
here
.
AR
TIC
LE I
X
The
Trib
unal
sha
ll de
cide
in e
ach
case
whe
ther
ora
l pro
ceed
ings
are
war
rant
ed. O
ral p
roce
edin
gs s
hall
be h
eld
in
publ
ic, u
nles
s th
e Tr
ibun
al d
ecid
es th
at e
xcep
tiona
l circ
umst
ance
s re
quire
that
they
be
held
in p
rivat
e.
AR
TIC
LE X
1. T
he T
ribun
al s
hall
take
all
its d
ecis
ions
by
a m
ajor
ity o
f the
mem
bers
pre
sent
.
2. In
the
even
t of a
n eq
ualit
y of
vot
es, t
he P
resi
dent
or t
he m
embe
r who
act
s in
suc
h pl
ace
shal
l hav
e a
cast
ing
vote
.
AR
TIC
LE X
I
1. J
udgm
ents
sha
ll be
fina
l and
with
out a
ppea
l.
2. E
ach
judg
men
t sha
ll st
ate
the
reas
ons
on w
hich
it is
bas
ed. D
isse
ntin
g an
d co
ncur
ring
opin
ions
, as
wel
l as
clar
ifica
tions
, may
be
set o
ut in
the
judg
men
t.
AR
TIC
LE X
II
1. If
the
Trib
unal
find
s th
at th
e ap
plic
atio
n is
wel
l-fou
nded
, it s
hall
orde
r the
resc
issi
on o
f the
dec
isio
n co
ntes
ted
or
the
spec
ific
perfo
rman
ce o
f the
obl
igat
ion
invo
ked
unle
ss th
e Tr
ibun
al fi
nds
that
the
Res
pond
ent i
nstit
utio
n ha
s re
ason
ably
det
erm
ined
that
suc
h re
scis
sion
or s
peci
fic p
erfo
rman
ce w
ould
not
be
prac
ticab
le o
r in
the
inst
itutio
n’s
inte
rest
. In
that
eve
nt, t
he T
ribun
al s
hall,
inst
ead,
ord
er s
uch
inst
itutio
n to
pay
rest
itutio
n in
the
amou
nt th
at is
re
ason
ably
nec
essa
ry to
com
pens
ate
the
appl
ican
t for
the
actu
al d
amag
es s
uffe
red.
2. S
houl
d th
e Tr
ibun
al fi
nd th
at th
e pr
oced
ure
pres
crib
ed in
the
rule
s of
the
resp
onde
nt in
stitu
tion
has
not b
een
obse
rved
, it m
ay, a
t the
requ
est o
f the
Pre
side
nt o
f suc
h re
spon
dent
and
prio
r to
the
dete
rmin
atio
n of
the
mer
its,
orde
r the
cas
e re
man
ded
for i
nstit
utio
n or
cor
rect
ion
of th
e re
quire
d pr
oced
ure.
3. In
all
appl
icab
le c
ases
, com
pens
atio
n fix
ed b
y th
e Tr
ibun
al s
hall
be p
aid
by th
e re
spon
dent
inst
itutio
n.
4. T
he fi
ling
of a
n ap
plic
atio
n sh
all n
ot h
ave
the
effe
ct o
f sus
pend
ing
exec
utio
n of
the
deci
sion
con
test
ed.
AR
TIC
LE X
III
1. A
par
ty to
a c
ase
in w
hich
a ju
dgm
ent h
as b
een
deliv
ered
may
, in
the
even
t of t
he d
isco
very
of a
fact
whi
ch b
y its
nat
ure
mig
ht h
ave
had
a de
cisi
ve in
fluen
ce o
n th
e ju
dgm
ent o
f the
Trib
unal
and
whi
ch a
t the
tim
e th
e ju
dgm
ent
was
del
iver
ed w
as u
nkno
wn
both
to th
e Tr
ibun
al a
nd to
that
par
ty, r
eque
st th
e Tr
ibun
al, w
ithin
a p
erio
d of
six
m
onth
s af
ter t
hat p
arty
acq
uire
d kn
owle
dge
of s
uch
fact
, to
revi
se th
e ju
dgm
ent.
2. T
he re
ques
t sha
ll co
ntai
n th
e in
form
atio
n ne
cess
ary
to s
how
that
the
cond
ition
s la
id d
own
in p
arag
raph
1 o
f th
is A
rticl
e ha
ve b
een
com
plie
d w
ith. I
t sha
ll be
acc
ompa
nied
by
the
orig
inal
or a
cop
y of
all
supp
ortin
g do
cum
ents
.
AR
TIC
LE X
IV
The
orig
inal
cop
y of
eac
h ju
dgm
ent s
hall
be fi
led
in th
e ar
chiv
es o
f the
Ban
k. A
cop
y of
the
judg
men
t sha
ll be
de
liver
ed to
eac
h of
the
parti
es c
once
rned
. Cop
ies
shal
l als
o be
mad
e av
aila
ble
on re
ques
t to
inte
rest
ed p
erso
ns.
AR
TIC
LE X
V
The
Ban
k m
ay m
ake
agre
emen
ts w
ith a
ny o
ther
inte
rnat
iona
l org
aniz
atio
n fo
r the
sub
mis
sion
of a
pplic
atio
ns o
f m
embe
rs o
f the
ir st
aff t
o th
e Tr
ibun
al. E
ach
such
agr
eem
ent s
hall
prov
ide
that
the
orga
niza
tion
conc
erne
d sh
all
be b
ound
by
the
judg
men
ts o
f the
Trib
unal
and
be
resp
onsi
ble
for t
he p
aym
ent o
f any
com
pens
atio
n aw
arde
d by
th
e Tr
ibun
al in
resp
ect o
f a s
taff
mem
ber o
f tha
t org
aniz
atio
n; th
e ag
reem
ent s
hall
also
incl
ude,
inte
r alia
, pr
ovis
ions
con
cern
ing
the
orga
niza
tion'
s pa
rtici
patio
n in
the
adm
inis
trativ
e ar
rang
emen
ts fo
r the
func
tioni
ng o
f the
Tr
ibun
al a
nd c
once
rnin
g its
sha
ring
of th
e ex
pens
es o
f the
Trib
unal
.
AR
TIC
LE X
VI
The
pres
ent S
tatu
te m
ay b
e am
ende
d by
the
Boa
rd o
f Gov
erno
rs o
f the
Ban
k.
AR
TIC
LE X
VII
Not
with
stan
ding
Arti
cle
II, p
arag
raph
2 o
f the
pre
sent
Sta
tute
, the
Trib
unal
sha
ll be
com
pete
nt to
hea
r any
ap
plic
atio
n co
ncer
ning
a c
ause
of c
ompl
aint
whi
ch a
rose
sub
sequ
ent t
o Ja
nuar
y 1,
197
9, p
rovi
ded,
how
ever
, tha
t th
e ap
plic
atio
n is
file
d w
ithin
90
days
afte
r the
ent
ry in
to fo
rce
of th
e pr
esen
t Sta
tute
.
Rules of The World Bank Administrative Tribunal
Adopted by the Tribunal on September 26 1980 and Amended on
1 January 2002
Rul
es o
f The
Wor
ld B
ank
Adm
inis
trat
ive
Trib
unal
as a
dopt
ed b
y th
e Tr
ibun
al o
n S
epte
mbe
r 26,
198
0 an
d am
ende
d on
1 J
anua
ry 2
002
(Sub
-hea
ding
s ar
e fo
r eas
e of
refe
renc
e on
ly, d
o no
t for
m p
art o
f the
rule
s, a
nd d
o no
t con
stitu
te a
n in
terp
reta
tion
ther
eof.)
CH
AP
TER
I:
Org
aniz
atio
n
Rul
e 1:
Ter
m o
f O
ffic
e of
Mem
bers
Sub
ject
to a
ny c
ontra
ry d
ecis
ion
of th
e E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
s of
the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Ban
k fo
r Rec
onst
ruct
ion
and
Dev
elop
men
t (he
rein
afte
r ref
erre
d to
indi
vidu
ally
as
the
"Ban
k" a
nd c
olle
ctiv
ely,
toge
ther
with
the
Inte
rnat
iona
l D
evel
opm
ent A
ssoc
iatio
n an
d th
e In
tern
atio
nal F
inan
ce C
orpo
ratio
n, a
s th
e "B
ank
Gro
up")
, the
term
of o
ffice
of
mem
bers
of t
he T
ribun
al s
hall
com
men
ce o
n th
e fir
st d
ay o
f Oct
ober
of t
he y
ear o
f the
ir ap
poin
tmen
t by
the
Exe
cutiv
e D
irect
ors
of th
e B
ank.
Rul
e 2:
Pre
side
nt
and
Vic
e P
resi
den
ts
1.
The
Trib
unal
sha
ll el
ect a
Pre
side
nt a
nd tw
o V
ice
Pre
side
nts
for t
erm
s of
thre
e ye
ars.
The
Pre
side
nt a
nd
Vic
e P
resi
dent
s th
us e
lect
ed s
hall
take
up
thei
r dut
ies
imm
edia
tely
. The
y m
ay b
e re
-ele
cted
. 2.
Th
e re
tirin
g P
resi
dent
and
Vic
e P
resi
dent
s sh
all r
emai
n in
offi
ce u
ntil
thei
r suc
cess
ors
are
elec
ted.
3.
If
the
Pre
side
nt s
houl
d ce
ase
to b
e a
mem
ber o
f the
Trib
unal
or s
houl
d re
sign
the
offic
e of
Pre
side
nt
befo
re th
e ex
pira
tion
of th
e no
rmal
term
, the
Trib
unal
sha
ll el
ect a
suc
cess
or fo
r the
une
xpire
d po
rtion
of
the
term
. In
the
case
of a
vac
ancy
of a
Vic
e P
resi
dent
, the
Pre
side
nt m
ay a
rran
ge fo
r the
ele
ctio
n of
a
succ
esso
r by
corre
spon
denc
e.
4.
The
elec
tions
sha
ll be
by
maj
ority
vot
e.
Ru
le 3
: D
uti
es o
f P
resi
den
t 1.
Th
e P
resi
dent
sha
ll di
rect
the
wor
k of
the
Trib
unal
and
of i
ts S
ecre
taria
t. H
e sh
all r
epre
sent
the
Trib
unal
in
all
adm
inis
trativ
e m
atte
rs a
nd s
hall
pres
ide
at m
eetin
gs o
f the
Trib
unal
. 2.
If
the
Pre
side
nt is
una
ble
to a
ct, o
ne o
f the
Vic
e P
resi
dent
s de
sign
ated
by
the
Pre
side
nt s
hall
act a
s P
resi
dent
. In
the
abse
nce
of a
ny s
uch
desi
gnat
ion
by th
e P
resi
dent
, the
Vic
e P
resi
dent
des
igna
ted
by
the
Trib
unal
sha
ll ac
t as
Pre
side
nt.
3.
No
case
sha
ll be
hea
rd b
y th
e Tr
ibun
al e
xcep
t und
er th
e ch
airm
ansh
ip o
f the
Pre
side
nt o
r one
of t
he
Vic
e P
resi
dent
s.
Ru
le 4
: Ex
ecu
tive
Sec
reta
ry a
nd
Staf
f
In a
dditi
on to
an
Exe
cutiv
e Se
cret
ary,
the
Trib
unal
sha
ll ha
ve o
ther
sta
ff pl
aced
at i
ts d
ispo
sal b
y th
e P
resi
dent
of
the
Ban
k. T
he E
xecu
tive
Sec
reta
ry, i
f una
ble
to a
ct, s
hall
be re
plac
ed b
y an
offi
cial
app
oint
ed b
y th
e P
resi
dent
of
the
Ban
k.
C
HA
PTE
R I
I: S
essi
ons
Rul
e 5:
Ple
nar
y Se
ssio
ns
Plen
ary
Sess
ions
Th
e Tr
ibun
al s
hall
hold
a p
lena
ry s
essi
on o
nce
a ye
ar o
n a
date
fixe
d by
the
Pre
side
nt fo
r the
pur
pose
of h
earin
g ca
ses,
form
ing
pane
ls, e
lect
ing
offic
ers
and
any
othe
r mat
ters
affe
ctin
g th
e ad
min
istra
tion
or o
pera
tion
of th
e Tr
ibun
al. W
hen,
how
ever
, the
re a
re n
o ca
ses
on th
e lis
t ref
erre
d to
in R
ule
14, p
arag
raph
1, w
hich
in th
e op
inio
n of
the
Pre
side
nt w
ould
just
ify th
e ho
ldin
g of
a s
essi
on fo
r the
ir co
nsid
erat
ion,
the
Pre
side
nt m
ay, a
fter c
onsu
lting
the
othe
r mem
bers
of t
he T
ribun
al, d
ecid
e to
pos
tpon
e th
e pl
enar
y se
ssio
n to
a la
ter d
ate.
Spec
ial P
lena
ry S
essi
ons
A
spe
cial
ple
nary
ses
sion
may
be
conv
ened
by
the
Pre
side
nt w
hen,
in h
is o
r her
opi
nion
, the
num
ber o
r urg
ency
of
cas
es re
quire
s su
ch a
ses
sion
or i
t is
nece
ssar
y to
dea
l with
a q
uest
ion
affe
ctin
g th
e op
erat
ion
of th
e Tr
ibun
al.
Not
ices
of S
essi
ons
Not
ice
of th
e co
nven
ing
of a
ple
nary
ses
sion
or a
spe
cial
ple
nary
ses
sion
sha
ll be
giv
en to
the
mem
bers
of t
he
Trib
unal
at l
east
thirt
y da
ys in
adv
ance
of t
he d
ate
of th
e op
enin
g of
suc
h a
sess
ion.
Quo
rum
Fi
ve m
embe
rs o
f the
Trib
unal
sha
ll co
nstit
ute
a qu
orum
for p
lena
ry s
essi
ons.
Rul
e 6:
Pan
els
1.
Whe
n th
e Tr
ibun
al d
ecid
es to
form
a p
anel
pro
vide
d fo
r in
Arti
cle
V, p
arag
raph
2 o
f the
Sta
tute
, it s
hall
dete
rmin
e th
e pa
rticu
lar c
ase
or g
roup
of c
ases
for w
hich
suc
h pa
nel i
s fo
rmed
. 2.
A
pan
el w
hen
form
ed s
hall
incl
ude
the
Pre
side
nt o
r one
of t
he V
ice
Pre
side
nts,
who
, as
the
case
may
be
, sha
ll pr
esid
e ov
er th
at p
anel
. 3.
Th
e pr
esid
ing
mem
ber o
f a p
anel
sha
ll ex
erci
se a
ll th
e fu
nctio
ns o
f the
Pre
side
nt o
f the
Trib
unal
in
rela
tion
to c
ases
bef
ore
that
pan
el, i
nclu
ding
det
erm
inin
g th
e da
tes
of s
essi
ons
of th
e pa
nel.
C
HA
PTE
R I
II:
Pro
ceed
ings
R
ule
7:
App
licat
ion
s
App
licat
ions
1. A
pplic
atio
ns in
stitu
ting
proc
eedi
ngs
shal
l be
subm
itted
to th
e Tr
ibun
al th
roug
h th
e E
xecu
tive
Sec
reta
ry. S
uch
appl
icat
ions
sha
ll be
div
ided
into
four
sec
tions
, whi
ch s
hall
be e
ntitl
ed re
spec
tivel
y:
I. In
form
atio
n co
ncer
ning
the
pers
onal
and
offi
cial
sta
tus
of th
e ap
plic
ant;
II. P
leas
; III
. Exp
lana
tory
sta
tem
ent;
and
IV. A
nnex
es.
2. T
he in
form
atio
n co
ncer
ning
the
pers
onal
and
offi
cial
sta
tus
of th
e ap
plic
ant s
hall
be p
rese
nted
in th
e fo
rm
cont
aine
d in
Ann
ex I
of th
ese
rule
s.
Plea
s
3. T
he p
leas
sha
ll in
dica
te a
ll th
e m
easu
res
and
deci
sion
s w
hich
the
appl
ican
t is
requ
estin
g th
e Tr
ibun
al to
ord
er
or ta
ke. T
hey
shal
l spe
cify
:
(a) a
ny p
relim
inar
y or
pro
visi
onal
mea
sure
s, s
uch
as th
e pr
oduc
tion
of a
dditi
onal
doc
umen
ts o
r the
hea
ring
of
witn
esse
s, w
hich
the
appl
ican
t is
requ
estin
g th
e Tr
ibun
al to
ord
er b
efor
e pr
ocee
ding
to c
onsi
der t
he m
erits
;
(b) t
he d
ecis
ions
whi
ch th
e ap
plic
ant i
s co
ntes
ting
and
who
se re
scis
sion
is re
ques
ted
unde
r Arti
cle
XII,
para
grap
h 1,
of t
he S
tatu
te;
(c) t
he o
blig
atio
ns w
hich
the
appl
ican
t is
invo
king
and
the
spec
ific
perfo
rman
ce o
f whi
ch is
requ
este
d un
der
Arti
cle
XII,
para
grap
h 1,
of t
he S
tatu
te;
(d) t
he a
mou
nt o
f com
pens
atio
n cl
aim
ed b
y th
e ap
plic
ant i
n th
e ev
ent t
hat t
he T
ribun
al fi
nds
that
the
resp
onde
nt
inst
itutio
n ha
s de
term
ined
, in
acco
rdan
ce w
ith A
rticl
e XI
I, pa
ragr
aph
1, o
f the
Sta
tute
, tha
t res
ciss
ion
or s
peci
fic
perfo
rman
ce w
ould
not
be
prac
ticab
le o
r in
the
inst
itutio
n's
inte
rest
;
(e) a
ny o
ther
relie
f whi
ch th
e ap
plic
ant m
ay re
ques
t in
acco
rdan
ce w
ith th
e S
tatu
te; a
nd
(f) th
e am
ount
of c
osts
requ
este
d by
the
appl
ican
t.
Expl
anat
ory
Stat
emen
t
4. T
he e
xpla
nato
ry s
tate
men
t sha
ll se
t out
the
fact
s an
d th
e le
gal g
roun
ds o
n w
hich
the
plea
s ar
e ba
sed.
It s
hall
spec
ify, i
nter
alia
, the
pro
visi
ons
of th
e co
ntra
ct o
f em
ploy
men
t or o
f the
term
s of
app
oint
men
t the
non
-ob
serv
ance
of w
hich
is a
llege
d.
Ann
exes
5. T
he a
nnex
es s
hall
cont
ain
the
text
s of
all
docu
men
ts re
ferre
d to
in th
e fir
st th
ree
sect
ions
of t
he a
pplic
atio
n.
They
sha
ll be
pre
sent
ed b
y th
e ap
plic
ant i
n ac
cord
ance
with
the
follo
win
g ru
les
and
Ann
ex I,
Par
t II,
of th
ese
rule
s:
(a) e
ach
docu
men
t sha
ll be
ann
exed
in th
e or
igin
al o
r, fa
iling
that
, in
the
form
of a
cop
y be
arin
g th
e w
ords
"C
ertif
ied
true
copy
";
(b) d
ocum
ents
sha
ll be
acc
ompa
nied
by
any
nece
ssar
y tra
nsla
tions
; and
doc
umen
ts s
hall
be a
ccom
pani
ed b
y an
y ne
cess
ary
trans
latio
ns; a
nd
(c) u
nles
s pa
rt of
the
docu
men
t is
irrel
evan
t to
the
appl
icat
ion,
eac
h do
cum
ent,
rega
rdle
ss o
f its
nat
ure,
sha
ll be
an
nexe
d in
its
entir
ety.
Cop
ies
6. T
he a
pplic
ant s
hall
prep
are
eigh
t cop
ies
of th
e ap
plic
atio
n in
add
ition
to th
e or
igin
al. E
ach
copy
sha
ll re
prod
uce
all s
ectio
ns o
f the
orig
inal
, inc
ludi
ng th
e an
nexe
s. H
owev
er, t
he E
xecu
tive
Sec
reta
ry m
ay g
rant
the
appl
ican
t per
mis
sion
, upo
n re
ques
t, to
om
it th
e te
xt o
f an
anne
x of
unu
sual
leng
th fr
om a
spe
cifie
d nu
mbe
r of
copi
es o
f the
app
licat
ion.
Aut
hent
icat
ion
7. T
he a
pplic
ant s
hall
sign
the
last
pag
e of
the
orig
inal
app
licat
ion.
In th
e ev
ent o
f the
app
lican
t's in
capa
city
, the
re
quire
d si
gnat
ure
shal
l be
furn
ishe
d by
his
or h
er le
gal r
epre
sent
ativ
e. T
he a
pplic
ant m
ay in
stea
d, b
y m
eans
of a
le
tter t
rans
mitt
ed fo
r tha
t pur
pose
to th
e E
xecu
tive
Sec
reta
ry, a
utho
rize
his
or h
er la
wye
r or t
he s
taff
mem
ber o
r re
tired
sta
ff m
embe
r who
is re
pres
entin
g th
e ap
plic
ant t
o si
gn in
his
or h
er s
tead
.
Filin
g
8. T
he a
pplic
ant s
hall
file
the
duly
sig
ned
orig
inal
and
the
eigh
t cop
ies
of th
e ap
plic
atio
n w
ith th
e E
xecu
tive
Sec
reta
ry. W
here
the
Pre
side
nt o
f the
resp
onde
nt in
stitu
tion
and
the
appl
ican
t hav
e ag
reed
to s
ubm
it th
e ap
plic
atio
n di
rect
ly to
the
Trib
unal
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith th
e op
tion
give
n to
them
und
er A
rticl
e II,
par
agra
ph 2
(i), o
f th
e S
tatu
te, t
he fi
ling
shal
l tak
e pl
ace
with
in n
inet
y da
ys o
f the
dat
e on
whi
ch th
e P
resi
dent
of t
he re
spon
dent
in
stitu
tion
notif
ies
the
appl
ican
t of a
gree
men
t for
dire
ct s
ubm
issi
on. I
n al
l oth
er c
ases
, the
filin
g sh
all t
ake
plac
e w
ithin
the
time
limits
pre
scrib
ed b
y A
rticl
e II,
par
agra
ph 2
(ii),
of th
e St
atut
e an
d by
Rul
e 24
.
Cor
rect
ions
9. I
f the
form
al re
quire
men
ts o
f thi
s ru
le a
re n
ot fu
lfille
d, th
e E
xecu
tive
Sec
reta
ry m
ay c
all u
pon
the
appl
ican
t to
mak
e th
e ne
cess
ary
corr
ectio
ns in
the
appl
icat
ion
and
the
copi
es th
ereo
f with
in a
per
iod
whi
ch th
e E
xecu
tive
Sec
reta
ry s
hall
pres
crib
e. H
e or
she
sha
ll re
turn
the
nece
ssar
y pa
pers
to th
e ap
plic
ant f
or th
is p
urpo
se. T
he
Exe
cutiv
e S
ecre
tary
may
als
o, w
ith th
e ap
prov
al o
f the
Pre
side
nt, m
ake
the
nece
ssar
y co
rrect
ions
whe
n th
e de
fect
s in
the
appl
icat
ion
do n
ot a
ffect
the
subs
tanc
e.
Tran
smis
sion
10.
Afte
r asc
erta
inin
g th
at th
e fo
rmal
requ
irem
ents
of t
his
rule
hav
e be
en c
ompl
ied
with
, the
Exe
cutiv
e S
ecre
tary
sh
all t
rans
mit
a co
py o
f the
app
licat
ion
to th
e re
spon
dent
.
Res
erva
tion
of A
pplic
atio
n
11.
If it
appe
ars
that
an
appl
icat
ion
is c
lear
ly ir
rece
ivab
le o
r dev
oid
of a
ll m
erit,
the
Pre
side
nt m
ay in
stru
ct th
e E
xecu
tive
Sec
reta
ry to
take
no
furth
er a
ctio
n th
ereo
n un
til th
e ne
xt s
essi
on o
f the
Trib
unal
. The
Trib
unal
sha
ll th
en c
onsi
der t
he a
pplic
atio
n an
d m
ay e
ither
adj
udge
that
it b
e su
mm
arily
dis
mis
sed
as c
lear
ly ir
rece
ivab
le o
r de
void
of a
ll m
erit,
or o
rder
that
it s
houl
d be
pro
ceed
ed w
ith in
the
ordi
nary
way
.
Rul
e 8
Prel
imin
ary
Obj
ectio
ns
1.
Any
obj
ectio
n by
the
resp
onde
nt to
the
juris
dict
ion
of th
e Tr
ibun
al o
r to
the
adm
issi
bilit
y of
the
appl
icat
ion,
or a
ny o
ther
obj
ectio
n fo
r whi
ch a
dec
isio
n is
sou
ght b
efor
e an
y fu
rther
pro
ceed
ings
on
the
mer
its ta
ke p
lace
, sha
ll be
mad
e in
writ
ing
with
in tw
enty
-one
day
s of
the
date
of t
he re
ceip
t by
the
resp
onde
nt o
f the
app
licat
ion.
2.
Th
e pr
elim
inar
y ob
ject
ion
shal
l set
forth
the
fact
s an
d th
e la
w u
pon
whi
ch th
e ob
ject
ion
is b
ased
. 3.
U
pon
rece
ipt b
y th
e E
xecu
tive
Sec
reta
ry o
f a p
relim
inar
y ob
ject
ion,
the
proc
eedi
ngs
on th
e m
erits
sha
ll be
sus
pend
ed a
nd th
e P
resi
dent
of t
he T
ribun
al s
hall
fix th
e tim
e-lim
it w
ithin
whi
ch th
e ap
plic
ant m
ay
pres
ent a
writ
ten
answ
er to
the
obje
ctio
n.
4.
The
Pre
side
nt o
f the
Trib
unal
sha
ll de
cide
whe
ther
and
to w
hat e
xten
t add
ition
al p
lead
ings
may
be
requ
ired
of th
e pa
rties
. 5.
Th
e Tr
ibun
al o
r, w
hen
the
Trib
unal
is n
ot in
ses
sion
, the
Pre
side
nt o
f the
Trib
unal
may
join
the
prel
imin
ary
obje
ctio
n to
the
mer
its if
ther
e ap
pear
s to
be
sign
ifica
nt o
verla
p of
issu
es o
r con
tent
ions
.
Rul
e 9
Ans
wer
1. T
he re
spon
dent
's a
nsw
er s
hall
be s
ubm
itted
to th
e Tr
ibun
al th
roug
h th
e E
xecu
tive
Secr
etar
y. T
he a
nsw
er
shal
l inc
lude
ple
as, a
n ex
plan
ator
y st
atem
ent a
nd a
nnex
es. T
he a
nnex
es s
hall
cont
ain
the
com
plet
e te
xts
of a
ll do
cum
ents
refe
rred
to in
the
othe
r sec
tions
of t
he a
nsw
er n
ot a
nnex
ed to
the
appl
icat
ion.
The
y sh
all b
e pr
esen
ted
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith th
e ru
les
esta
blis
hed
for t
he a
pplic
atio
n in
Rul
e 7,
par
agra
ph 5
, and
Ann
ex I(
II).
Cop
ies
2. T
he re
spon
dent
sha
ll pr
epar
e ei
ght c
opie
s of
the
answ
er in
add
ition
to th
e or
igin
al. E
ach
copy
sha
ll re
prod
uce
all s
ectio
ns o
f the
orig
inal
, inc
ludi
ng a
nnex
es. H
owev
er, t
he E
xecu
tive
Sec
reta
ry m
ay g
rant
the
resp
onde
nt
perm
issi
on, u
pon
requ
est,
to o
mit
the
text
of a
n an
nex
of u
nusu
al le
ngth
from
a s
peci
fied
num
ber o
f cop
ies
of th
e an
swer
.
Aut
hent
icat
ion
3. T
he re
pres
enta
tive
of th
e re
spon
dent
sha
ll si
gn th
e la
st p
age
of th
e or
igin
al a
nsw
er.
Filin
g
4. W
ithin
six
ty d
ays
of th
e da
te o
n w
hich
the
appl
icat
ion
is tr
ansm
itted
to th
e re
spon
dent
by
the
Exe
cutiv
e S
ecre
tary
, the
resp
onde
nt s
hall
file
the
duly
sig
ned
orig
inal
and
the
eigh
t cop
ies
of th
e an
swer
with
the
Exe
cutiv
e S
ecre
tary
.
Tran
smis
sion
5. A
fter a
scer
tain
ing
that
the
form
al re
quire
men
ts o
f thi
s ru
le h
ave
been
com
plie
d w
ith, t
he E
xecu
tive
Sec
reta
ry
shal
l tra
nsm
it a
copy
of t
he a
nsw
er to
the
appl
ican
t.
Rul
e 10
Rep
ly
1.
The
appl
ican
t may
, with
in fo
rty-fi
ve d
ays
of th
e da
te o
n w
hich
the
answ
er is
tran
smitt
ed to
him
or h
er, f
ile
with
the
Exe
cutiv
e S
ecre
tary
a w
ritte
n re
ply
to th
e an
swer
. 2.
Th
e co
mpl
ete
text
of a
ny d
ocum
ent r
efer
red
to in
the
writ
ten
repl
y sh
all b
e an
nexe
d th
eret
o in
ac
cord
ance
with
the
rule
s es
tabl
ishe
d fo
r the
app
licat
ion
in R
ule
7, p
arag
raph
5, a
nd A
nnex
I(II)
. 3.
Th
e w
ritte
n re
ply
shal
l be
filed
in a
n or
igin
al a
nd e
ight
cop
ies
draw
n up
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith th
e ru
les
esta
blis
hed
for t
he a
pplic
atio
n in
Rul
e 7,
par
agra
ph 6
. The
orig
inal
sha
ll be
sig
ned
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith
the
rule
s es
tabl
ishe
d fo
r the
app
licat
ion
in R
ule
7, p
arag
raph
7.
4.
Afte
r asc
erta
inin
g th
at th
e fo
rmal
requ
irem
ents
of t
his
rule
hav
e be
en c
ompl
ied
with
, the
Exe
cutiv
e S
ecre
tary
sha
ll tra
nsm
it a
copy
of t
he w
ritte
n re
ply
to th
e re
spon
dent
.
Rul
e 11
Rej
oind
er
1.
The
resp
onde
nt m
ay, w
ithin
thirt
y da
ys o
f the
dat
e on
whi
ch th
e re
ply
is tr
ansm
itted
to th
e re
spon
dent
, fil
e w
ith th
e E
xecu
tive
Sec
reta
ry a
writ
ten
rejo
inde
r. 2.
Th
e co
mpl
ete
text
of a
ny d
ocum
ent r
efer
red
to in
the
writ
ten
rejo
inde
r sha
ll be
ann
exed
ther
eto
in
acco
rdan
ce w
ith th
e ru
les
esta
blis
hed
for t
he a
pplic
atio
n in
Rul
e 7,
par
agra
ph 5
, and
Ann
ex I(
II).
3.
The
writ
ten
rejo
inde
r sha
ll be
file
d in
an
orig
inal
and
eig
ht c
opie
s dr
awn
up in
acc
orda
nce
with
the
rule
s es
tabl
ishe
d fo
r the
ans
wer
in R
ule
9, p
arag
raph
2. T
he o
rigin
al re
join
der s
hall
be s
igne
d on
the
last
pag
e by
the
repr
esen
tativ
e of
the
resp
onde
nt.
4.
Afte
r asc
erta
inin
g th
at th
e fo
rmal
requ
irem
ents
of t
his
rule
hav
e be
en c
ompl
ied
with
, the
Exe
cutiv
e S
ecre
tary
sha
ll tra
nsm
it a
copy
of t
he w
ritte
n re
join
der t
o th
e ap
plic
ant.
5.
With
out p
reju
dice
to R
ule
12, t
he w
ritte
n pr
ocee
ding
s sh
all b
e cl
osed
afte
r the
rejo
inde
r has
bee
n fil
ed.
Rul
e 12
Add
ition
al S
tate
men
ts a
nd D
ocum
ents
1. I
n ex
cept
iona
l cas
es, t
he P
resi
dent
may
, on
his
or h
er o
wn
initi
ativ
e, o
r at t
he re
ques
t of e
ither
par
ty, c
all u
pon
the
parti
es to
sub
mit
addi
tiona
l writ
ten
stat
emen
ts o
r add
ition
al d
ocum
ents
with
in a
per
iod
whi
ch h
e or
she
sha
ll fix
. The
add
ition
al d
ocum
ents
sha
ll be
furn
ishe
d in
the
orig
inal
or i
n pr
oper
ly a
uthe
ntic
ated
form
. The
writ
ten
stat
emen
ts a
nd a
dditi
onal
doc
umen
ts s
hall
be a
ccom
pani
ed b
y ei
ght c
opie
s. A
ny d
ocum
ent s
hall
be
acco
mpa
nied
by
any
nece
ssar
y tra
nsla
tions
. In
exce
ptio
nal c
ases
, the
Pre
side
nt m
ay, o
n hi
s or
her
ow
n in
itiat
ive,
or
at t
he re
ques
t of e
ither
par
ty, c
all u
pon
the
parti
es to
sub
mit
addi
tiona
l writ
ten
stat
emen
ts o
r add
ition
al
docu
men
ts w
ithin
a p
erio
d w
hich
he
or s
he s
hall
fix. T
he a
dditi
onal
doc
umen
ts s
hall
be fu
rnis
hed
in th
e or
igin
al o
r in
pro
perly
aut
hent
icat
ed fo
rm. T
he w
ritte
n st
atem
ents
and
add
ition
al d
ocum
ents
sha
ll be
acc
ompa
nied
by
eigh
t co
pies
. Any
doc
umen
t sha
ll be
acc
ompa
nied
by
any
nece
ssar
y tra
nsla
tions
.
2. E
ach
writ
ten
stat
emen
t and
add
ition
al d
ocum
ent s
hall
be c
omm
unic
ated
by
the
Exe
cutiv
e S
ecre
tary
, on
rece
ipt,
to th
e ot
her p
artie
s, u
nles
s at
the
requ
est o
f one
of t
he p
artie
s an
d w
ith th
e co
nsen
t of t
he o
ther
par
ties,
th
e Tr
ibun
al d
ecid
es o
ther
wis
e. T
he p
erso
nnel
file
s co
mm
unic
ated
to th
e Tr
ibun
al s
hall
be m
ade
avai
labl
e to
the
appl
ican
t by
the
Exe
cutiv
e S
ecre
tary
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith in
stru
ctio
ns is
sued
by
the
Trib
unal
.
Obt
aini
ng In
form
atio
n
3. I
n or
der t
o co
mpl
ete
the
docu
men
tatio
n of
the
case
prio
r to
its b
eing
pla
ced
on th
e lis
t, th
e P
resi
dent
may
ob
tain
any
nec
essa
ry in
form
atio
n fro
m a
ny p
arty
, witn
esse
s or
exp
erts
. The
Pre
side
nt m
ay d
esig
nate
a m
embe
r of
the
Trib
unal
or a
ny o
ther
dis
inte
rest
ed p
erso
n to
take
ora
l sta
tem
ents
. Any
suc
h st
atem
ent s
hall
be m
ade
unde
r dec
lara
tion
as p
rovi
ded
to th
e pa
rties
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith R
ule
18, p
arag
raph
2.
Del
egat
ion
of F
unct
ions
4. T
he P
resi
dent
may
in p
artic
ular
cas
es d
eleg
ate
his
or h
er fu
nctio
ns u
nder
this
rule
to o
ne o
f the
Vic
e P
resi
dent
s.
Rul
es 1
3
Prov
isio
nal R
elie
f
1.
The
filin
g of
an
appl
icat
ion
shal
l not
sus
pend
the
exec
utio
n of
the
deci
sion
con
test
ed. H
owev
er, t
he
appl
ican
t may
sub
mit
to th
e P
resi
dent
of t
he T
ribun
al a
requ
est t
o su
spen
d th
e co
ntes
ted
deci
sion
unt
il th
e Tr
ibun
al re
nder
s its
judg
men
t in
the
case
. 2.
A
requ
est f
or th
e su
spen
sion
of t
he c
onte
sted
dec
isio
n sh
all,
unle
ss it
is m
anife
stly
unf
ound
ed, b
e tra
nsm
itted
to th
e re
spon
dent
for i
ts a
nsw
er w
ithin
a p
erio
d of
tim
e to
be
dete
rmin
ed b
y th
e P
resi
dent
of
the
Trib
unal
. 3.
Th
e Tr
ibun
al o
r, w
hen
the
Trib
unal
is n
ot in
ses
sion
, the
Pre
side
nt o
f the
Trib
unal
may
gra
nt s
uch
a re
ques
t in
a ca
se in
whi
ch th
e ex
ecut
ion
of th
e de
cisi
on is
sho
wn
to b
e hi
ghly
like
ly to
resu
lt in
gra
ve
hard
ship
to th
e ap
plic
ant t
hat c
anno
t oth
erw
ise
be re
dres
sed.
Rul
e 14
List
ing
of C
ase
for D
ecis
ion
1.
Whe
n th
e P
resi
dent
con
side
rs th
e do
cum
enta
tion
of a
cas
e to
be
suffi
cien
tly c
ompl
ete,
he
or s
he s
hall
inst
ruct
the
Exe
cutiv
e Se
cret
ary
to p
lace
the
case
on
the
list a
nd to
tran
smit
the
doss
ier o
f suc
h ca
se to
th
e m
embe
rs d
esig
nate
d to
dec
ide
it. T
he E
xecu
tive
Secr
etar
y sh
all i
nfor
m th
e pa
rties
as
soon
as
the
incl
usio
n of
the
case
in th
e lis
t is
effe
cted
. No
addi
tiona
l sta
tem
ents
or d
ocum
ents
may
be
filed
afte
r the
ca
se h
as b
een
incl
uded
in th
e lis
t. 2.
A
s so
on a
s th
e da
te o
f ope
ning
of t
he s
essi
on o
r pan
el a
t whi
ch a
cas
e ha
s be
en e
nter
ed fo
r dec
idin
g ha
s be
en fi
xed,
the
Exe
cutiv
e S
ecre
tary
sha
ll no
tify
the
parti
es o
f the
dat
e.
3.
Any
app
licat
ion
for t
he a
djou
rnm
ent o
f a c
ase
shal
l be
deci
ded
by th
e P
resi
dent
, or,
whe
n th
e Tr
ibun
al is
in
ses
sion
, by
the
Trib
unal
.
Rul
e 15
Exec
utiv
e Se
cret
ary'
s Fu
nctio
ns
1.
The
Exe
cutiv
e S
ecre
tary
sha
ll be
resp
onsi
ble
for t
rans
mitt
ing
all d
ocum
ents
and
mak
ing
all n
otifi
catio
ns
requ
ired
in c
onne
ctio
n w
ith p
roce
edin
gs b
efor
e th
e Tr
ibun
al.
2.
The
Exe
cutiv
e S
ecre
tary
sha
ll m
ake
for e
ach
case
a d
ossi
er w
hich
sha
ll re
cord
all
actio
ns ta
ken
in
conn
ectio
n w
ith th
e pr
epar
atio
n of
the
case
for t
rial,
the
date
s th
ereo
f, an
d th
e da
tes
on w
hich
any
do
cum
ent o
r not
ifica
tion
form
ing
part
of th
e pr
oced
ure
is re
ceiv
ed in
or d
ispa
tche
d fro
m h
is o
r her
offi
ce.
Rul
e 16
Pres
enta
tion
of C
ase
1.
An
appl
ican
t may
pre
sent
his
or h
er c
ase
befo
re th
e Tr
ibun
al in
per
son,
in e
ither
writ
ten
or o
ral
proc
eedi
ngs
if al
low
ed p
ursu
ant t
o R
ule
17, p
arag
raph
1. S
ubje
ct to
Rul
e 7,
par
agra
ph 7
, the
app
lican
t m
ay d
esig
nate
a s
taff
mem
ber o
r ret
ired
staf
f mem
ber o
f the
Ban
k G
roup
to re
pres
ent h
im o
r her
, or
may
be
repr
esen
ted
by a
law
yer a
utho
rized
to p
ract
ice
in a
ny c
ount
ry w
hich
is a
mem
ber o
f the
Ban
k.
2.
The
resp
onde
nt in
stitu
tion
shal
l be
repr
esen
ted
eith
er b
y on
e of
its
offic
ials
or r
etire
d of
ficia
ls d
esig
nate
d fo
r tha
t pur
pose
or b
y a
law
yer a
utho
rized
to p
ract
ice
in a
ny c
ount
ry w
hich
is a
mem
ber o
f the
re
spon
dent
inst
itutio
n.
Rul
e 17
Ora
l Pro
ceed
ings
1.
Ora
l pro
ceed
ings
sha
ll be
hel
d if
the
Trib
unal
mem
bers
hea
ring
a ca
se s
o de
cide
or i
f eith
er p
arty
so
requ
ests
and
the
Trib
unal
so
agre
es. T
he o
ral p
roce
edin
gs m
ay in
clud
e th
e pr
esen
tatio
n an
d ex
amin
atio
n of
witn
esse
s or
exp
erts
, and
eac
h pa
rty s
hall
have
the
right
of o
ral a
rgum
ent a
nd o
f co
mm
ent o
n th
e ev
iden
ce g
iven
. 2.
In
suf
ficie
nt ti
me
befo
re th
e op
enin
g of
the
oral
pro
ceed
ings
eac
h pa
rty s
hall
info
rm th
e E
xecu
tive
Sec
reta
ry a
nd, t
hrou
gh h
im o
r her
, the
oth
er p
artie
s of
the
nam
es a
nd d
escr
iptio
n of
witn
esse
s an
d ex
perts
who
m h
e or
she
des
ires
to b
e he
ard,
indi
catin
g th
e po
ints
to w
hich
the
evid
ence
is to
refe
r. 3.
Th
e Tr
ibun
al s
hall
deci
de o
n an
y ap
plic
atio
n fo
r the
hea
ring
of w
itnes
ses
or e
xper
ts a
nd s
hall
dete
rmin
e th
e se
quen
ce o
f ora
l pro
ceed
ings
. Whe
re a
ppro
pria
te, t
he T
ribun
al m
ay d
ecid
e th
at w
itnes
ses
shal
l re
ply
in w
ritin
g to
the
ques
tions
of t
he p
artie
s. T
he p
artie
s sh
all,
how
ever
, ret
ain
the
right
to c
omm
ent o
n an
y su
ch w
ritte
n re
ply.
Rul
e 18
Witn
esse
s an
d Ex
pert
s
1.
The
Trib
unal
may
exa
min
e th
e w
itnes
ses
and
expe
rts. T
he p
artie
s, th
eir r
epre
sent
ativ
es o
r law
yers
may
, un
der t
he c
ontro
l of t
he p
resi
ding
mem
ber,
put q
uest
ions
to th
e w
itnes
ses
and
expe
rts.
Rul
e 19
Prod
uctio
n of
Doc
umen
ts a
nd In
quiry
Th
e Tr
ibun
al m
ay a
t any
sta
ge o
f the
pro
ceed
ings
cal
l for
the
prod
uctio
n of
doc
umen
ts o
r of s
uch
othe
r evi
denc
e as
may
be
requ
ired.
It m
ay a
rrang
e fo
r any
mea
sure
s of
inqu
iry a
s m
ay b
e ne
cess
ary.
C
HA
PTE
R I
V:
Rem
and
of a
Cas
e R
ule
20
Rem
and
1.
If, in
the
cour
se o
f the
del
iber
atio
ns, t
he T
ribun
al fi
nds
that
the
case
sho
uld
be re
man
ded
in o
rder
that
th
e re
quire
d pr
oced
ure
may
be
inst
itute
d or
cor
rect
ed u
nder
Arti
cle
XII,
para
grap
h 2,
of t
he S
tatu
te, i
t sh
all n
otify
the
parti
es a
ccor
ding
ly.
2.
The
Trib
unal
sha
ll de
cide
on
the
subs
tanc
e of
the
case
if, o
n th
e ex
piry
of t
he ti
me
limit
of tw
o w
orki
ng
days
reck
oned
from
the
date
of t
he n
otifi
catio
n un
der p
arag
raph
1 a
bove
, no
requ
est f
or a
rem
and
has
been
mad
e by
the
Pre
side
nt o
f the
resp
onde
nt in
stitu
tion.
C
HA
PTE
R V
: In
terv
enti
on
Rul
e 21
Inte
rven
tion
by In
divi
dual
s
1.
Any
per
son
to w
hom
the
Trib
unal
is o
pen
unde
r Arti
cle
II, p
arag
raph
3, a
nd A
rticl
e XV
of t
he S
tatu
te m
ay
appl
y to
inte
rven
e in
a c
ase
at a
ny s
tage
ther
eof o
n th
e gr
ound
that
he
or s
he h
as a
righ
t whi
ch m
ay b
e af
fect
ed b
y th
e ju
dgm
ent t
o be
giv
en b
y th
e Tr
ibun
al. S
uch
pers
on s
hall
for t
hat p
urpo
se d
raw
up
and
file
an a
pplic
atio
n in
the
form
of A
nnex
II fo
r int
erve
ntio
n in
acc
orda
nce
with
the
cond
ition
s la
id d
own
in th
is
rule
. 2.
Th
e ru
les
rega
rdin
g th
e pr
epar
atio
n an
d su
bmis
sion
of a
pplic
atio
ns s
peci
fied
in R
ules
7 th
roug
h 16
ab
ove
shal
l app
ly m
utat
is m
utan
dis
to th
e ap
plic
atio
n fo
r int
erve
ntio
n.
3.
Afte
r asc
erta
inin
g th
at th
e fo
rmal
requ
irem
ents
of t
his
rule
hav
e be
en c
ompl
ied
with
, the
Exe
cutiv
e S
ecre
tary
sha
ll tra
nsm
it a
copy
of t
he a
pplic
atio
n fo
r int
erve
ntio
n to
the
appl
ican
t and
to th
e re
spon
dent
in
stitu
tion.
The
Pre
side
nt s
hall
deci
de w
hich
doc
umen
ts, i
f any
, rel
atin
g to
the
proc
eedi
ngs
are
to b
e tra
nsm
itted
to th
e in
terv
enor
by
the
Exe
cutiv
e S
ecre
tary
. 4.
Th
e Tr
ibun
al s
hall
rule
on
the
adm
issi
bilit
y of
eve
ry a
pplic
atio
n fo
r int
erve
ntio
n su
bmitt
ed u
nder
this
rule
.
Rul
e 22
Inte
rven
tion
by O
rgan
izat
ions
1.
The
Pre
side
nt o
f the
Ban
k, th
e ch
ief e
xecu
tive
offic
er o
f an
inte
rnat
iona
l org
aniz
atio
n to
whi
ch th
e co
mpe
tenc
e of
the
Trib
unal
has
bee
n ex
tend
ed in
acc
orda
nce
with
the
Sta
tute
, or t
he C
hairm
an o
f the
P
ensi
on B
enef
its A
dmin
istra
tion
Com
mitt
ee o
f the
Ban
k, m
ay, o
n gi
ving
pre
viou
s no
tice
to th
e P
resi
dent
of
the
Trib
unal
, int
erve
ne a
t any
sta
ge, i
f suc
h pe
rson
con
side
rs th
at h
is o
r her
resp
ectiv
e ad
min
istra
tion
may
be
affe
cted
by
the
judg
men
t to
be g
iven
by
the
Trib
unal
.
Rul
e 23
Pote
ntia
l Int
erve
nors
1.
Whe
n it
appe
ars
that
a p
erso
n m
ay h
ave
an in
tere
st in
inte
rven
ing
in a
cas
e un
der R
ules
21
or 2
2, th
e P
resi
dent
, or t
he T
ribun
al w
hen
in s
essi
on, m
ay in
stru
ct th
e E
xecu
tive
Sec
reta
ry to
tran
smit
to s
uch
pers
on a
cop
y of
the
appl
icat
ion
subm
itted
in th
e ca
se.
C
HA
PTE
R V
I: A
pplic
atio
ns C
once
rnin
g D
ecis
ions
of
the
Pen
sion
Ben
efit
s A
dmin
istr
atio
n C
omm
itte
e R
ule
24
Pens
ion
Cas
es
Whe
re a
n ap
plic
atio
n is
bro
ught
aga
inst
a d
ecis
ion
of th
e P
ensi
on B
enef
its A
dmin
istra
tion
Com
mitt
ee o
f the
B
ank,
the
time
limits
pre
scrib
ed in
Arti
cle
II of
the
Sta
tute
are
reck
oned
from
the
date
of t
he c
omm
unic
atio
n of
the
cont
este
d de
cisi
on to
the
party
con
cern
ed.
C
HA
PTE
R V
II:
Mis
cella
neo
us P
rovi
sion
s R
ule
25
Pers
ons
Furn
ishi
ng In
form
atio
n
1. T
he T
ribun
al m
ay, f
or p
urpo
ses
of in
form
atio
n, p
erm
it pe
rson
s to
who
m th
e Tr
ibun
al is
ope
n un
der A
rticl
e II,
pa
ragr
aph
3, o
f the
Sta
tute
, whe
neve
r suc
h pe
rson
s m
ay b
e ex
pect
ed to
furn
ish
info
rmat
ion
perti
nent
to th
e ca
se,
to s
ubm
it w
ritte
n or
ora
l obs
erva
tions
as
may
be
appr
opria
te.
Am
icus
Cur
iae
2. T
he T
ribun
al m
ay p
erm
it an
y pe
rson
or e
ntity
with
a s
ubst
antia
l int
eres
t in
the
outc
ome
of a
cas
e to
par
ticip
ate
as a
frie
nd-o
f-the
-cou
rt. It
may
als
o pe
rmit
the
duly
aut
horiz
ed re
pres
enta
tives
of t
he S
taff
Ass
ocia
tion
of a
re
spon
dent
inst
itutio
n so
to p
artic
ipat
e. A
requ
est s
o to
par
ticip
ate
shal
l be
acco
mpa
nied
by
a br
ief a
nd s
hall
be
filed
not
late
r tha
n th
e da
te fi
xed
for t
he fi
ling
of th
e ap
plic
ant’s
repl
y un
der R
ule
10(1
). If
the
Trib
unal
gra
nts
the
requ
est,
the
Exe
cutiv
e S
ecre
tary
sha
ll tra
nsm
it a
copy
of t
he a
ccom
pany
ing
brie
f to
the
parti
es w
ho m
ay
com
men
t the
reon
with
in th
irty
days
of t
he d
ate
on w
hich
the
brie
f is
trans
mitt
ed to
them
.
Rul
e 26
Rep
rese
ntat
ive
Cas
es
1.
Eith
er th
e ap
plic
ant o
r the
resp
onde
nt to
a c
ase
brou
ght b
efor
e th
e Tr
ibun
al m
ay re
ques
t tha
t the
Tr
ibun
al’s
judg
men
t in
the
case
be
appl
ied
to a
ll st
aff m
embe
rs s
imila
rly s
ituat
ed, w
heth
er o
r not
suc
h st
aff m
embe
rs h
ave
mad
e ap
plic
atio
n to
or i
nter
vene
d in
the
proc
eedi
ngs
befo
re th
e Tr
ibun
al. T
he
requ
est m
ust b
e m
ade
by th
e ap
plic
ant n
ot la
ter t
han
the
date
fixe
d fo
r the
filin
g of
the
repl
y, o
r by
the
resp
onde
nt n
ot la
ter t
han
the
date
fixe
d fo
r the
filin
g of
the
rejo
inde
r. 2.
Th
e P
resi
dent
of t
he T
ribun
al m
ay g
rant
the
requ
est u
nder
suc
h co
nditi
ons
as h
e or
she
may
find
ap
prop
riate
in th
e ci
rcum
stan
ces
whe
re it
is s
how
n th
at th
ere
exis
ts a
n id
entif
iabl
e gr
oup
of s
imila
rly
situ
ated
sta
ff w
ho s
hare
a c
omm
on le
gal o
r fac
tual
pos
ition
and
whe
re s
uch
a ru
ling
wou
ld b
est s
erve
ju
dici
al e
ffici
ency
in c
larif
ying
the
right
s or
obl
igat
ions
of t
he s
peci
fied
grou
p.
3.
The
Trib
unal
may
det
erm
ine
in it
s ju
dgm
ent t
he e
xten
t to
whi
ch it
s ju
dgm
ent w
ill a
pply
and
to w
hom
it
may
app
ly w
ithin
the
spec
ified
gro
up.
Rul
e 27
Con
solid
atio
n of
Cas
es o
r Ple
adin
gs
1.
App
lican
ts in
sep
arat
e ca
ses,
or t
he re
spon
dent
, may
requ
est t
he T
ribun
al to
con
solid
ate
the
case
s in
qu
estio
n, o
r any
asp
ect o
f the
ple
adin
gs in
the
case
s. In
dec
idin
g on
the
requ
est,
the
Trib
unal
will
co
nsid
er th
e ex
tent
to w
hich
iden
tical
issu
es o
f law
or f
act a
re p
rese
nted
. 2.
Th
e Tr
ibun
al m
ay o
n its
ow
n in
itiat
ive
orde
r the
con
solid
atio
n of
cas
es, o
r asp
ects
of p
lead
ings
in
sepa
rate
cas
es, w
here
it d
eem
s th
at id
entic
al is
sues
of l
aw o
r fac
t are
pre
sent
ed.
Rul
e 28
Ano
nym
ity
1.
An
appl
ican
t who
wis
hes
that
his
or h
er n
ame
not b
e m
ade
publ
ic m
ay re
ques
t ano
nym
ity a
t the
tim
e w
hen
the
appl
icat
ion
inst
itutin
g pr
ocee
ding
s is
sub
mitt
ed to
the
Trib
unal
and
, in
any
even
t, no
late
r tha
n by
the
date
of t
he fi
ling
of h
is o
r her
writ
ten
repl
y to
the
answ
er.
2.
A re
ques
t for
ano
nym
ity s
hall
be tr
ansm
itted
to th
e re
spon
dent
for c
omm
ent w
ithin
a p
erio
d of
tim
e to
be
dete
rmin
ed b
y th
e P
resi
dent
of t
he T
ribun
al.
3.
The
Pre
side
nt o
f the
Trib
unal
may
gra
nt a
requ
est f
or a
nony
mity
in c
ases
whe
re p
ublic
atio
n of
the
appl
ican
t’s n
ame
is li
kely
to b
e se
rious
ly p
reju
dici
al to
the
appl
ican
t.
Rul
e 29
Cos
ts
1.
An
appl
icat
ion
for c
osts
sho
uld
be s
ubm
itted
not
late
r tha
n se
ven
days
afte
r the
list
ing
of th
e ca
se.
Rul
e 30
Publ
icat
ion
of D
ecis
ions
1.
The
Exe
cutiv
e S
ecre
tary
sha
ll ar
rang
e fo
r the
pub
licat
ion
of th
e de
cisi
ons
of th
e Tr
ibun
al.
Rul
e 31
Mod
ifica
tion
and
Supp
lem
enta
tion
of R
ules
Th
e Tr
ibun
al, o
r, w
hen
the
Trib
unal
is n
ot in
ses
sion
, the
Pre
side
nt a
fter c
onsu
ltatio
n w
here
app
ropr
iate
with
the
mem
bers
of t
he T
ribun
al, m
ay:
i. in
exc
eptio
nal c
ases
mod
ify th
e ap
plic
atio
n of
thes
e ru
les,
incl
udin
g an
y tim
e lim
its th
ereu
nder
; ii.
de
al w
ith a
ny m
atte
r not
exp
ress
ly p
rovi
ded
for i
n th
e pr
esen
t rul
es.
Rul
e 32
Entr
y In
to F
orce
The
pres
ent r
ules
sha
ll ap
ply
to a
ll ap
plic
atio
ns s
ubm
itted
afte
r Jan
uary
1, 2
002
and
may
app
ly to
app
licat
ions
be
fore
that
dat
e if
both
the
appl
ican
t and
the
resp
onde
nt s
o in
form
the
Trib
unal
.
A
NN
EX I
I.
For
m o
f fi
rst
sect
ion
of
appl
icat
ion
dra
wn
up
in a
ccor
dan
ce w
ith
Ru
le 7
Info
rmat
ion
conc
erni
ng th
e pe
rson
al a
nd o
ffici
al s
tatu
s of
the
appl
ican
t:
1.
Nam
e of
resp
onde
nt.
2.
App
lican
t: a.
na
me
and
first
nam
es;
b.
date
and
pla
ce o
f birt
h;
c.
mar
ital s
tatu
s;
d.
natio
nalit
y; a
nd
e.
addr
ess
for p
urpo
ses
of th
e pr
ocee
ding
s.
3.
Nam
e an
d ad
dres
s of
law
yer o
r sta
ff m
embe
r or r
etire
d st
aff m
embe
r rep
rese
ntin
g th
e ap
plic
ant b
efor
e th
e Tr
ibun
al.
4.
Offi
cial
sta
tus
of a
pplic
ant:
a.
orga
niza
tion
of w
hich
the
appl
ican
t was
a s
taff
mem
ber a
t the
tim
e of
the
deci
sion
con
test
ed;
b.
date
of e
mpl
oym
ent;
c.
title
and
leve
l at t
ime
of d
ecis
ion
cont
este
d;
d.
sala
ry o
f app
lican
t at t
he ti
me
of d
ecis
ion
cont
este
d;
e.
type
of a
pplic
ant's
app
oint
men
t; an
d f.
visa
sta
tus,
if a
pplic
able
. 5.
If
the
appl
ican
t was
not
a s
taff
mem
ber a
t the
tim
e of
the
cont
este
d de
cisi
on, s
tate
: a.
th
e na
me,
firs
t nam
es, n
atio
nalit
y an
d of
ficia
l sta
tus
of th
e st
aff m
embe
r who
se ri
ghts
are
relie
d on
; and
b.
th
e re
latio
n of
the
appl
ican
t to
the
said
sta
ff m
embe
r whi
ch e
ntitl
es th
e fo
rmer
to c
ome
befo
re
the
Trib
unal
. 6.
D
ate
of th
e oc
curr
ence
of t
he e
vent
or d
ate
of d
ecis
ion
givi
ng ri
se to
the
appl
icat
ion.
7.
D
ate
of re
ceip
t of n
otic
e (a
fter t
he a
pplic
ant h
as e
xhau
sted
all
othe
r rem
edie
s av
aila
ble
with
in th
e B
ank
Gro
up) t
hat t
he re
lief a
sked
for o
r rec
omm
ende
d w
ill n
ot b
e gr
ante
d.
8.
Dat
e of
rece
ipt o
f not
ice
that
the
relie
f ask
ed fo
r or r
ecom
men
ded
will
be
gran
ted,
if s
uch
relie
f sha
ll no
t ha
ve b
een
gran
ted
with
in th
irty
days
afte
r rec
eipt
of s
uch
notic
e.
9.
Des
crip
tion
of re
med
ies
exha
uste
d w
ithin
the
resp
onde
nt in
stitu
tion.
10
. A
pplic
ants
who
are
filin
g ap
plic
atio
ns a
fter t
hey
have
bee
n se
para
ted
from
the
Ban
k's
empl
oym
ent
shou
ld in
dica
te a
ll em
ploy
men
t, in
clud
ing
self-
empl
oym
ent,
sinc
e th
e da
te o
f sep
arat
ion,
sta
ting
the
natu
re a
nd p
erio
ds o
f suc
h em
ploy
men
t, th
e na
mes
of a
ll em
ploy
ers
and
gros
s pa
ymen
ts re
ceiv
ed in
resp
ect o
f suc
h em
ploy
men
t.
Req
uir
emen
ts r
egar
din
g an
nex
es
1.
Eac
h do
cum
ent s
hall
cons
titut
e a
sepa
rate
ann
ex a
nd s
hall
be n
umbe
red
with
an
Ara
bic
num
eral
. The
w
ord
"AN
NE
X," f
ollo
wed
by
the
num
ber o
f the
doc
umen
t, sh
all a
ppea
r at t
he to
p of
the
first
pag
e;
2.
The
anne
xed
docu
men
ts s
hall
be p
rece
ded
by a
tabl
e of
con
tent
s in
dica
ting
the
num
ber,
title
, nat
ure,
da
te a
nd, w
here
app
ropr
iate
, sym
bol o
f eac
h an
nex;
3.
T
he w
ords
"see
ann
ex,"
follo
wed
by
the
appr
opria
te n
umbe
r, sh
all a
ppea
r in
pare
nthe
ses
afte
r eac
h re
fere
nce
to a
n an
nexe
d do
cum
ent i
n th
e ot
her s
ectio
ns o
f the
app
licat
ion;
and
4.
W
hene
ver p
ossi
ble,
ann
exes
sho
uld
be a
ttach
ed in
chr
onol
ogic
al o
rder
.
A
NN
EX I
I Fo
rm o
f fi
rst
sect
ion
of
appl
icat
ion
for
inte
rven
tion
dra
wn
up
in a
ccor
dan
ce w
ith
Art
icle
7
Info
rmat
ion
conc
erni
ng th
e pe
rson
al a
nd o
ffici
al s
tatu
s of
the
inte
rven
or:
1.
Cas
e in
whi
ch in
terv
entio
n is
sou
ght.
2.
Inte
rven
or:
a.
nam
e an
d fir
st n
ames
; b.
da
te a
nd p
lace
of b
irth;
c.
m
arita
l sta
tus;
d.
na
tiona
lity;
and
e.
ad
dres
s fo
r pur
pose
s of
the
proc
eedi
ngs.
3.
N
ame
and
addr
ess
of la
wye
r or s
taff
mem
ber o
r ret
ired
staf
f mem
ber r
epre
sent
ing
the
inte
rven
or b
efor
e th
e Tr
ibun
al.
4.
Offi
cial
sta
tus
of in
terv
enor
: a.
or
gani
zatio
n of
whi
ch th
e in
terv
enor
is a
sta
ff m
embe
r; b.
da
te o
f em
ploy
men
t; c.
tit
le a
nd le
vel;
d.
sala
ry o
f int
erve
nor a
t the
tim
e of
dec
isio
n co
ntes
ted;
e.
ty
pe o
f int
erve
nor's
app
oint
men
t; an
d f.
visa
sta
tus
of in
terv
enor
, if a
pplic
able
. 5.
If
the
inte
rven
or w
as n
ot a
sta
ff m
embe
r at t
he ti
me
of th
e co
ntes
ted
deci
sion
, sta
te:
a.
the
nam
e, fi
rst n
ames
, nat
iona
lity
and
offic
ial s
tatu
s of
the
staf
f mem
ber w
hose
righ
ts a
re re
lied
on; a
nd
b.
the
title
und
er w
hich
the
inte
rven
or c
laim
s he
or s
he is
ent
itled
to th
e rig
hts
of th
e sa
id s
taff
mem
ber.
6.
Inte
rven
ors
who
are
filin
g ap
plic
atio
ns a
fter t
hey
have
bee
n se
para
ted
from
the
Ban
k's
empl
oym
ent
shou
ld in
dica
te a
ll em
ploy
men
t, in
clud
ing
self-
empl
oym
ent,
sinc
e th
e da
te o
f sep
arat
ion,
sta
ting
the
natu
re a
nd p
erio
ds o
f suc
h em
ploy
men
t, th
e na
mes
of a
ll em
ploy
ers
and
gros
s pa
ymen
ts re
ceiv
ed in
re
spec
t of s
uch
empl
oym
ent.
The World Bank Administrative Tribunal
Louis de Merode and Others v. The World Bank
Decision of 5 June 1981
Decision No. 1
Dec
isio
ns
http
://ln
web
90.w
orld
bank
.org
/crn
/wbt
/wbt
web
site
.nsf
/(res
ults
web
)/470
F6C
6098
A11
FDF8
5256
9ED
006B
B87
7[5/
20/2
014
11:5
4:49
AM
]
Dec
isio
n N
o. 1
Loui
s de
Mer
ode,
Fran
k La
mso
n-S
crib
ner,
Jr.,
Dav
id G
ene
Ree
se,
Judi
th R
eism
an-T
oof,
Fran
co R
uber
l,N
ina
Sha
piro
,A
pplic
ants
v.
The
Wor
ld B
ank,
Res
pond
ent
The
Wor
ld B
ank
Adm
inis
trativ
e Tr
ibun
al,
Com
pose
d of
E. J
imen
ez d
e A
rech
aga,
Pre
side
nt, T
. O. E
lias,
P. W
eil,
Vic
e P
resi
dent
s, A
.K. A
bul-M
agd,
R.
Gor
man
, N. K
umar
ayya
** J
udge
Kum
aray
ya h
as ta
ken
part
in a
ll th
e de
liber
atio
ns in
this
cas
e. H
e w
aspr
even
ted
for
reas
ons
of h
ealth
from
atte
ndin
g th
e he
arin
g bu
t has
sin
ce h
ad a
n op
portu
nity
of l
iste
ning
to a
tape
reco
rdin
g of
it. a
nd E
. Lau
terp
acht
, Mem
bers
.
1. T
he T
ribun
al is
sei
zed
of a
pplic
atio
ns d
ated
Sep
tem
ber 2
9, 1
980
filed
by
App
lican
ts d
e M
erod
e, L
amso
n-S
crib
ner,
Ree
se, R
eism
an-T
oof,
Rub
erl a
nd S
hapi
ro (h
erei
nafte
r col
lect
ivel
y ca
lled
“the
App
lican
ts”)
. By
aD
ecis
ion
date
d S
epte
mbe
r 26,
198
0 th
e A
pplic
ants
wer
e pe
rmitt
ed to
add
by
Oct
ober
19,
198
0 a
Mem
oran
dum
of L
aw to
thei
r ap
plic
atio
ns a
nd th
e R
espo
nden
t**
For t
he p
urpo
ses
of th
is d
ecis
ion,
the
term
"Wor
ld B
ank"
mea
ns th
e In
tern
atio
nal B
ank
for
Rec
onst
ruct
ion
and
Dev
elop
men
t, th
e In
tern
atio
nal D
evel
opm
ent A
ssoc
iatio
nan
d th
e In
tern
atio
nal F
inan
ce C
orpo
ratio
n. w
as g
iven
unt
il D
ecem
ber 1
0, 1
980
(sub
sequ
ently
ext
ende
d to
Janu
ary
15, 1
981)
to s
ubm
it its
Ans
wer
.
2. T
he A
pplic
ants
sub
mitt
ed th
eir
obse
rvat
ions
on
the
Ans
wer
by
Febr
uary
27,
198
1, a
nd th
e R
espo
nden
t was
allo
wed
to s
ubm
it a
supp
lem
enta
l sta
tem
ent b
y a
deci
sion
of t
he T
ribun
al d
ated
Mar
ch 1
6, 1
981.
The
cas
e w
aslis
ted
on M
arch
16,
198
1 an
d w
as h
eard
on
May
28,
198
1. A
t tha
t hea
ring
coun
sel f
or th
e A
pplic
ants
and
the
Res
pond
ent o
rally
dev
elop
ed c
erta
in p
arts
of t
heir
resp
ectiv
e ca
ses.
I. IN
TRO
DU
CTI
ON
3. T
he T
ribun
al is
pre
sent
ed in
this
, the
firs
t cas
e to
be
deci
ded
by it
, with
the
ques
tion
whe
ther
the
impl
emen
tatio
n in
rela
tion
to th
e A
pplic
ants
of t
he d
ecis
ions
ado
pted
on
May
25,
197
9 by
the
Exe
cutiv
eD
irect
ors
of th
e B
ank
rega
rdin
g ta
x re
imbu
rsem
ent a
nd s
alar
y ad
just
men
t am
ount
s to
non
-obs
erva
nce
by th
eB
ank
of th
e co
ntra
cts
of e
mpl
oym
ent o
r ter
ms
of a
ppoi
ntm
ent o
f the
App
lican
ts. T
he le
gal i
ssue
s in
volv
ed in
this
que
stio
n ar
e ba
sic
and
impo
rtant
. The
y do
not
lend
them
selv
es to
sum
mar
y tre
atm
ent.
4. T
he T
ribun
al is
, by
Arti
cle
II of
its
Sta
tute
, giv
en ju
risdi
ctio
n to
hea
r ap
plic
atio
ns a
llegi
ng n
on-o
bser
vanc
e of
the
cont
ract
of e
mpl
oym
ent o
r ter
ms
of a
ppoi
ntm
ent o
f sta
ff m
embe
rs, a
nd th
is p
hras
e is
sta
ted
to in
clud
e “a
llpe
rtine
nt re
gula
tions
and
rule
s in
forc
e at
the
time
of a
llege
d no
nobs
erva
nce
incl
udin
g th
e pr
ovis
ions
of t
heS
taff
Ret
irem
ent P
lan”
. In
orde
r to
avoi
d co
nsta
nt re
petit
ion
of a
ll th
ese
term
s, th
e Tr
ibun
al w
ill in
this
Jud
gmen
tus
e th
e ph
rase
“con
ditio
ns o
f em
ploy
men
t” to
des
crib
e co
mpe
ndio
usly
the
vario
us e
lem
ents
whi
ch to
geth
erde
term
ine
the
cont
ent o
f the
lega
l rel
atio
nshi
p be
twee
n th
e B
ank
and
a m
embe
r of
its
staf
f.
5. T
he c
ircum
stan
ces
in w
hich
the
pres
ent c
ase
has
com
e be
fore
the
Trib
unal
refle
ct s
ome
of th
e m
any
Dec
isio
ns
http
://ln
web
90.w
orld
bank
.org
/crn
/wbt
/wbt
web
site
.nsf
/(res
ults
web
)/470
F6C
6098
A11
FDF8
5256
9ED
006B
B87
7[5/
20/2
014
11:5
4:49
AM
]
chan
ges
whi
ch th
e ac
tiviti
es a
nd o
pera
tions
of t
he B
ank
have
und
ergo
ne s
ince
its
esta
blis
hmen
t in
1945
–ch
ange
s in
the
purp
oses
of i
ts lo
ans,
in th
e ch
arac
ter o
f the
bor
row
er c
ount
ries,
in th
e m
agni
tude
and
rang
e of
its p
roje
cts,
in it
s so
urce
s of
fina
nce
and,
mos
t rel
evan
t of a
ll, in
the
num
ber o
f per
sonn
el e
ngag
ed in
the
purs
uit o
f the
Ban
k's
obje
ctiv
es. B
y re
ason
of t
he la
st, t
he c
lose
ness
of t
he re
latio
nshi
p be
twee
n th
e B
ank
man
agem
ent a
nd th
e ge
nera
l bod
y of
Ban
k pe
rson
nel w
hich
mar
ked
the
earli
er y
ears
of t
he B
ank
has
unav
oida
bly
been
affe
cted
. In
addi
tion,
ext
erna
l eco
nom
ic c
ondi
tions
hav
e un
ders
tand
ably
giv
en ri
se to
con
cern
on th
e pa
rt o
f the
sta
ff m
embe
rs re
gard
ing
the
mai
nten
ance
of t
he re
al v
alue
of t
heir
rem
uner
atio
n in
the
face
of in
flatio
n an
d of
the
incr
ease
in th
e co
st o
f liv
ing.
At t
he s
ame
time,
som
e of
the
Ban
k's
Mem
bers
hav
e fo
und
occa
sion
to q
uest
ion
som
e el
emen
ts o
f the
Ban
k's
com
pens
atio
n po
licie
s in
com
paris
on w
ith th
ose
appl
ied
toth
eir
own
offic
ials
and
the
empl
oyee
s of
dom
estic
ban
king
and
oth
er s
imila
r ent
erpr
ises
.
6. In
197
7, th
e P
resi
dent
of t
he B
ank
prop
osed
to th
e E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
s th
at:
“a J
oint
Ban
k an
d Fu
nd C
omm
ittee
sho
uld
be e
stab
lishe
d to
exa
min
e co
mpe
nsat
ion
issu
es a
nd to
agr
ee o
na
set o
f prin
cipl
es w
hich
wou
ld p
rovi
de a
mor
e st
able
fram
ewor
k fo
r th
e pr
oces
s of
det
erm
inin
gco
mpe
nsat
ion.
”
7. T
he J
oint
Com
mitt
ee o
n S
taff
Com
pens
atio
n Is
sues
(the
Kaf
ka C
omm
ittee
, so
calle
d be
caus
e it
was
cha
ired
by A
lexa
ndre
Kaf
ka, a
n E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
of t
he In
tern
atio
nal M
onet
ary
Fund
), co
mpo
sed
of E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
s of
the
Wor
ld B
ank
and
the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Mon
etar
y Fu
nd a
nd o
utsi
de e
xper
ts, i
ssue
d its
516
-pag
eR
epor
t in
Janu
ary
1979
con
tain
ing
deta
iled
findi
ngs
as to
sal
arie
s an
d be
nefit
s at
the
Wor
ld B
ank
and
the
Fund
and
mak
ing
reco
mm
enda
tions
for
the
futu
re. A
fter a
llow
ing
a pe
riod
for
com
men
t the
Exe
cutiv
e D
irect
ors
ofbo
th th
e B
ank
and
the
Fund
dec
ided
in M
ay 1
979
to a
dopt
, sub
ject
to s
ome
chan
ges,
man
y of
the
Com
mitt
ee's
reco
mm
enda
tions
.
8. B
y A
dmin
istra
tive
Circ
ular
AC
/23/
79 o
f May
25,
197
9, th
e st
aff o
f the
B
ank
was
info
rmed
that
:
“The
Exe
cutiv
e D
irect
ors
have
com
plet
ed th
eir
cons
ider
atio
n of
the
mai
n po
licy
issu
es s
tem
min
g fro
m th
ere
port
of th
e Jo
int C
omm
ittee
on
Sta
ff C
ompe
nsat
ion
Issu
es. A
mon
g th
e m
ore
impo
rtant
mat
ters
, the
Exe
cutiv
e D
irect
ors
have
agr
eed
that
: ...
.
“... u
nles
s th
e G
over
nmen
ts c
once
rned
agr
ee to
exe
mpt
thei
r na
tiona
ls fr
om ta
xes
or in
com
e de
rived
from
the
Ban
k, th
e pr
esen
t sys
tem
of t
ax re
imbu
rsem
ent w
ill b
e re
plac
ed, e
ffect
ive
Janu
ary
1, 1
980,
by
a sy
stem
base
d on
ave
rage
ded
uctio
ns w
ith a
five
-yea
r tra
nsiti
on p
erio
d an
d ap
prop
riate
saf
egua
rds.
The
det
ails
of
how
this
sys
tem
is to
be
impl
emen
ted
are
yet t
o be
agr
eed.
“The
Exe
cutiv
e D
irect
ors
have
als
o ap
prov
ed a
9.5
% in
crea
se in
net
sal
arie
s ef
fect
ive
Mar
ch 1
, 197
9 ...
This
is in
line
with
ave
rage
real
pay
incr
ease
s of
the
US
priv
ate
sect
or c
ompa
rato
rs o
ver
the
past
yea
r.”
The
met
hods
of i
mpl
emen
ting
the
new
sys
tem
of t
ax re
imbu
rsem
ent w
ere
set o
ut in
Per
sonn
el M
anua
l Circ
ular
1/80
of J
anua
ry 2
1, 1
980.
9. T
hese
dec
isio
ns w
ere
rega
rded
by
mem
bers
of t
he s
taff
as a
ffect
ing
them
in tw
o re
spec
ts. T
he n
ew ta
xre
imbu
rsem
ent s
yste
m w
ould
resu
lt, w
hen
fully
pha
sed
in, i
n a
redu
ctio
n of
23%
in ta
x re
imbu
rsem
ents
toex
istin
g st
aff o
f Uni
ted
Sta
tes
natio
nalit
y. A
s re
gard
s th
e de
cisi
on re
latin
g to
sal
ary
incr
ease
s, s
taff
mem
bers
cons
ider
ed th
at th
is in
volv
ed th
e re
pudi
atio
n by
the
Ban
k of
a d
ecis
ion
take
n in
196
8 to
adj
ust s
alar
ies
auto
mat
ical
ly in
pro
porti
on to
the
incr
ease
in th
e C
onsu
mer
Pric
e In
dex
in th
e W
ashi
ngto
n M
etro
polit
an A
rea
(“C
PI”)
. As
a co
nseq
uenc
e of
this
dec
isio
n th
e ad
just
men
t of 9
.5%
(effe
ctiv
e M
arch
1, 1
979)
and
a s
ubse
quen
tad
just
men
t of 8
.3%
(effe
ctiv
e M
arch
1, 1
980)
wer
e lo
wer
than
the
incr
ease
s in
the
CP
I of 1
1.26
% a
nd 1
1.68
%du
ring
the
two
prec
edin
g 12
-mon
th p
erio
ds re
spec
tivel
y.
10. F
rom
thes
e de
cisi
ons
mor
e th
an 1
,300
Wor
ld B
ank
staf
f mem
bers
app
eale
d to
the
App
eals
Com
mitt
ee o
f
Dec
isio
ns
http
://ln
web
90.w
orld
bank
.org
/crn
/wbt
/wbt
web
site
.nsf
/(res
ults
web
)/470
F6C
6098
A11
FDF8
5256
9ED
006B
B87
7[5/
20/2
014
11:5
4:49
AM
]
the
Ban
k al
legi
ng v
iola
tion
of th
eir
cond
ition
s of
em
ploy
men
t. O
n Ja
nuar
y 8,
198
0, th
e A
ppea
ls C
omm
ittee
deci
ded
that
it h
ad n
o ju
risdi
ctio
n ov
er th
e m
atte
r and
exp
ress
ed re
gret
that
ther
e w
as “n
o fo
rum
in th
e w
orld
inw
hich
suc
h de
cisi
ons
can
be c
halle
nged
, rev
iew
ed, a
nd p
ossi
bly
over
turn
ed if
foun
d ill
egal
.” O
n A
pril
30, 1
980
the
Boa
rd o
f Gov
erno
rs a
dopt
ed th
e S
tatu
te o
f thi
s Tr
ibun
al w
hich
ent
ered
into
forc
e on
Jul
y 1,
198
0. A
rticl
eX
VII
of th
e S
tatu
te p
rovi
des
that
:
“... t
he T
ribun
al s
hall
be c
ompe
tent
to h
ear
any
appl
icat
ion
conc
erni
ng a
cau
se o
f com
plai
nt w
hich
aro
sesu
bseq
uent
to J
anua
ry 1
, 197
9, p
rovi
ded,
how
ever
, tha
t the
app
licat
ion
is fi
led
with
in 9
0 da
ys a
fter
the
entry
into
forc
e of
the
pres
ent S
tatu
te.”
11. O
n S
epte
mbe
r 29,
198
0, th
at is
to s
ay, w
ithin
the
perio
d fix
ed b
y A
rticl
e X
VII,
the
appl
icat
ions
of t
he s
ixna
med
App
lican
ts w
ere
filed
with
the
Trib
unal
. The
se w
ere
iden
tifie
d by
cou
nsel
for
the
App
lican
ts a
s be
ing
“rep
rese
ntat
ive
of th
e br
oad
spec
trum
of B
ank
empl
oyee
s w
ho h
ave
been
fina
ncia
lly h
arm
ed b
y th
ese
two
chan
ges”
. The
Ban
k ha
s ag
reed
that
, if a
nd to
the
exte
nt th
at th
e Tr
ibun
al re
nder
s a
deci
sion
in fa
vor
of a
nA
pplic
ant o
r App
lican
ts in
the
repr
esen
tativ
e ca
ses
on th
e ba
sis
of g
ener
al p
rinci
ples
rath
er th
an o
n th
e ba
sis
ofpa
rticu
lar f
acts
rela
ting
to th
e ap
plic
atio
n of
a g
iven
indi
vidu
al, t
he B
ank
will
trea
t all
staf
f mem
bers
sim
ilarly
situ
ated
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith th
e Tr
ibun
al's
dec
isio
n, w
heth
er o
r not
suc
h st
aff m
embe
rs h
ave
mad
e ap
plic
atio
nto
or i
nter
vene
d in
the
proc
eedi
ngs
befo
re th
e Tr
ibun
al. A
s a
resu
lt, 8
74 a
pplic
atio
ns h
ave
been
file
d by
sta
ffm
embe
rs w
ho b
elie
ve th
eir
case
s sh
ould
be
disp
osed
of o
n th
e ba
sis
of th
e pa
rticu
lar f
acts
of t
heir
own
indi
vidu
al c
ases
. In
addi
tion,
the
Sec
reta
riat o
f the
Trib
unal
has
rece
ived
8 a
pplic
atio
ns fo
r in
terv
entio
n w
hich
have
bee
n jo
ined
with
the
874
so-c
alle
d “n
on-r
epre
sent
ativ
e” a
pplic
atio
ns.
12. A
ll of
the
six
nam
ed A
pplic
ants
com
plai
n of
the
deci
sion
s of
the
Ban
k re
latin
g to
sal
ary
adju
stm
ents
. The
yco
nten
d th
at, a
s a
resu
lt of
thes
e de
cisi
ons,
thei
r sa
larie
s fo
r th
e ye
ars
1979
and
198
0 w
ere
resp
ectiv
ely
11%
and
29%
low
er th
an th
ey w
ould
hav
e be
en if
the
Ban
k ha
d no
t uni
late
rally
aba
ndon
ed it
s pr
evio
us p
olic
y,es
tabl
ishe
d in
196
8, o
f aut
omat
ical
ly a
djus
ting
sala
ries
on th
e ba
sis
of th
e C
PI.
In a
dditi
on, f
our
of th
e si
xA
pplic
ants
, Lam
son-
Scr
ibne
r, R
eese
, Rei
sman
-Too
f and
Sha
piro
com
plai
n of
sub
stan
tial r
educ
tions
in th
eir
gros
s in
com
e re
sulti
ng fr
om c
hang
es m
ade
by th
e B
ank,
with
effe
ct fr
om J
anua
ry 1
, 198
0, in
the
met
hod
ofca
lcul
atin
g ta
x re
imbu
rsem
ent.
13. T
he A
pplic
ants
ask
the
Trib
unal
:
1. T
o or
der t
he re
scis
sion
of c
erta
in a
dmin
istra
tive
circ
ular
s, n
amel
y, A
dmin
istra
tive
Circ
ular
s 23
/79,
dat
edM
ay 2
5, 1
979,
and
13/
80, d
ated
Mar
ch 1
4, 1
980,
as
rega
rds
sala
ry a
djus
tmen
t, an
d th
e P
erso
nnel
Man
ual
Circ
ular
1/8
0, d
ated
Jan
uary
21,
198
0, a
s re
gard
s ta
x re
imbu
rsem
ent;
2. T
o or
der s
peci
fic p
erfo
rman
ce o
f the
ir co
ntra
ct o
f em
ploy
men
t;
3. T
o or
der t
he B
ank
to p
ay th
em th
e di
ffere
nce
betw
een
thei
r sa
larie
s an
d/or
the
tax
reim
burs
emen
ts w
hich
they
act
ually
rece
ived
on
the
basi
s of
the
abov
e-m
entio
ned
circ
ular
s, a
nd th
e pa
ymen
ts to
whi
ch th
ey c
laim
they
are
ent
itled
in la
w;
4. (a
) To
ord
er th
e pa
ymen
t of i
nter
est a
t the
pre
vaili
ng ra
te o
n th
e di
ffere
nce;
(b)
To o
rder
the
Ban
k to
reim
burs
e al
l the
ir fe
es, c
osts
and
dis
burs
emen
ts in
curr
ed in
the
prep
arat
ion
ofth
is c
ase,
incl
udin
g re
ason
able
atto
rney
's c
osts
.
14. T
he c
ompe
tenc
e of
the
Trib
unal
to p
ass
judg
men
t upo
n th
ese
App
licat
ions
has
not
bee
n co
ntes
ted
by th
eR
espo
nden
t. A
s th
e ap
plic
atio
ns a
llege
non
-obs
erva
nce
of th
e co
ntra
cts
of e
mpl
oym
ent o
r ter
ms
ofap
poin
tmen
t of t
he A
pplic
ants
, the
Trib
unal
dec
ides
that
it is
com
pete
nt to
det
erm
ine
thes
e m
atte
rs.
15. D
oes
the
Wor
ld B
ank
have
the
pow
er –
and
, if s
o, w
ithin
wha
t lim
its –
uni
late
rally
to c
hang
e th
e co
nditi
ons
of e
mpl
oym
ent o
f its
sta
ff? M
ay B
ank
pers
onne
l inv
oke
the
conc
ept o
f acq
uire
d rig
hts
to p
reve
nt th
e ap
plic
atio
nto
them
of c
hang
es u
nila
tera
lly in
trodu
ced
by th
e B
ank?
The
se tw
o qu
estio
ns re
pres
ent t
wo
diffe
rent
form
ulat
ions
of t
he p
rinci
pal l
egal
issu
e in
volv
ed in
the
pres
ent p
roce
edin
gs. T
he T
ribun
al w
ill a
ppro
ach
its ta
sk
Dec
isio
ns
http
://ln
web
90.w
orld
bank
.org
/crn
/wbt
/wbt
web
site
.nsf
/(res
ults
web
)/470
F6C
6098
A11
FDF8
5256
9ED
006B
B87
7[5/
20/2
014
11:5
4:49
AM
]
of re
solv
ing
thes
e qu
estio
ns b
y fir
st id
entif
ying
the
cond
ition
s of
em
ploy
men
t of B
ank
pers
onne
l. It
will
then
exam
ine
the
issu
e of
the
Ban
k's
right
to a
men
d th
ese
term
s. F
inal
ly, t
he T
ribun
al w
ill c
onsi
der t
he s
peci
ficis
sues
rais
ed b
y th
e pr
oble
ms
of ta
x re
imbu
rsem
ent a
nd s
alar
y ad
just
men
t.
II. T
HE
CO
ND
ITIO
NS
OF
EM
PLO
YM
EN
T
16. N
orm
ally
, mem
bers
of t
he s
taff
ente
r the
ser
vice
of t
he B
ank
as a
resu
lt of
an
exch
ange
of a
lette
r of
appo
intm
ent a
nd a
lette
r of
acc
epta
nce.
The
lette
r of
app
oint
men
t con
veys
to th
e pr
ospe
ctiv
e st
aff m
embe
r“th
e fo
rmal
offe
r of
an
appo
intm
ent t
o th
e st
aff o
f the
Ban
k”. I
t set
s ou
t cer
tain
spe
cific
det
ails
of t
heap
poin
tmen
t, su
ch a
s in
itial
ass
ignm
ent,
sala
ry, d
epen
denc
y al
low
ance
s, e
ntry
dat
e, a
nd in
form
atio
n ab
out
bene
fits,
vis
as, e
tc. I
t als
o st
ates
:
“You
r ba
sic
sala
ry a
nd y
our
depe
nden
cy a
llow
ance
s w
ill b
e ne
t of i
ncom
e ta
xes
as p
rese
ntly
or h
erea
fter
prov
ided
in th
e B
y-La
ws
and
Reg
ulat
ions
of t
he B
ank
...
“You
r ap
poin
tmen
t is
subj
ect t
o th
e co
nditi
ons
of e
mpl
oym
ent o
f the
Ban
k as
at p
rese
nt in
effe
ct a
nd a
sth
ey m
ay b
e am
ende
d fro
m ti
me
to ti
me.
”
In h
is le
tter
of a
ccep
tanc
e th
e pr
ospe
ctiv
e em
ploy
ee s
tate
s th
at h
e ac
cept
s ap
poin
tmen
t to
the
staf
f of t
he B
ank
“... u
nder
the
term
s an
d co
nditi
ons
set f
orth
in m
y le
tter
of a
ppoi
ntm
ent a
nd th
e po
licie
s an
d pr
oced
ures
of
the
Ban
k as
they
may
be
in e
ffect
from
tim
e to
tim
e”.
17. E
mpl
oym
ent b
y th
e B
ank
thus
resu
lts fr
om a
n of
fer
follo
wed
by
an a
ccep
tanc
e, th
at is
to s
ay, a
con
tract
,an
d no
t, as
is th
e ca
se w
ith e
mpl
oym
ent i
n th
e ci
vil s
ervi
ce o
f cer
tain
indi
vidu
al c
ount
ries,
as
a re
sult
of a
unila
tera
l act
of n
omin
atio
n by
the
adm
inis
tratio
n.
18. H
owev
er, t
he fa
ct th
at th
e B
ank'
s em
ploy
ees
ente
r its
ser
vice
on
the
basi
s of
an
exch
ange
of l
ette
rs d
oes
not m
ean
that
thes
e co
ntra
ctua
l ins
trum
ents
con
tain
an
exha
ustiv
e st
atem
ent o
f all
rele
vant
righ
ts a
nd d
utie
s.Th
e tw
o si
des
are
agre
ed o
n th
is p
oint
. The
con
tract
may
be
the
sine
qua
non
of t
he re
latio
nshi
ps, b
ut it
rem
ains
no
mor
e th
an o
ne o
f a n
umbe
r of e
lem
ents
whi
ch c
olle
ctiv
ely
esta
blis
h th
e en
sem
ble
of c
ondi
tions
of
empl
oym
ent o
pera
tive
betw
een
the
Ban
k an
d its
sta
ff m
embe
rs. I
n th
e ca
se o
f oth
er o
rgan
izat
ions
one
look
s fo
rth
ese
othe
r ele
men
ts p
rinci
pally
in th
e co
nstit
uent
inst
rum
ent o
f the
org
aniz
atio
n an
d in
its
Sta
ff R
ules
and
Reg
ulat
ions
. As
the
Ban
k ha
s at
pre
sent
no
Sta
ff R
ules
or R
egul
atio
ns o
ne m
ust l
ook
to th
e A
rticl
es o
fA
gree
men
t of t
he B
ank
and
to th
e B
y-La
ws
and,
dep
endi
ng o
n th
eir
cont
ent,
to c
erta
in m
anua
ls, c
ircul
ars,
note
s an
d st
atem
ents
issu
ed b
y th
e m
anag
emen
t of t
he B
ank
as w
ell a
s to
cer
tain
oth
er s
ourc
es w
hich
will
be
exam
ined
pre
sent
ly.
19. A
s re
gard
s th
e A
rticl
es o
f Agr
eem
ent,
Arti
cle
V, S
ectio
n 1
pres
crib
es th
at th
e B
ank
shal
l hav
e, in
add
ition
toa
Boa
rd o
f Gov
erno
rs, t
he E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
s an
d a
Pre
side
nt, s
uch
othe
r offi
cers
and
sta
ff to
per
form
suc
hdu
ties
as th
e B
ank
may
det
erm
ine.
Arti
cle
V, S
ectio
n 2
prov
ides
:
“(f)
The
Boa
rd o
f Gov
erno
rs, a
nd th
e E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
s to
the
exte
nt a
utho
rized
, may
ado
pt s
uch
rule
san
d re
gula
tions
as
may
be
nece
ssar
y or
app
ropr
iate
to c
ondu
ct th
e bu
sine
ss o
f the
Ban
k.”
Arti
cle
V, S
ectio
n 5
prov
ides
:
“(b)
The
Pre
side
nt s
hall
be c
hief
of t
he o
pera
ting
staf
f of t
he B
ank
and
shal
l con
duct
, und
er th
e di
rect
ion
ofth
e E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
s, th
e or
dina
ry b
usin
ess
of th
e B
ank.
Sub
ject
to th
e ge
nera
l con
trol o
f the
Exe
cutiv
eD
irect
ors,
he
shal
l be
resp
onsi
ble
for
the
orga
niza
tion,
app
oint
men
t and
dis
mis
sal o
f the
offi
cers
and
sta
ff.
“(c)
The
Pre
side
nt, o
ffice
rs a
nd s
taff
of th
e B
ank,
in th
e di
scha
rge
of th
eir
offic
es, o
we
thei
r du
ty e
ntire
ly to
the
Ban
k an
d to
no
othe
r aut
horit
y. E
ach
mem
ber
of th
e B
ank
shal
l res
pect
the
inte
rnat
iona
l cha
ract
er o
f
Dec
isio
ns
http
://ln
web
90.w
orld
bank
.org
/crn
/wbt
/wbt
web
site
.nsf
/(res
ults
web
)/470
F6C
6098
A11
FDF8
5256
9ED
006B
B87
7[5/
20/2
014
11:5
4:49
AM
]
this
dut
y an
d sh
all r
efra
in fr
om a
ll at
tem
pts
to in
fluen
ce a
ny o
f the
m in
the
disc
harg
e of
thei
r du
ties.
“(d)
In a
ppoi
ntin
g th
e of
ficer
s an
d st
aff t
he P
resi
dent
sha
ll, s
ubje
ct to
the
para
mou
nt im
porta
nce
of s
ecur
ing
the
high
est s
tand
ards
of e
ffici
ency
and
tech
nica
l com
pete
nce,
pay
due
rega
rd to
the
impo
rtanc
e of
recr
uitin
g pe
rson
nel o
n as
wid
e a
geog
raph
ical
bas
is a
s po
ssib
le.”
Arti
cle
VII,
Sec
tion
9(b)
pro
vide
s:
“No
tax
shal
l be
levi
ed o
n or
in re
spec
t of s
alar
ies
and
emol
umen
ts p
aid
by th
e B
ank
to e
xecu
tive
dire
ctor
s,al
tern
ates
, offi
cial
s or
em
ploy
ees
of th
e B
ank
who
are
not
loca
l citi
zens
, loc
al s
ubje
cts,
or o
ther
loca
lna
tiona
ls.”
20. T
he T
ribun
al tu
rns
from
the
cons
titut
iona
l fou
ndat
ion
to th
e ne
xt g
ener
al in
stru
men
t whi
ch c
ontro
ls th
eB
ank'
s po
wer
to a
ct a
s an
em
ploy
er. R
efer
ence
has
alre
ady
been
mad
e to
the
pow
er a
ccor
ded
to th
e B
oard
of
Gov
erno
rs a
nd th
e E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
s by
Arti
cle
V, S
ectio
n 2(
f), to
ado
pt ru
les
and
regu
latio
ns n
eces
sary
or
appr
opria
te to
the
cond
uct o
f the
Ban
k's
busi
ness
. Thi
s po
wer
has
bee
n ex
erci
sed
in a
var
iety
of w
ays
of w
hich
the
mos
t for
mal
in c
hara
cter
is th
e B
y-La
ws.
The
mai
n pr
ovis
ion
in th
ese
By-
law
s re
ferr
ing
to s
taff
mem
bers
isth
at in
Sec
tion
14(b
) whi
ch re
late
d, in
the
perio
d pr
ior
to 1
980,
to ta
x re
imbu
rsem
ent.
21. L
ikew
ise,
the
deci
sion
of t
he B
oard
of G
over
nors
to e
stab
lish
this
Trib
unal
intro
duce
d in
to th
e co
nditi
ons
ofem
ploy
men
t of B
ank
staf
f the
righ
t of r
ecou
rse
to th
is T
ribun
al, i
n ac
cord
ance
with
the
cond
ition
s la
id d
own
inth
e S
tatu
te. T
his
right
form
s an
inte
gral
par
t of t
he le
gal r
elat
ions
hip
betw
een
the
Ban
k an
d its
sta
ff m
embe
rs.
22. F
urth
er e
lem
ents
of t
he le
gal r
elat
ions
hip
betw
een
the
Ban
k an
d its
per
sonn
el a
re a
lso
to b
e fo
und
in th
eP
erso
nnel
Man
ual,
the
Fiel
d O
ffice
Man
ual,
vario
us a
dmin
istra
tive
circ
ular
s an
d in
cer
tain
not
es a
nd s
tate
men
tsof
the
man
agem
ent.
How
ever
, it i
s im
porta
nt to
obs
erve
that
not
all
the
prov
isio
ns o
f the
se m
anua
ls, c
ircul
ars,
note
s, a
nd s
tate
men
ts a
re in
clud
ed in
the
cond
ition
s of
em
ploy
men
t. S
ome
of th
em h
ave
the
char
acte
r of
sim
ple
stat
emen
ts o
f cur
rent
pol
icy
or la
y do
wn
certa
in p
ract
ical
or p
urel
y pr
oced
ural
met
hods
of o
pera
tion.
Itis
, the
refo
re, n
eces
sary
to d
ecid
e in
eac
h ca
se w
heth
er th
e pr
ovis
ion
cons
titut
es o
ne o
f the
con
ditio
ns o
fem
ploy
men
t.
23. T
he p
ract
ice
of th
e or
gani
zatio
n m
ay a
lso,
in c
erta
in c
ircum
stan
ces,
bec
ome
part
of t
he c
ondi
tions
of
empl
oym
ent.
Obv
ious
ly, t
he o
rgan
izat
ion
wou
ld b
e di
scou
rage
d fro
m ta
king
mea
sure
s fa
vora
ble
to it
sem
ploy
ees
on a
n ad
hoc
basi
s if
each
tim
e it
did
so it
had
to ta
ke th
e ris
k of
initi
atin
g a
prac
tice
whi
ch m
ight
beco
me
lega
lly b
indi
ng u
pon
it. T
he in
tegr
atio
n of
pra
ctic
e in
to th
e co
nditi
ons
of e
mpl
oym
ent m
ust t
here
fore
be
limite
d to
that
of w
hich
ther
e is
evi
denc
e th
at it
is fo
llow
ed b
y th
e or
gani
zatio
n in
the
conv
ictio
n th
at it
refle
cts
ale
gal o
blig
atio
n, a
s w
as re
cogn
ized
by
the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Cou
rt o
f Jus
tice
in it
s A
dvis
ory
Opi
nion
on
Judg
men
ts o
fth
e A
dmin
istra
tive
Trib
unal
of t
he IL
O (I
CJ
Rep
orts
195
6, p
. 91)
.
24. T
he s
peci
fic c
ircum
stan
ces
of e
ach
case
may
als
o ha
ve s
ome
bear
ing
on th
e le
gal r
elat
ions
hip
betw
een
the
Ban
k an
d an
indi
vidu
al m
embe
r of
the
staf
f, pa
rticu
larly
the
actu
al c
ondi
tions
in w
hich
the
appo
intm
ent h
asbe
en m
ade.
25. A
noth
er s
ourc
e of
the
right
s an
d du
ties
of th
e st
aff o
f the
Ban
k co
nsis
ts o
f cer
tain
gen
eral
prin
cipl
es o
f law
,th
e ap
plic
abili
ty o
f whi
ch h
as in
fact
bee
n ac
know
ledg
ed b
y th
e B
ank
in it
s w
ritte
n an
d or
al p
lead
ings
.
26. T
he p
artie
s ha
ve d
iscu
ssed
the
ques
tion
whe
ther
the
cond
ition
s of
em
ploy
men
t inc
orpo
rate
in a
dditi
on th
erig
hts
and
dutie
s de
fined
in re
latio
n to
oth
er in
tern
atio
nal o
rgan
izat
ions
by
adm
inis
trativ
e tri
buna
ls c
ompa
rabl
eto
this
one
. Or,
to p
ut it
ano
ther
way
, do
ther
e ex
ist r
ules
com
mon
to a
ll in
tern
atio
nal o
rgan
izat
ions
, and
whi
chm
ust,
ther
efor
e, ip
sofa
cto
appl
y in
the
lega
l rel
atio
ns b
etw
een
the
Ban
k an
d its
em
ploy
ees,
in s
uch
a w
ay a
s to
dete
rmin
e th
e rig
hts
and
dutie
s of
the
two
parti
es in
the
pres
ent c
ase?
Is th
ere
a co
mm
on c
orpu
sju
ris s
hare
dby
all
inte
rnat
iona
l offi
cial
s?
27. T
he T
ribun
al, w
hich
is a
n in
tern
atio
nal t
ribun
al, c
onsi
ders
that
its
task
is to
dec
ide
inte
rnal
dis
pute
s be
twee
n
Dec
isio
ns
http
://ln
web
90.w
orld
bank
.org
/crn
/wbt
/wbt
web
site
.nsf
/(res
ults
web
)/470
F6C
6098
A11
FDF8
5256
9ED
006B
B87
7[5/
20/2
014
11:5
4:49
AM
]
the
Ban
k an
d its
sta
ff w
ithin
the
orga
nize
d le
gal s
yste
m o
f the
Wor
ld B
ank
and
that
it m
ust a
pply
the
inte
rnal
law
of t
he B
ank
as th
e la
w g
over
ning
the
cond
ition
s of
em
ploy
men
t.
28. T
he T
ribun
al d
oes
not o
verlo
ok th
e fa
ct th
at e
ach
inte
rnat
iona
l org
aniz
atio
n ha
s its
ow
n co
nstit
uent
inst
rum
ent;
its o
wn
mem
bers
hip;
its
own
inst
itutio
nal s
truct
ure;
its
own
func
tions
; its
ow
n m
easu
re o
f leg
alpe
rson
ality
; its
ow
n pe
rson
nel p
olic
y; a
nd th
at th
e di
ffere
nce
betw
een
one
orga
niza
tion
and
anot
her a
re s
oob
viou
s th
at th
e no
tion
of a
com
mon
law
of i
nter
natio
nal o
rgan
izat
ion
mus
t be
subj
ect t
o nu
mer
ous
and
som
etim
es s
igni
fican
t qua
lific
atio
ns. B
ut th
e fa
ct th
at th
ese
diffe
renc
es e
xist
doe
s no
t exc
lude
the
poss
ibili
tyth
at s
imila
r con
ditio
ns m
ay a
ffect
the
solu
tion
of c
ompa
rabl
e pr
oble
ms.
Whi
le th
e va
rious
inte
rnat
iona
lad
min
istra
tive
tribu
nals
do
not c
onsi
der t
hem
selv
es b
ound
by
each
oth
er's
dec
isio
ns a
nd h
ave
wor
ked
out a
som
etim
es d
iver
gent
juris
prud
ence
ada
pted
to e
ach
orga
niza
tion,
it is
equ
ally
true
that
on
certa
in p
oint
s th
eso
lutio
ns re
ache
d ar
e no
t sig
nific
antly
diff
eren
t. It
even
hap
pens
that
the
judg
men
ts o
f one
trib
unal
may
refe
r to
the
juris
prud
ence
of a
noth
er. S
ome
of th
ese
judg
men
ts e
ven
go s
o fa
r as
to s
peak
of g
ener
al p
rinci
ples
of
inte
rnat
iona
l civ
il se
rvic
e la
w o
r of a
bod
y of
rule
s ap
plic
able
to th
e in
tern
atio
nal c
ivil
serv
ice.
Whe
ther
thes
esi
mila
r fea
ture
s am
ount
to a
true
cor
pus
juris
is n
ot a
mat
ter o
n w
hich
it is
nec
essa
ry fo
r th
e Tr
ibun
al to
exp
ress
a vi
ew. T
he T
ribun
al is
free
to ta
ke n
ote
of s
olut
ions
wor
ked
out i
n su
ffici
ently
com
para
ble
cond
ition
s by
oth
erad
min
istra
tive
tribu
nals
, par
ticul
arly
thos
e of
the
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
fam
ily. I
n th
is w
ay th
e Tr
ibun
al m
ay ta
keac
coun
t bot
h of
the
dive
rsity
of i
nter
natio
nal o
rgan
izat
ions
and
the
spec
ial c
hara
cter
of t
he B
ank
with
out
negl
ectin
g th
e te
nden
cy to
war
ds a
cer
tain
rapp
roch
emen
t.
29. I
t is
impo
rtant
to e
mph
asiz
e th
at th
e le
gal b
asis
for
the
appl
icat
ion
to e
ach
empl
oyee
of r
ules
out
side
his
own
“con
tract
” st
ricto
sen
su d
oes
not r
est o
n th
ose
term
s of
the
lette
r of
app
oint
men
t and
the
lette
r of
acce
ptan
ce w
hich
pro
vide
that
the
appo
intm
ent i
s “s
ubje
ct to
the
cond
ition
s of
em
ploy
men
t of t
he B
ank”
and
whi
ch m
entio
n sp
ecifi
cally
the
Ban
k's
polic
y in
resp
ect t
o de
pend
ency
allo
wan
ce, b
enef
its, r
etire
men
t,in
sura
nce,
etc
. Tru
e, o
ne m
ight
say
that
, in
acce
ptin
g th
e ap
poin
tmen
t “of
fere
d” b
y th
e B
ank,
the
staf
f mem
ber
at th
e sa
me
time
“acc
epte
d” a
s a
who
le th
e re
leva
nt ru
les
and
polic
ies.
The
app
licab
ility
of t
hese
to th
eem
ploy
ee is
, how
ever
, the
con
sequ
ence
of t
heir
obje
ctiv
e ex
iste
nce
as p
art o
f the
lega
l sys
tem
to w
hich
the
staf
f mem
ber
beco
mes
sub
ject
by
ente
ring
into
a c
ontra
ct w
ith th
e or
gani
zatio
n. T
he d
eter
min
atio
n of
the
law
appl
icab
le b
y th
is T
ribun
al c
anno
t dep
end
on s
ubje
ctiv
e co
nsid
erat
ions
of a
hig
hly
indi
vidu
al c
hara
cter
whi
chw
ould
resu
lt, if
one
wer
e to
ado
pt th
em, i
n th
e ap
plic
atio
n to
sta
ff m
embe
rs o
f diff
eren
t rul
es o
f law
acc
ordi
ng to
the
expe
ctat
ions
of e
ach
one
at th
e m
omen
t he
“acc
epte
d” h
is a
ppoi
ntm
ent.
The
Trib
unal
will
reve
rt to
this
subj
ect l
ater
.
III. T
HE
BA
NK
'S P
OW
ER
OF
AM
EN
DM
EN
T
30. T
he fi
rst c
onse
quen
ce o
f the
fact
that
the
lega
l pos
ition
of B
ank
empl
oyee
s is
in la
rge
part
fixe
d by
obje
ctiv
e ru
les
of a
gen
eral
and
impe
rson
al c
hara
cter
is th
at th
e or
gani
zatio
n m
ust a
pply
thes
e ru
les
to e
ach
mem
ber
of th
e st
aff i
ndiv
idua
lly, a
nd th
at, i
f it f
ails
to o
bser
ve th
em, t
he la
tter
may
turn
to th
is T
ribun
al a
nd s
eek
the
rem
edie
s se
t out
in A
rticl
e X
II of
the
Sta
tute
. In
othe
r wor
ds, b
ecau
se e
very
aut
horit
y is
bou
nd b
y its
ow
nru
les
for
so lo
ng a
s su
ch ru
les
have
not
bee
n am
ende
d or
abr
ogat
ed in
divi
dual
dec
isio
ns m
ust c
onfo
rm to
the
gene
ral r
ules
.
31. A
sec
ond
and
no le
ss im
porta
nt c
onse
quen
ce o
f the
dom
inan
tly o
bjec
tive
natu
re o
f the
lega
l situ
atio
n of
the
staf
f of t
he B
ank
is th
at th
e B
ank
poss
esse
s, in
com
mon
with
oth
er in
tern
atio
nal o
rgan
izat
ions
, an
inhe
rent
pow
er to
cha
nge
– su
bjec
t to
cond
ition
s w
hich
the
Trib
unal
will
exa
min
e la
ter
– th
e ge
nera
l and
impe
rson
alru
les
esta
blis
hing
the
right
s an
d du
ties
of th
e st
aff.
It is
a w
ell-e
stab
lishe
d le
gal p
rinci
ple
that
the
pow
er to
mak
e ru
les
impl
ies
in p
rinci
ple
the
right
to a
men
d th
em. T
his
pow
er fl
ows
from
the
resp
onsi
bilit
ies
of th
eco
mpe
tent
aut
horit
ies
of th
e B
ank.
32. W
hile
the
pow
er o
f the
Ban
k to
cha
nge
the
gene
ral r
ules
def
inin
g th
e rig
hts
and
oblig
atio
ns o
f the
sta
ffca
nnot
be
deni
ed –
and
inde
ed is
not
den
ied
by th
e A
pplic
ants
– th
e qu
estio
n w
heth
er th
e ch
ange
s in
trodu
ced
by th
e B
ank
may
be
appl
ied
to s
taff
mem
bers
em
ploy
ed b
efor
e th
eir
adop
tion
is a
mat
ter o
n w
hich
the
parti
esex
pres
s di
verg
ent v
iew
s.
Dec
isio
ns
http
://ln
web
90.w
orld
bank
.org
/crn
/wbt
/wbt
web
site
.nsf
/(res
ults
web
)/470
F6C
6098
A11
FDF8
5256
9ED
006B
B87
7[5/
20/2
014
11:5
4:49
AM
]
33. T
he A
pplic
ants
rely
prin
cipa
lly o
n w
hat t
hey
call
the
doct
rine
of a
cqui
red
right
s, u
nder
whi
ch “t
he e
mpl
oyer
orga
niza
tion
may
not
uni
late
rally
mak
e su
bsta
ntia
l adv
erse
cha
nges
in th
e es
sent
ial t
erm
s of
an
empl
oyee
'sap
poin
tmen
t”. T
hey
mai
ntai
n th
at, e
ven
if th
e st
aff m
embe
r ha
s ac
cept
ed in
adv
ance
in h
is c
ontra
ct o
fem
ploy
men
t, w
ithou
t any
rese
rvat
ion
or li
mita
tion,
the
orga
niza
tion'
s po
wer
to a
men
d th
e co
ntra
ct –
whi
ch is
the
case
in th
e le
tters
of a
ppoi
ntm
ent a
nd a
ccep
tanc
e of
the
Ban
k –
this
pow
er c
anno
t go
so fa
r as
to a
utho
rize
the
orga
niza
tion
unila
tera
lly to
pre
judi
ce th
e ac
quire
d rig
hts
of th
e st
aff m
embe
rs. T
he R
espo
nden
t rej
ects
the
App
lican
ts’ c
onte
ntio
n in
rega
rd to
acq
uire
d rig
hts
as u
nrea
sona
ble
and
unre
alis
tic: a
ccep
tanc
e of
suc
h a
theo
ry, t
he R
espo
nden
t arg
ues,
wou
ld p
reve
nt th
e B
ank
from
adj
ustin
g its
per
sonn
el p
olic
ies
to c
hang
ing
circ
umst
ance
s an
d w
ould
pla
ce it
in a
n ad
min
istra
tive
stra
itjac
ket.
Mor
eove
r, a
dds
the
Res
pond
ent,
the
doct
rine
of a
cqui
red
right
s co
uld
not b
e ap
plie
d he
re w
ithou
t dis
rega
rdin
g th
e cl
ear
lang
uage
of t
he A
pplic
ants
' let
ters
of
appo
intm
ent.
34. H
owev
er, o
nce
thes
e st
rong
ly c
ontra
stin
g an
d at
firs
t sig
ht ir
reco
ncila
ble
posi
tions
are
stu
died
at c
lose
rra
nge,
they
app
ear t
o ha
ve b
een
put f
orw
ard
by th
e pa
rties
with
som
e nu
ance
s. T
he A
pplic
ants
qua
lify
thei
rth
eory
of a
cqui
red
right
s by
two
limita
tions
. Firs
t, ac
quire
d rig
hts
stan
d in
the
way
onl
y of
“sub
stan
tial a
dver
sech
ange
s in
the
esse
ntia
l ter
ms
of th
e em
ploy
ee's
app
oint
men
t”. T
his
impl
ies
a co
ntra
rio th
at th
e B
ank
may
mak
e (i)
favo
rabl
e ch
ange
s; (i
i) in
subs
tant
ial c
hang
es; a
nd (i
ii) c
hang
es in
non
esse
ntia
l ter
ms.
Mor
eove
r,A
pplic
ants
adm
it th
at th
ere
may
be
inst
ance
s of
“exi
gent
circ
umst
ance
s” o
r “ov
erw
helm
ing
cont
inge
ncie
s” u
nder
whi
ch th
e ac
quire
d rig
hts
doct
rine
give
s w
ay to
the
Ban
k's
need
to a
ct. T
he R
espo
nden
t, on
the
othe
r han
d,th
ough
den
ying
the
exis
tenc
e of
any
so-
calle
d “d
octri
ne o
f acq
uire
d rig
hts”
as
invo
ked
by th
e A
pplic
ants
,ac
know
ledg
es th
at th
e B
ank
cann
ot a
ct in
an
unfe
ttere
d m
anne
r. Its
pow
er o
f uni
late
ral a
men
dmen
t, in
Res
pond
ent's
ow
n vi
ew a
s el
abor
ated
dur
ing
the
oral
ple
adin
gs, i
s su
bjec
t to
gene
ral p
rinci
ples
of l
aw s
uch
asth
e pr
inci
ple
of n
on-r
etro
activ
ity, t
he p
rinci
ple
of n
ondi
scrim
inat
ion
and
the
prin
cipl
e of
reas
onab
le re
latio
nshi
pbe
twee
n ai
ms
and
mea
ns.
35. T
he T
ribun
al is
of t
he v
iew
that
the
Ban
k ha
s th
e po
wer
uni
late
rally
to c
hang
e co
nditi
ons
of e
mpl
oym
ent o
fth
e st
aff.
At t
he s
ame
time,
sig
nific
ant l
imita
tions
exi
st u
pon
the
exer
cise
of s
uch
pow
er.
36. T
he e
xist
ence
of t
he B
ank'
s po
wer
uni
late
rally
to c
hang
e co
nditi
ons
of e
mpl
oym
ent r
ests
on
its im
plie
dpo
wer
to p
ursu
e fu
lly a
nd e
ffici
ently
the
purp
oses
and
obj
ectiv
es fo
r w
hich
it w
as c
reat
ed. A
s th
e le
gal
rela
tions
hip
betw
een
the
Ban
k an
d its
sta
ff do
es n
ot re
st o
n an
y na
tiona
l leg
al s
yste
m, i
t is
in th
e B
ank'
s ow
nin
tern
al la
w th
at th
e ba
sis
for
the
Ban
k's
pow
er m
ust b
e fo
und.
To
deny
the
exis
tenc
e of
any
pow
er u
nila
tera
llyto
am
end
the
cond
ition
s of
em
ploy
men
t of e
xist
ing
staf
f wou
ld le
ad to
a s
ituat
ion
in w
hich
ther
e ar
e as
man
yru
les
as th
ere
are
empl
oyee
s w
ho e
nter
ed th
e se
rvic
e of
the
Ban
k at
diff
eren
t dat
es. T
his
wou
ld c
reat
eun
just
ifiab
le in
equa
litie
s be
twee
n th
e va
rious
sta
ff m
embe
rs a
nd w
ould
be
cont
rary
to th
e el
emen
tary
requ
irem
ents
of g
ood
adm
inis
tratio
n. T
he e
xist
ence
of o
bjec
tive
rule
s of
a g
ener
al a
nd im
pers
onal
cha
ract
erim
plie
s no
t onl
y th
e po
wer
of t
he o
rgan
izat
ion
to c
hang
e th
ese
rule
s, b
ut a
lso
a po
wer
to d
ecid
e th
at th
e ne
wru
les
shou
ld a
pply
imm
edia
tely
to p
erso
nnel
alre
ady
empl
oyed
.
37. T
he A
pplic
ants
adv
ance
the
idea
that
the
elem
ents
of t
he c
ondi
tions
of e
mpl
oym
ent m
ust r
emai
n at
leas
t as
favo
rabl
e to
the
staf
f mem
ber
durin
g th
e w
hole
per
iod
of h
is e
mpl
oym
ent a
s th
ey w
ere
at th
e da
te o
f the
com
men
cem
ent o
f his
ser
vice
to th
e B
ank.
It is
on
thos
e co
nditi
ons
of e
mpl
oym
ent,
so th
e A
pplic
ants
mai
ntai
n,th
at th
e st
aff m
embe
r pl
aced
his
“rel
ianc
e” a
nd h
is “e
xpec
tatio
ns”;
with
out t
hem
he
wou
ld n
ot h
ave
agre
ed to
beco
me
an e
mpl
oyee
or w
ould
not
sub
sequ
ently
hav
e re
mai
ned
in th
e se
rvic
e of
the
Ban
k.
38. I
n th
e op
inio
n of
the
Trib
unal
the
cond
ition
s of
em
ploy
men
t can
not
be
froze
n at
the
date
the
staf
f mem
ber
join
s th
e B
ank.
It is
rele
vant
to n
ote
that
Arti
cle
II, p
arag
raph
1, o
f the
Sta
tute
, afte
r de
finin
g th
e ju
risdi
ctio
n of
the
Trib
unal
by
refe
renc
e to
“non
-obs
erva
nce
of th
e co
ntra
ct o
f em
ploy
men
t or t
erm
s of
app
oint
men
t”, p
rovi
des:
“The
wor
ds 'c
ontra
ct o
f em
ploy
men
t' an
d 'te
rms
of a
ppoi
ntm
ent'
incl
ude
all p
ertin
ent r
egul
atio
ns a
nd ru
les
info
rce
at th
e tim
e of
alle
ged
non-
obs
erva
nce.
...”
This
pro
visi
on c
lear
ly e
stab
lishe
s th
at th
e co
nditi
ons
of e
mpl
oym
ent f
or w
hich
the
Trib
unal
mus
t ass
ure
resp
ect
Dec
isio
ns
http
://ln
web
90.w
orld
bank
.org
/crn
/wbt
/wbt
web
site
.nsf
/(res
ults
web
)/470
F6C
6098
A11
FDF8
5256
9ED
006B
B87
7[5/
20/2
014
11:5
4:49
AM
]
are
not t
hose
whi
ch e
xist
ed a
t the
dat
e of
app
oint
men
t of t
he c
laim
ant b
ut th
ose
whi
ch e
xist
at t
he d
ate
of th
eal
lege
d no
n-ob
serv
ance
; it i
mpl
ies,
by
its v
ery
wor
ds, p
ossi
ble
chan
ges
in th
e co
nditi
ons
of e
mpl
oym
ent.
39. T
he s
ame
cons
ider
atio
ns w
hich
und
erlie
the
exis
tenc
e of
a p
ower
of u
nila
tera
l am
endm
ent,
nam
ely,
the
inte
rnal
law
of t
he B
ank
and
its im
plie
d po
wer
s, le
ad th
e Tr
ibun
al to
reje
ct th
e id
ea th
at th
is p
ower
sho
uld
beto
tally
unl
imite
d. S
uch
an id
ea w
ould
run
coun
ter t
o “th
e pa
ram
ount
impo
rtanc
e of
sec
urin
g th
e hi
ghes
tst
anda
rds
of e
ffici
ency
and
of t
echn
ical
com
pete
nce”
(Arti
cle
V, S
ectio
n 5(
d) o
f the
Arti
cles
of A
gree
men
t). N
oon
e w
ould
wis
h to
be
empl
oyed
in a
n or
gani
zatio
n in
whi
ch th
ere
wer
e no
lim
its a
t all
to th
e po
wer
of t
heem
ploy
er.
40. H
ow th
en is
a d
istin
ctio
n to
be
draw
n be
twee
n th
ose
unila
tera
l am
endm
ents
whi
ch a
re p
erm
issi
ble
and
thos
e w
hich
are
not
? Th
e Tr
ibun
al n
otes
, firs
t, th
at s
uch
dist
inct
ion
cann
ot re
st o
n th
e ex
tent
to w
hich
a s
taff
mem
ber
acce
pted
suc
h po
wer
of a
men
dmen
t in
his
lette
r of
app
oint
men
t. E
ven
if no
rese
rvat
ion
of th
e po
wer
of
amen
dmen
t wer
e ex
pres
sly
incl
uded
in th
e le
tters
of a
ppoi
ntm
ent,
such
a p
ower
wou
ld b
e im
plie
d fro
m th
ein
tern
al la
w o
f the
Ban
k. L
ikew
ise,
eve
n in
thos
e ca
ses
whe
re a
pow
er o
f am
endm
ent i
s re
serv
ed in
term
sw
hich
impo
se n
o lim
itatio
n up
on it
s ex
erci
se, t
his
cann
ot b
e co
nstru
ed to
acc
ord
to th
e or
gani
zatio
n an
unre
stric
ted
pow
er o
f am
endm
ent.
The
scop
e of
the
wor
ds a
s us
ed in
the
exch
ange
of l
ette
rs m
ust b
e re
adag
ains
t the
bac
kgro
und
of th
e B
ank'
s in
tern
al la
w, a
nd it
is n
ot o
n th
e st
reng
th a
nd e
xten
t of a
ny in
divi
dual
'sac
cept
ance
that
the
pow
er o
f am
endm
ent a
nd it
s lim
itatio
ns m
ay b
e de
fined
.
41. N
or c
an th
e di
stin
ctio
n be
twee
n w
hat i
s pe
rmis
sibl
e an
d w
hat i
s im
perm
issi
ble
rest
on
the
stat
e of
min
d or
the
inte
ntio
ns o
f sta
ff m
embe
rs a
t the
tim
e of
taki
ng th
eir
empl
oym
ent,
on th
eir
“exp
ecta
tions
” or “
relia
nce”
or
on th
e m
otiv
atin
g fa
ctor
s w
hich
mig
ht h
ave
indu
ced
them
to a
ccep
t or r
emai
n in
em
ploy
men
t with
the
Ban
k.S
ubje
ctiv
e co
nsid
erat
ions
are
at b
est d
iffic
ult t
o id
entif
y an
d th
e di
fficu
lty in
crea
ses
with
tim
e. T
he p
ossi
bilit
yex
ists
that
diff
eren
t con
side
ratio
ns m
ay p
reva
il w
ith d
iffer
ent i
ndiv
idua
ls, t
hus
occa
sion
ing
a di
vers
ity o
fgo
vern
ing
rule
s w
here
uni
form
ity is
nec
essa
ry. M
oreo
ver,
ther
e ar
e at
leas
t tw
o su
bjec
tive
inte
ntio
ns in
any
cont
ract
. The
re is
no
mor
e re
ason
to a
ttach
gre
ater
wei
ght t
o th
e in
tent
ion
of th
e st
aff m
embe
r th
an to
that
of
the
Ban
k, F
urth
erm
ore,
sta
ff m
embe
rs a
re e
ntitl
ed to
the
obse
rvan
ce o
f the
ir co
nditi
ons
of e
mpl
oym
ent a
s th
eym
ay e
xist
from
tim
e to
tim
e, a
nd n
ot o
nly
of th
ose
term
s of
app
oint
men
t whi
ch in
duce
d th
em to
acc
ept s
ervi
cew
ith th
e B
ank
and
on th
e m
aint
enan
ce o
f whi
ch th
ey h
ave
plac
ed th
eir
“exp
ecta
tions
” and
thei
r “r
elia
nce”
. In
ente
ring
the
serv
ice
of th
e B
ank,
the
staf
f mem
ber
expe
cts,
or s
houl
d ex
pect
, tha
t the
se e
lem
ents
may
be
alte
red
in th
e fu
ture
to ta
ke a
ccou
nt o
f cha
ngin
g ci
rcum
stan
ces.
42. T
he T
ribun
al c
onsi
ders
that
in e
xam
inin
g th
e nu
mer
ous
and
varie
d el
emen
ts o
f the
con
ditio
ns o
fem
ploy
men
t, a
maj
or d
istin
ctio
n m
ust b
e dr
awn.
Cer
tain
ele
men
ts a
re fu
ndam
enta
l and
ess
entia
l in
the
bala
nce
of ri
ghts
and
dut
ies
of th
e st
aff m
embe
r; th
ey a
re n
ot o
pen
to a
ny c
hang
e w
ithou
t the
con
sent
of t
hest
aff m
embe
r af
fect
ed. O
ther
s ar
e le
ss fu
ndam
enta
l and
less
ess
entia
l in
this
bal
ance
; the
y m
ay b
e un
ilate
rally
chan
ged
by th
e B
ank
in th
e ex
erci
se o
f its
pow
er, s
ubje
ct to
the
limits
and
con
ditio
ns w
hich
will
be
exam
ined
late
r. In
var
ious
form
s an
d w
ith d
iffer
ing
term
inol
ogy
this
dis
tinct
ion
is fo
und
in th
e Ju
rispr
uden
ce o
f oth
erin
tern
atio
nal a
dmin
istra
tive
tribu
nals
.
43. T
he T
ribun
al re
cogn
izes
that
it is
not
pos
sibl
e to
des
crib
e in
abs
tract
term
s th
e lin
e be
twee
n es
sent
ial a
ndno
n-es
sent
ial e
lem
ents
any
mor
e th
an it
is in
abs
tract
term
s po
ssib
le to
dis
cern
the
line
betw
een
wha
t is
reas
onab
le a
nd u
nrea
sona
ble,
fair
and
unfa
ir, e
quita
ble
and
ineq
uita
ble.
Eac
h di
stin
ctio
n tu
rns
upon
the
circ
umst
ance
s of
the
parti
cula
r cas
e, a
nd u
ltim
atel
y up
on th
e po
ssib
ility
of r
ecou
rse
to im
parti
al d
eter
min
atio
n.H
owev
er, t
his
diffi
culty
has
not
pre
vent
ed d
istin
ctio
ns o
f thi
s ki
nd p
layi
ng a
cen
tral r
ole
in th
e ap
plic
atio
n of
the
law
gen
eral
ly a
nd th
e Tr
ibun
al s
ees
no re
ason
for
reje
ctin
g th
e re
leva
nce
of s
uch
a di
stin
ctio
n in
the
inte
rnal
law
of t
he B
ank.
Som
etim
es it
will
be
the
prin
cipl
e its
elf o
f a c
ondi
tion
of e
mpl
oym
ent w
hich
pos
sess
es a
nes
sent
ial a
nd fu
ndam
enta
l cha
ract
er, w
hile
its
impl
emen
tatio
n w
ill p
osse
ss a
less
fund
amen
tal a
nd le
sses
sent
ial c
hara
cter
. In
othe
r cas
es, o
ne o
r ano
ther
ele
men
t in
the
lega
l sta
tus
of a
sta
ff m
embe
r w
ill b
elon
gen
tirel
y –
both
prin
cipl
e an
d im
plem
enta
tion
– to
one
or a
noth
er o
f the
se c
ateg
orie
s. In
som
e ca
ses
the
dist
inct
ion
will
rest
upo
n a
quan
titat
ive
crite
rion;
in o
ther
s, it
will
rest
on
qual
itativ
e co
nsid
erat
ions
. Som
etim
es it
is th
e in
clus
ion
of a
spe
cific
and
wel
l-def
ined
und
erta
king
in th
e le
tters
of a
ppoi
ntm
ent a
nd a
ccep
tanc
e th
atm
ay e
ndow
suc
h an
und
erta
king
with
the
qual
ity o
f bei
ng e
ssen
tial.
Dec
isio
ns
http
://ln
web
90.w
orld
bank
.org
/crn
/wbt
/wbt
web
site
.nsf
/(res
ults
web
)/470
F6C
6098
A11
FDF8
5256
9ED
006B
B87
7[5/
20/2
014
11:5
4:49
AM
]
44. I
n de
scrib
ing
the
dist
inct
ion
betw
een
esse
ntia
l and
non
-ess
entia
l ele
men
ts, t
he T
ribun
al p
refe
rs n
ot to
use
such
term
inol
ogy
as “c
ontra
ctua
l rig
hts”
as
oppo
sed
to “s
tatu
tory
righ
ts”.
Som
e of
the
cond
ition
s co
ntai
ned
inth
e “c
ontra
ct,”
that
is, i
n th
e le
tters
of a
ppoi
ntm
ent a
nd a
ccep
tanc
e, m
ay b
e no
n-fu
ndam
enta
l and
non
-es
sent
ial,
whi
le s
ome
of th
e co
nditi
ons
lyin
g ou
tsid
e th
e “c
ontra
ct”,
and
ther
efor
e ca
lled
“sta
tuto
ry”,
may
be
fund
amen
tal a
nd e
ssen
tial.
Like
wis
e, th
e Tr
ibun
al p
refe
rs n
ot to
invo
ke th
e ph
rase
“acq
uire
d rig
hts”
in o
rder
tode
scrib
e es
sent
ial r
ight
s. T
he c
onte
nt o
f thi
s ph
rase
is d
iffic
ult t
o id
entif
y. It
is n
ot b
ecau
se th
ere
is a
n ac
quire
drig
ht th
at th
ere
is n
o po
wer
of u
nila
tera
l am
endm
ent.
It is
rath
er b
ecau
se c
erta
in c
ondi
tions
of e
mpl
oym
ent a
reso
ess
entia
l and
fund
amen
tal a
nd, b
y re
ason
ther
eof,
unch
ange
able
with
out t
he c
onse
nt o
f the
sta
ff m
embe
r,th
at o
ne c
an s
peak
of a
cqui
red
right
s. In
oth
er w
ords
, wha
t one
cal
ls “t
he d
octri
ne o
f acq
uire
d rig
hts”
doe
s no
tco
nstit
ute
the
caus
e or
just
ifica
tion
of th
e un
chan
geab
le c
hara
cter
of c
erta
in c
ondi
tions
of e
mpl
oym
ent.
It is
sim
ply
a ha
ndy
expr
essi
on o
f thi
s un
chan
geab
le c
hara
cter
, of w
hich
the
caus
e an
d th
e ju
stifi
catio
n ar
e to
be
foun
d in
the
fund
amen
tal a
nd e
ssen
tial c
hara
cter
of t
he re
leva
nt c
ondi
tions
of e
mpl
oym
ent.
45. A
s ha
s be
en s
tate
d, w
hile
the
fund
amen
tal a
nd e
ssen
tial e
lem
ents
of t
he c
ondi
tions
of e
mpl
oym
ent m
ayno
t be
amen
ded
unila
tera
lly, t
he n
on-fu
ndam
enta
l and
non
-ess
entia
l ele
men
ts a
re s
ubje
ct to
uni
late
ral
amen
dmen
t. Th
is p
ower
is d
iscr
etio
nary
and
it is
not
for
this
Trib
unal
to s
ubst
itute
its
own
judg
men
t for
that
of
the
com
pete
nt o
rgan
s of
the
Ban
k in
exe
rcis
ing
that
dis
cret
ion.
How
ever
, the
Ban
k's
pow
er to
am
end
non-
esse
ntia
l ter
ms
may
be
exer
cise
d su
bjec
t onl
y to
cer
tain
lim
itatio
ns. D
iscr
etio
nary
pow
er is
not
abs
olut
e po
wer
.
46. F
irst,
no re
troac
tive
effe
ct m
ay b
e gi
ven
to a
ny a
men
dmen
ts a
dopt
ed b
y th
e B
ank.
The
Ban
k ca
nnot
depr
ive
staf
f mem
bers
of a
ccru
ed ri
ghts
for
serv
ices
alre
ady
rend
ered
. Thi
s w
ell-e
stab
lishe
d pr
inci
ple
has
been
appl
ied
in m
any
judg
men
ts o
f oth
er in
tern
atio
nal a
dmin
istra
tive
tribu
nals
.
47. T
he p
rinci
ple
of n
on-r
etro
activ
ity is
not
the
only
lim
itatio
n up
on th
e po
wer
to a
men
d th
e no
n-fu
ndam
enta
lel
emen
ts o
f the
con
ditio
ns o
f em
ploy
men
t. Th
e B
ank
wou
ld a
buse
its
disc
retio
n if
it w
ere
to a
dopt
suc
hch
ange
s fo
r re
ason
s al
ien
to th
e pr
oper
func
tioni
ng o
f the
org
aniz
atio
n an
d to
its
duty
to e
nsur
e th
at it
has
ast
aff p
osse
ssin
g “th
e hi
ghes
t sta
ndar
ds o
f effi
cien
cy a
nd o
f tec
hnic
al c
ompe
tenc
e”. C
hang
es m
ust b
e ba
sed
ona
prop
er c
onsi
dera
tion
of re
leva
nt fa
cts.
The
y m
ust b
e re
ason
ably
rela
ted
to th
e ob
ject
ive
whi
ch th
ey a
rein
tend
ed to
ach
ieve
. The
y m
ust b
e m
ade
in g
ood
faith
and
mus
t not
be
prom
pted
by
impr
oper
mot
ives
. The
ym
ust n
ot d
iscr
imin
ate
in a
n un
just
ifiab
le m
anne
r bet
wee
n in
divi
dual
s or
gro
ups
with
in th
e st
aff.
Am
endm
ents
mus
t be
mad
e in
a re
ason
able
man
ner s
eeki
ng to
avo
id e
xces
sive
and
unn
eces
sary
har
m to
the
staf
f. In
this
resp
ect,
the
care
with
whi
ch a
refo
rm h
as b
een
stud
ied
and
the
cond
ition
s at
tach
ed to
a c
hang
e ar
e to
be
take
n in
to a
ccou
nt b
y th
e Tr
ibun
al.
48. T
he T
ribun
al m
ust s
atis
fy it
self
in e
ach
case
that
the
Ban
k's
pow
er to
cha
nge
the
non-
fund
amen
tal
elem
ents
in th
e co
nditi
ons
of e
mpl
oym
ent o
f its
em
ploy
ees
has
not b
een
exer
cise
d ei
ther
retro
activ
ely
or in
an
arbi
trary
or o
ther
wis
e im
prop
er m
anne
r.
IV. T
AX
RE
IMB
UR
SE
ME
NT
49. I
n th
e lig
ht o
f the
prin
cipl
es a
nd ru
les
of la
w w
hich
hav
e ju
st b
een
stat
ed, t
he T
ribun
al n
ow in
tend
s to
exam
ine
whe
ther
the
intro
duct
ion
in re
latio
n to
the
App
lican
ts L
amso
n-S
crib
ner,
Ree
se, R
eism
an-T
oof a
ndS
hapi
ro, o
f a n
ew s
yste
m o
f tax
reim
burs
emen
t with
affe
ct fr
om J
anua
ry 1
, 198
0 co
nstit
uted
a n
on-o
bser
vanc
eof
thei
r co
ntra
cts
of e
mpl
oym
ent o
r ter
ms
of a
ppoi
ntm
ent.
50. T
he o
rigin
s of
the
syst
em o
f tax
reim
burs
emen
t go
back
to 1
945.
As
alre
ady
poin
ted
out,
Arti
cle
VII,
Sec
tion
9(b)
of t
he A
rticl
es o
f Agr
eem
ent o
f the
Ban
k pr
ovid
es: “
No
tax
shal
l be
levi
ed o
n or
in re
spec
t of s
alar
ies
and
emol
umen
ts p
aid
by th
e B
ank
to E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
s, a
ltern
ates
, offi
cial
s or
em
ploy
ees
of th
e B
ank
who
are
not
loca
l citi
zens
, loc
al s
ubje
cts,
or o
ther
loca
l nat
iona
ls.”
At i
ts in
augu
ral m
eetin
g, th
e B
oard
of G
over
nors
ado
pted
on 1
6 M
arch
194
6 a
reso
lutio
n re
com
men
ding
to th
e M
embe
rs o
f the
Ban
k th
at th
ey ta
ke n
eces
sary
act
ion
toex
empt
from
nat
iona
l tax
atio
n sa
larie
s an
d al
low
ance
s pa
id to
the
staf
f of t
he B
ank.
The
reso
lutio
n st
ated
:
“App
ropr
iate
mea
sure
s fo
r th
e el
imin
atio
n or
equ
aliz
atio
n of
the
burd
en o
f nat
iona
l tax
es u
pon
sala
ries
and
Dec
isio
ns
http
://ln
web
90.w
orld
bank
.org
/crn
/wbt
/wbt
web
site
.nsf
/(res
ults
web
)/470
F6C
6098
A11
FDF8
5256
9ED
006B
B87
7[5/
20/2
014
11:5
4:49
AM
]
allo
wan
ces
paid
by
(the
Ban
k) a
re in
disp
ensa
ble
to th
e ac
hiev
emen
t of e
quity
am
ong
its m
embe
rs a
ndeq
ualit
y am
ong
its p
erso
nnel
.”
How
ever
, as
the
solu
tion
of re
leva
nt le
gal a
nd o
ther
pro
blem
s to
ach
ieve
this
aim
wou
ld ta
ke ti
me,
the
Boa
rd o
fG
over
nors
, at i
ts fi
rst A
nnua
l Mee
ting
in th
e au
tum
n of
194
6, a
dopt
ed B
y-La
ws
cont
aini
ng th
e fo
llow
ing
prov
isio
n (S
ectio
n 14
(b))
:
“Pen
ding
the
nece
ssar
y ac
tion
bein
g ta
ken
by m
embe
rs to
exe
mpt
from
nat
iona
l tax
atio
n sa
larie
s an
dal
low
ance
s pa
id o
ut o
f the
bud
get o
f the
Ban
k, th
e G
over
nors
and
the
Exe
cutiv
e D
irect
ors,
and
thei
rA
ltern
ates
, the
Pre
side
nt, a
nd th
e st
aff m
embe
rs s
hall
be re
imbu
rsed
by
the
Ban
k fo
r th
e ta
xes
whi
ch th
eyar
e re
quire
d to
pay
on
such
sal
arie
s an
d al
low
ance
s.
“In c
ompu
ting
the
amou
nt o
f tax
adj
ustm
ent t
o be
mad
e w
ith re
spec
t to
any
indi
vidu
al, i
t sha
ll be
pre
sum
edfo
r th
e pu
rpos
es o
f the
com
puta
tion
that
the
inco
me
rece
ived
from
the
bank
is h
is to
tal i
ncom
e. A
ll sa
larie
san
d al
low
ance
s pr
escr
ibed
by
or p
ursu
ant t
o th
is s
ectio
n ar
e st
ated
as
net o
n th
e ab
ove
basi
s.”
51. I
n th
e ea
rly y
ears
of t
he B
ank,
it w
as e
xpec
ted
that
its
Mem
bers
, inc
ludi
ng e
spec
ially
the
Uni
ted
Sta
tes,
wou
ld b
ecom
e P
artie
s to
the
Con
vent
ion
on th
e P
rivile
ges
and
Imm
uniti
es o
f the
Spe
cial
ized
Age
ncie
s w
ithre
spec
t to
the
Ban
k, w
ith th
e ef
fect
that
eac
h su
ch m
embe
r w
ould
hav
e ex
empt
ed it
s ow
n na
tiona
ls fr
omin
com
e ta
xes
on c
ompe
nsat
ion
for
Wor
ld B
ank
empl
oym
ent.
The
Uni
ted
Sta
tes
Gov
ernm
ent a
mon
g ot
hers
did
not a
cced
e to
the
Con
vent
ion,
so
that
all
of th
e m
ore
than
1,5
00 U
nite
d S
tate
s na
tiona
ls e
mpl
oyed
by
the
Ban
k, w
heth
er in
the
Uni
ted
Sta
tes
or e
lsew
here
, hav
e re
mai
ned
subj
ect t
o U
nite
d S
tate
s fe
dera
l, st
ate
and
loca
l inc
ome
taxe
s on
thei
r B
ank
sala
ries
whi
le a
ll ot
her s
taff
mem
bers
(exc
ept f
or a
few
Fre
nch
natio
nals
wor
king
in th
e B
ank'
s P
aris
offi
ce a
nd a
few
Brit
ish
natio
nals
wor
king
in it
s Lo
ndon
offi
ce)
are
entir
ely
exem
ptfro
m n
atio
nal t
axat
ion
of th
eir
Ban
k co
mpe
nsat
ion.
The
Ban
k w
as th
eref
ore
left
with
a s
yste
m u
nder
whi
ch it
has
to re
imbu
rse
all i
ts U
nite
d S
tate
s st
aff f
or th
e ta
xes
whi
ch th
ey a
re re
quire
d to
pay
on
the
Ban
k's
sala
ries
and
allo
wan
ces.
52. W
hile
the
prin
cipl
e of
reim
burs
emen
t of t
he ta
xes
that
Uni
ted
Sta
tes
staf
f mem
bers
"are
requ
ired
to p
ay”
was
eas
y to
sta
te, t
he m
etho
d of
cal
cula
ting
the
amou
nt g
ave
rise
to c
ompl
ex q
uest
ions
. One
of t
he re
ason
s fo
rth
is c
ompl
exity
lies
in th
e U
nite
d S
tate
s ta
x sy
stem
. On
this
sub
ject
the
Res
pond
ent h
as p
rovi
ded
the
Trib
unal
with
the
follo
win
g in
form
atio
n, w
hich
has
not
bee
n co
ntes
ted
by th
e A
pplic
ants
:
“The
fede
ral g
over
nmen
t of t
he U
nite
d S
tate
s im
pose
s in
com
e ta
xes
at ra
tes
whi
ch in
crea
se p
rogr
essi
vely
as th
e am
ount
of t
axab
le in
com
e ris
es. T
he in
crem
ent o
f inc
ome
to w
hich
a g
iven
rate
app
lies
is c
omm
only
refe
rred
to a
s a
‘tax
brac
ket’.
Mos
t sta
tes
of th
e U
nite
d S
tate
s (in
clud
ing
Virg
inia
and
Mar
ylan
d), t
he D
istri
ctof
Col
umbi
a, a
nd, i
n so
me
case
s, c
ount
y or
city
gov
ernm
ents
with
in S
tate
s al
so im
pose
inco
me
taxe
s up
onpe
rson
s su
bjec
t to
thei
r ta
juris
dict
ion.
“The
U.S
. fed
eral
inco
me
tax
syst
em re
quire
s th
at th
e ta
xpay
er re
port
his
gros
s in
com
e to
the
U.S
. Int
erna
lR
even
ue S
ervi
ce a
t lea
st a
nnua
lly. F
rom
gro
ss in
com
e, th
e ta
xpay
er m
ay m
ake
certa
in d
educ
tions
(for
exam
ple,
60%
of c
erta
in c
apita
l gai
ns, u
nrei
mbu
rsed
trav
el e
xpen
ses
incu
rred
as
an e
mpl
oyee
, and
cer
tain
mov
ing
expe
nses
) to
reac
h ‘a
djus
ted
gros
s in
com
e’. F
rom
adj
uste
d gr
oss
inco
me,
he
may
mak
e ad
ditio
nal
dedu
ctio
ns fo
r pe
rson
al e
xem
ptio
ns (a
spe
cific
dol
lar
amou
nt fo
r ea
ch ta
xpay
er a
nd e
ach
of th
e ta
xpay
er's
depe
nden
ts),
for
the
zero
bra
cket
am
ount
and
for
item
ized
ded
uctio
ns in
sofa
r as
thei
r to
tal a
mou
nt e
xcee
dsth
e ze
ro b
rack
et a
mou
nt. T
he z
ero
brac
ket a
mou
nt is
a fl
at d
olla
r am
ount
ded
uctib
le fr
om a
djus
ted
gros
sin
com
e on
eac
h ta
xpay
er's
fede
ral i
ncom
e ta
x re
turn
.
“The
re a
re n
umer
ous
item
ized
ded
uctio
ns p
rovi
ded
for.
The
y in
clud
e, a
mon
g ot
hers
, the
dol
lar
amou
nt p
aid
durin
g th
e ta
xabl
e ye
ar fo
r in
tere
st, s
tate
and
loca
l inc
ome
taxe
s, re
al e
stat
e ta
xes,
cha
ritab
le c
ontri
butio
ns,
and
certa
in m
edic
al e
xpen
ses.
The
resu
lt of
sub
tract
ing
dedu
ctio
ns fo
r pe
rson
al e
xem
ptio
ns, t
he z
ero
brac
ket a
mou
nt, a
nd it
emiz
ed d
educ
tions
in e
xces
s of
the
zero
bra
cket
am
ount
from
adj
uste
d gr
oss
inco
me
is ‘t
axab
le in
com
e’.
“Fro
m th
e tim
e th
e B
ank
was
org
aniz
ed u
ntil
1977
, how
ever
, the
U.S
. Int
erna
l Rev
enue
Cod
e di
d no
tco
ntai
n pr
ovis
ion
for
a ze
ro b
rack
et a
mou
nt, b
ut ra
ther
it p
rovi
ded
for
a ‘s
tand
ard
dedu
ctio
n’. T
he ta
xpay
er
Dec
isio
ns
http
://ln
web
90.w
orld
bank
.org
/crn
/wbt
/wbt
web
site
.nsf
/(res
ults
web
)/470
F6C
6098
A11
FDF8
5256
9ED
006B
B87
7[5/
20/2
014
11:5
4:49
AM
]
was
allo
wed
to d
educ
t fro
m h
is a
djus
ted
gros
s in
com
e th
e gr
eate
r of h
is to
tal i
tem
ized
ded
uctio
ns o
r the
stan
dard
ded
uctio
n, b
ut n
ot b
oth.
The
sta
ndar
d de
duct
ion
durin
g m
ost o
f thi
s tim
e w
as th
e le
sser
of a
flat
dolla
r am
ount
or o
f a s
peci
fied
perc
enta
ge o
f adj
uste
d gr
oss
inco
me.
”
Thus
, whe
n to
day
one
uses
the
term
“sta
ndar
d de
duct
ion”
, it i
s no
long
er, a
s it
was
from
194
6 to
197
7, a
“sta
ndar
d de
duct
ion”
stri
cto
sens
u (th
at is
the
less
er o
f a fl
at d
olla
r am
ount
or o
f a s
peci
fied
perc
enta
ge o
fad
just
ed g
ross
inco
me)
, but
, mor
e ex
actly
, a z
ero
brac
ket a
mou
nt. T
he te
rm “s
tand
ard
dedu
ctio
n”, i
n co
ntra
stw
ith “i
tem
ized
ded
uctio
ns”,
cont
inue
s to
be
used
for
reas
ons
of c
onve
nien
ce.
53. I
n th
is c
onte
xt, t
wo
basi
c pr
oble
ms
had
to b
e re
solv
ed in
the
form
ulat
ion
of a
ny s
yste
m o
f tax
reim
burs
emen
t.
54. T
he fi
rst p
robl
em w
as th
at o
f det
erm
inin
g w
heth
er o
utsi
de in
com
e sh
ould
be
take
n in
to a
ccou
nt a
nd, i
f so,
by w
hat m
etho
d. A
s th
e K
afka
Rep
ort n
oted
, sin
ce th
e U
nite
d S
tate
s ta
x sy
stem
is p
rogr
essi
ve, i
t mak
es a
diffe
renc
e to
the
amou
nt to
be
reim
burs
ed if
out
side
inco
me
is re
gard
ed a
s to
p or
bot
tom
inco
me,
or i
f it i
sgi
ven
equa
l wei
ght w
ith o
rgan
izat
ion
inco
me.
As
has
been
see
n, th
e B
y-La
ws
adop
ted
the
prin
cipl
e th
at “i
tsh
all b
e pr
esum
ed fo
r th
e pu
rpos
es o
f the
com
puta
tion
that
the
inco
me
rece
ived
from
the
Ban
k is
his
(the
empl
oyee
's)
tota
l inc
ome”
. Spe
cial
pro
blem
s w
ere
to a
rise,
how
ever
, reg
ardi
ng th
e ef
fect
of a
spo
use'
s in
com
e.
55. T
he s
econ
d pr
oble
m re
late
d to
ded
uctio
ns. I
t has
bee
n ex
plai
ned
in th
e fo
llow
ing
term
s in
the
mem
oran
dum
of th
e G
ener
al C
ouns
el a
nd o
f the
Tre
asur
er, d
ated
Dec
embe
r 5, 1
946:
“The
taxp
ayer
may
, at h
is o
ptio
n, in
mak
ing
his
tax
retu
rn ta
ke a
s de
duct
ions
the
actu
al a
mou
nts
of h
isex
pend
iture
s fo
r th
e al
low
able
item
s [in
tere
st, r
eal e
stat
e ta
xes,
cha
ritab
le g
ifts,
etc
.], in
whi
ch c
ase
he m
ust
be p
repa
red
to ju
stify
the
dedu
ctio
ns ta
ken,
or h
e m
ay ta
ke w
hat a
re c
alle
d st
anda
rd d
educ
tions
, tha
t is,
alu
mp
sum
whi
ch c
over
s al
l suc
h de
duct
ions
and
whi
ch h
e do
es n
ot h
ave
to ju
stify
.... O
bvio
usly
as
amon
gin
divi
dual
em
ploy
ees
of th
e B
ank
ther
e w
ill b
e a
grea
t div
ersi
ty a
s to
whe
ther
they
take
the
stan
dard
dedu
ctio
ns o
r act
ual d
educ
tions
, and
, in
the
latte
r ca
se, a
s to
the
kind
s an
d am
ount
s of
the
dedu
ctio
nsw
hich
are
take
n. If
the
Ban
k sh
ould
und
erta
ke to
com
pute
the
amou
nt o
f ded
uctio
ns ta
ken
by th
e pa
rticu
lar
empl
oyee
in c
ompu
ting
his
inco
me
tax,
that
wou
ld m
ean
that
the
Ban
k w
ould
hav
e to
mak
e an
inqu
iry in
toea
ch e
mpl
oyee
's ta
x re
turn
. Fur
ther
mor
e, in
the
case
of e
mpl
oyee
s ha
ving
inco
me
othe
r tha
n th
eir
sala
ries
from
the
Ban
k, it
wou
ld m
ean
that
the
Ban
k w
ould
hav
e to
det
erm
ine
how
the
dedu
ctio
ns s
houl
d be
allo
cate
d be
twee
n th
e em
ploy
ee's
sal
ary
and
his
othe
r inc
ome,
bec
ause
in m
any
case
s it
wou
ld b
e hi
ghly
ineq
uita
ble
to a
lloca
te a
ll su
ch d
educ
tions
to th
e em
ploy
ee's
sal
ary.
The
am
ount
of a
ccou
ntin
g an
din
vest
igat
ing
wor
k in
volv
ed w
ould
be
cons
ider
able
, not
to m
entio
n th
e an
noya
nce
to e
mpl
oyee
s of
suc
h a
scru
tiny
of th
eir
pers
onal
affa
irs.”
56. T
he T
ribun
al d
oes
not c
onsi
der i
t nec
essa
ry to
exa
min
e th
e pr
oble
m o
f the
trea
tmen
t of o
utsi
de in
com
e as
only
the
prob
lem
rela
ting
to d
educ
tions
aris
es in
the
pres
ent c
ase.
57. O
ther
inte
rnat
iona
l org
aniz
atio
ns w
ere
also
affe
cted
by
the
prob
lem
. Tha
t is
why
a “S
teer
ing
Com
mitt
ee o
nTa
x P
robl
ems
of In
tern
atio
nal O
rgan
izat
ions
Res
pect
ing
Met
hods
of T
ax R
eim
burs
emen
t by
Inte
rnat
iona
lO
rgan
izat
ions
” w
as e
stab
lishe
d. In
a R
epor
t iss
ued
in O
ctob
er 1
946,
the
Com
mitt
ee s
poke
of “
the
prob
lem
san
d is
sues
resp
ectin
g va
rious
met
hods
of t
ax re
imbu
rsem
ent o
f em
ploy
ees
by in
tern
atio
nal o
rgan
izat
ions
”, an
din
dica
ted
that
“the
cur
rent
reim
burs
emen
t sys
tem
s ad
opte
d by
inte
rnat
iona
l org
aniz
atio
ns n
eed
not b
e un
iform
as to
the
treat
men
t of e
xem
ptio
ns a
nd d
educ
tions
”. Th
e R
epor
t of t
he T
echn
ical
Sub
-Com
mitt
ee a
nnex
ed to
the
Rep
ort o
f the
Ste
erin
g C
omm
ittee
em
phas
ized
that
“Non
e of
the
tax
reim
burs
emen
t met
hods
ana
lyze
d w
ould
achi
eve
com
plet
e eq
ualit
y be
twee
n na
tiona
ls o
f diff
eren
t cou
ntrie
s ...
. Onl
y su
bsta
ntia
l equ
ality
of s
alar
ies
afte
rta
xes
is p
ract
ical
”. Th
e S
ub-C
omm
ittee
add
ed th
at th
e m
etho
d to
be
adop
ted
shou
ld s
atis
fy e
qual
ly th
eco
nditi
ons
of “s
impl
icity
in th
e ad
min
istra
tion
of ta
x re
imbu
rsem
ent a
nd u
nder
stan
dabi
lity
by th
e em
ploy
ees”
.Th
e S
ub-C
omm
ittee
pro
ceed
ed to
a d
etai
led
com
paris
on o
f the
“adv
anta
ges
and
disa
dvan
tage
s of
thre
e pl
ans
for
tax
reim
burs
emen
t by
inte
rnat
iona
l org
aniz
atio
ns” a
nd p
ropo
sed
one
whi
ch “o
n ba
lanc
e, m
eets
the
requ
irem
ents
set
forth
abo
ve”.
It ad
ded
that
“the
Com
mitt
ee is
stro
ngly
of t
he o
pini
on...
. tha
t a s
yste
m o
f
Dec
isio
ns
http
://ln
web
90.w
orld
bank
.org
/crn
/wbt
/wbt
web
site
.nsf
/(res
ults
web
)/470
F6C
6098
A11
FDF8
5256
9ED
006B
B87
7[5/
20/2
014
11:5
4:49
AM
]
stan
dard
ded
uctio
ns w
ill p
rove
nec
essa
ry u
nder
any
met
hod
of ta
x re
imbu
rsem
ent t
o av
oid
diffi
cult
adm
inis
trativ
e an
d po
licy
prob
lem
s”.
58. A
s a
resu
lt of
the
Ste
erin
g C
omm
ittee
's R
epor
t, th
e G
ener
al C
ouns
el a
nd th
e Tr
easu
rer o
f the
Ban
kre
com
men
ded
to th
e P
resi
dent
on
Dec
embe
r 5, 1
946
that
, for
the
reas
ons
of s
impl
icity
men
tione
d by
the
Com
mitt
ee, t
he B
ank
adop
t a ta
x re
imbu
rsem
ent s
yste
m b
ased
on
the
stan
dard
ded
uctio
n. T
hey
also
reco
mm
ende
d th
at th
e re
imbu
rsem
ent b
e in
an
amou
nt th
at, “
whe
n ad
ded
to ..
.. ne
t sal
ary,
will
yie
ld a
net
inco
me
for
the
year
, afte
r de
duct
ing
U.S
. inc
ome
taxe
s, a
t lea
st e
qual
to s
uch
net s
alar
y”.
59. O
n D
ecem
ber 1
0, 1
946,
the
Exe
cutiv
e D
irect
ors
adop
ted
the
reco
mm
enda
tions
of B
ank
Man
agem
ent.
They
deci
ded
inte
r al
ia th
at:
“In c
ompu
ting
the
amou
nt o
f suc
h ta
x re
imbu
rsem
ent,
ther
e sh
ould
be
dedu
cted
from
the
amou
nt o
f the
sala
ry o
f the
par
ticul
ar e
mpl
oyee
....
(b)
the
amou
nt o
f the
sta
ndar
d de
duct
ions
from
suc
h sa
lary
whi
ch a
real
low
able
und
er th
e U
.S. F
eder
al in
com
e ta
x la
w a
nd re
gula
tions
.”
60. T
he s
yste
m th
us a
dopt
ed b
y th
e B
ank
pres
ente
d on
e pe
culia
rity
to w
hich
it is
nec
essa
ry to
dra
w a
ttent
ion.
As
has
been
sai
d, th
e U
nite
d S
tate
s ta
x sy
stem
per
mits
a ta
xpay
er to
ded
uct f
rom
his
“adj
uste
d gr
oss
inco
me”
,w
ith a
vie
w to
the
calc
ulat
ion
of h
is “t
axab
le in
com
e”, a
t his
opt
ion,
eith
er a
“sta
ndar
d de
duct
ion”
or “
item
ized
dedu
ctio
ns” (
inte
rest
, cha
ritab
le c
ontri
butio
ns, s
tate
and
loca
l tax
es, e
tc.)
Obv
ious
ly e
ach
taxp
ayer
will
mak
eth
e ch
oice
whi
ch a
ssur
es h
im th
e la
rges
t ded
uctio
n; th
at is
, a c
hoic
e w
hich
pro
duce
s th
e sm
alle
st ta
xabl
ein
com
e an
d ta
xes.
Sin
ce th
e B
ank
deci
ded
in 1
946
to c
alcu
late
tax
reim
burs
emen
t on
the
basi
s of
the
stan
dard
dedu
ctio
n, e
ven
in c
ases
whe
re th
e em
ploy
ees
in fa
ct c
laim
ed it
emiz
ed d
educ
tions
in a
gre
ater
am
ount
, it
follo
wed
inev
itabl
y th
at in
the
latte
r ca
ses
the
empl
oyee
s w
ere
reim
burs
ed s
ums
in e
xces
s of
the
taxe
s ac
tual
lypa
id b
y th
em –
in s
hort
they
wer
e “o
ver-
reim
burs
ed”.
On
the
othe
r han
d, th
ere
was
no
poss
ibili
ty o
f “un
der-
reim
burs
emen
t”. W
ith th
e st
anda
rd d
educ
tion
syst
em a
sta
ff m
embe
r w
ould
alw
ays
rece
ive
a re
imbu
rsem
ent a
tle
ast e
qual
to h
is a
ctua
l fed
eral
tax
liabi
lity
on h
is B
ank
sala
ry b
ecau
se e
very
taxp
ayer
was
ent
itled
to th
est
anda
rd d
educ
tion
unde
r Uni
ted
Sta
tes
tax
law
; by
virtu
e of
the
stan
dard
ded
uctio
n, h
is a
fter-
tax
inco
me
coul
dno
t fal
l bel
ow h
is s
tate
d ne
t-of
-tax
sala
ry.
61. T
he fa
ct th
at th
ere
coul
d be
cas
es o
f rei
mbu
rsem
ent i
n ex
cess
of t
axes
was
take
n in
to c
onsi
dera
tion
at th
etim
e of
the
reco
mm
enda
tion
and
deci
sion
in 1
946.
The
Ste
erin
g C
omm
ittee
exp
ress
ly m
entio
ned
this
poss
ibili
ty: “
All
taxp
ayer
s...
with
ded
uctio
ns la
rger
than
sta
ndar
d w
ould
rece
ive
net s
alar
ies
high
er th
anst
ipul
ated
”, bu
t the
Com
mitt
ee im
med
iate
ly a
dded
: “H
owev
er, t
hese
add
ition
al a
mou
nts
are
gene
rally
not
rela
tivel
y la
rge
and
in o
ur o
pini
on w
ould
con
stitu
te to
lera
ble
diffe
renc
es”.
Lik
ewis
e th
e G
ener
al C
ouns
el a
nd th
eTr
easu
rer d
rew
atte
ntio
n to
this
pos
sibl
e co
nseq
uenc
e of
the
stan
dard
ded
uctio
n sy
stem
and
to th
e co
st th
at it
wou
ld in
volv
e fo
r th
e B
ank;
but
, the
y ad
ded:
“It i
s no
t bel
ieve
d th
at th
e sa
ving
to th
e B
ank
whi
ch w
ould
resu
ltfro
m a
mor
e ex
act m
etho
d of
com
puta
tion
wou
ld b
e su
ffici
ent t
o of
fset
the
disa
dvan
tage
to th
e B
ank
in h
avin
gto
mak
e a
spec
ial i
nves
tigat
ion
and
com
puta
tion
in e
ach
case
”.
62. O
ver
the
year
s th
e sy
stem
est
ablis
hed
in 1
946
unde
rwen
t a n
umbe
r of c
hang
es. M
ost o
f the
cha
nges
are
not r
elev
ant t
o th
e pr
esen
t pro
blem
, eith
er b
ecau
se th
ey d
id n
o m
ore
than
mak
e ne
cess
ary
adju
stm
ents
inco
nseq
uenc
e of
cha
nges
in U
nite
d S
tate
s ta
x le
gisl
atio
n, o
r bec
ause
they
wer
e co
ncer
ned
with
asp
ects
of
reim
burs
emen
t oth
er th
an th
at o
f ded
uctio
ns. O
nly
one
amen
dmen
t req
uire
s sp
ecia
l con
side
ratio
n. L
arge
incr
ease
s in
the
amou
nts
of s
tate
and
loca
l tax
es le
vied
on
empl
oyee
s re
sulte
d in
pay
men
t by
som
e em
ploy
ees
of s
tate
and
loca
l tax
es th
at e
xcee
ded,
som
etim
es b
y a
cons
ider
able
sum
, the
am
ount
of t
he s
tand
ard
dedu
ctio
n. T
hese
sta
te a
nd lo
cal t
axes
wer
e re
imbu
rsed
by
the
Ban
k. S
ince
an
empl
oyee
cou
ld c
laim
the
amou
nt o
f his
sta
te a
nd lo
cal t
axes
as
a de
duct
ion
on h
is fe
dera
l tax
retu
rn, i
t bec
ame
clea
r th
at s
ome
empl
oyee
s ha
d de
duct
ions
exc
eedi
ng th
e st
anda
rd d
educ
tion
used
as
the
basi
s fo
r th
e B
ank'
s ca
lcul
atio
ns, a
ndth
eref
ore
wer
e re
imbu
rsed
in e
xces
s of
thei
r ac
tual
fede
ral i
ncom
e ta
xes.
In 1
963,
in re
cogn
ition
of t
hech
ange
d ci
rcum
stan
ces,
the
Ban
k m
odifi
ed it
s po
licy
so th
at re
imbu
rsem
ents
wou
ld h
ence
forth
be
calc
ulat
edus
ing
the
stan
dard
ded
uctio
n or
the
amou
nt o
f sta
te a
nd lo
cal t
axes
, whi
chev
er w
as g
reat
er. A
lthou
gh th
ism
odifi
catio
n pr
oduc
ed a
n ad
vers
e im
pact
on
empl
oyee
s w
ho w
ere
alre
ady
wor
king
for
the
Ban
k, s
ince
they
wou
ld re
ceiv
e a
low
er re
imbu
rsem
ent t
han
unde
r the
form
er p
olic
y an
d th
us w
ould
hav
e a
low
er g
ross
sal
ary,
Dec
isio
ns
http
://ln
web
90.w
orld
bank
.org
/crn
/wbt
/wbt
web
site
.nsf
/(res
ults
web
)/470
F6C
6098
A11
FDF8
5256
9ED
006B
B87
7[5/
20/2
014
11:5
4:49
AM
]
the
chan
ge w
as a
pplie
d ac
ross
the
boar
d an
d w
ithou
t pro
test
from
the
staf
f.
63. T
he ta
x re
imbu
rsem
ent s
yste
m w
as c
odifi
ed in
the
Per
sonn
el M
anua
l Sta
tem
ent N
o. 3
.05
issu
ed D
ecem
ber
1973
, par
agra
ph 1
0 of
whi
ch re
ads:
“The
Ban
k G
roup
will
reim
burs
e ta
xes
on n
et-o
f-tax
sal
arie
s an
d on
allo
wan
ces
and
othe
r non
-sal
ary
paym
ents
whi
ch a
re re
quire
d to
be
incl
uded
in ta
xabl
e in
com
e, a
nd w
ith re
spec
t to
whi
ch n
o ex
pens
es a
rede
duct
ible
. Tax
es w
ill n
ot b
e re
imbu
rsed
on
allo
wan
ces
or n
on-s
alar
y pa
ymen
ts w
hich
are
not
requ
ired
tobe
incl
uded
in ta
xabl
e in
com
e or
with
resp
ect t
o w
hich
exp
ense
s ar
e de
duct
ible
. Tax
reim
burs
emen
ts w
ill b
eco
mpu
ted
on th
e ba
sis
of n
orm
al fi
ling
of ta
x re
turn
s at
the
appl
icab
le ta
x ra
tes
and
the
exem
ptio
ns a
nd th
est
anda
rd d
educ
tion
whi
ch a
sta
ff m
embe
r is
ent
itled
to c
laim
on
his
tax
retu
rns,
exc
ept t
hat i
n an
y ca
se in
whi
ch th
e st
ate
or lo
cal t
ax re
imbu
rsem
ents
mad
e to
a s
taff
mem
ber
durin
g a
year
exc
eede
d hi
s st
anda
rdde
duct
ion
for
fede
ral t
ax p
urpo
ses
his
stat
e or
loca
l tax
reim
burs
emen
ts w
ill b
e us
ed in
lieu
of t
he s
tand
ard
dedu
ctio
n in
com
putin
g hi
s fe
dera
l tax
reim
burs
emen
t. In
com
putin
g re
imbu
rsem
ent f
or a
sta
te o
r loc
al ta
xw
hen
no s
tand
ard
dedu
ctio
n is
pro
vide
d fo
r by
law
the
Ban
k G
roup
will
use
a d
educ
tion
of 1
0 pe
r ce
nt o
fco
mpe
nsat
ion
up to
$5,
000
or $
500,
whi
chev
er is
less
.” (e
mph
asis
add
ed)
64. G
radu
ally
, dou
bts
aros
e as
to th
e ad
equa
cy o
f thi
s sy
stem
in n
ew e
cono
mic
con
ditio
ns. I
nfla
tion
had
led
toin
crea
sed
sala
ry p
aym
ents
, whi
ch p
lace
d th
eir
reci
pien
ts in
con
stan
tly h
ighe
r bra
cket
s. T
he s
tand
ard
dedu
ctio
n,on
the
othe
r han
d, h
ad n
ot b
een
sign
ifica
ntly
incr
ease
d. A
lso
it ap
pear
ed th
at a
n in
crea
sing
num
ber o
f sta
ffm
embe
rs h
ad c
ome
to u
se it
emiz
ed d
educ
tions
, thu
s ob
tain
ing
mor
e by
way
of r
eim
burs
emen
t tha
n th
ey h
adpa
id b
y w
ay o
f tax
. The
pos
sibi
lity
of re
imbu
rsem
ent i
n ex
cess
of t
axes
pai
d, w
hich
in 1
946
had
been
thou
ght o
fas
rem
aini
ng in
frequ
ent a
nd u
nim
porta
nt, i
n fa
ct h
ad b
ecom
e in
crea
sing
ly fr
eque
nt a
nd m
ore
impo
rtant
.C
orre
spon
ding
ly, t
he c
ost o
f the
sys
tem
bec
ame
cons
tant
ly h
eavi
er fo
r th
e B
ank.
65. I
n or
der t
o as
sess
the
exac
t siz
e of
thes
e ch
ange
s, th
e B
ank
and
the
Fund
in 1
977
com
mis
sion
ed a
sur
vey
of ta
x re
imbu
rsem
ent b
y a
spec
ializ
ed fi
rm. B
ased
on
the
inco
me
tax
retu
rns
for
1976
of 1
,147
Ban
k an
d Fu
ndU
nite
d S
tate
s st
aff m
embe
rs, t
his
surv
ey le
d to
the
follo
win
g co
nclu
sion
s:
- Abo
ut 7
4% o
f sta
ff m
embe
rs e
ntitl
ed to
reim
burs
emen
t cla
imed
item
ized
ded
uctio
ns; o
nly
26%
use
d th
est
anda
rd d
educ
tion
on w
hich
the
tax
reim
burs
emen
t sys
tem
was
bas
ed. O
f tho
se c
laim
ing
item
ized
dedu
ctio
ns, m
ost w
ere
in th
e m
iddl
e or
hig
her i
ncom
e le
vels
; onl
y 36
% h
ad a
net
org
aniz
atio
n in
com
e of
less
than
$20
,000
. Virt
ually
all
(98%
) of
thos
e cl
aim
ing
the
stan
dard
ded
uctio
n ha
d ne
t org
aniz
atio
nin
com
es o
f les
s th
an $
25,0
00.
- Nea
rly 5
0% o
f tho
se e
ntitl
ed to
reim
burs
emen
t rec
eive
d re
imbu
rsem
ent i
n ex
cess
of t
he a
ctua
l tax
pai
d on
thei
r to
tal f
amily
inco
me,
that
is n
ot m
erel
y in
resp
ect o
f org
aniz
atio
n co
mpe
nsat
ion,
but
in re
spec
t of a
llso
urce
s of
inco
me.
- The
ove
rall
aver
age
exce
ss re
imbu
rsem
ent w
as o
ver
$2,3
00 p
er s
taff
mem
ber.
Thi
s ex
cess
rang
ed fr
om$1
50 a
t the
low
inco
me
leve
ls to
a m
axim
um o
f mor
e th
an $
4,00
0 at
the
high
est i
ncom
e le
vels
.
- Mor
e th
an 6
8% o
f all
staf
f sur
veye
d w
ho h
ad in
com
e ab
ove
the
$20,
000
leve
l rec
eive
d a
reim
burs
emen
t in
exce
ss o
f tax
pai
d on
tota
l fam
ily in
com
e.
- Slig
htly
mor
e th
an 5
0% p
aid
som
e ta
x on
tota
l fam
ily in
com
e in
exc
ess
of th
eir
tax
reim
burs
emen
t.H
owev
er, t
he a
utho
rs o
f the
sur
vey
did
not f
eel a
ble
to d
raw
any
con
clus
ion
from
this
fact
, sin
ce w
hene
ver a
staf
f mem
ber
had
non-
orga
niza
tion
inco
me
it w
ould
be
reas
onab
le th
at s
ome
tax
in e
xces
s of
the
reim
burs
emen
t wou
ld b
e pa
yabl
e.
66. I
n 19
77, t
he p
robl
em o
f tax
reim
burs
emen
t was
sub
mitt
ed, t
oget
her w
ith o
ther
asp
ects
of c
ompe
nsat
ion
polic
y, to
the
Join
t Com
mitt
ee o
n S
taff
Com
pens
atio
n Is
sues
(the
Kaf
ka C
omm
ittee
). C
hapt
er 6
of t
he K
afka
Rep
ort i
dent
ified
the
follo
win
g fa
ctor
s as
pro
foun
dly
alte
ring
the
reas
ons
whi
ch h
ad le
d to
the
adop
tion
of th
e19
46 s
yste
m:
Dec
isio
ns
http
://ln
web
90.w
orld
bank
.org
/crn
/wbt
/wbt
web
site
.nsf
/(res
ults
web
)/470
F6C
6098
A11
FDF8
5256
9ED
006B
B87
7[5/
20/2
014
11:5
4:49
AM
]
“Ove
r tim
e, in
flatio
n an
d ch
ange
s w
ithin
the
Uni
ted
Sta
tes
tax
stru
ctur
e ha
ve w
iden
ed th
e di
ffere
nce
betw
een
stan
dard
ded
uctio
ns a
nd th
ose
whi
ch m
ay b
e cl
aim
ed b
y ite
miz
ing
dedu
ctio
ns. T
he ta
x br
acke
tsan
d ab
solu
te a
mou
nts
of s
tand
ard
dedu
ctio
ns u
nder
the
U.S
. Tax
Cod
e ha
ve n
ot b
een
fully
adj
uste
d to
refle
ct p
rice
leve
l cha
nges
, but
item
ized
ded
uctio
ns, s
uch
as m
ortg
age
inte
rest
pay
men
ts a
nd re
al e
stat
eta
xes,
hav
e ge
nera
lly k
ept p
ace
with
thes
e ch
ange
s. T
his
has
led
to a
con
side
rabl
e in
crea
se in
the
prac
tice
of it
emiz
ing.
”
The
Rep
ort a
dded
that
the
cost
to th
e B
ank
of ta
x re
imbu
rsem
ent h
ad m
ount
ed fr
om $
300,
000
in 1
946
to$1
8,90
2,00
0 in
197
8, re
pres
entin
g an
incr
ease
from
2.4
% o
f the
tota
l adm
inis
trativ
e bu
dget
to 7
.2%
and
sta
ted:
“In th
e lig
ht o
f the
se re
sults
, we
conc
lude
d th
at th
e pr
esen
t sys
tem
is in
defe
nsib
le a
nd s
houl
d be
cha
nged
.”
67. I
n or
der t
o re
plac
e th
is s
yste
m a
nd to
find
a s
olut
ion
whi
ch w
as a
ppro
pria
te “i
n te
rms
of in
tern
al e
quity
and
econ
omy
for
the
inst
itutio
ns”,
the
Rep
ort s
tate
d th
at th
ere
wer
e a
varie
ty o
f sys
tem
s av
aila
ble,
non
e of
whi
chw
as b
y its
elf e
ntire
ly s
atis
fact
ory:
“The
re is
cle
arly
sco
pe fo
r di
sagr
eem
ent,
not m
erel
y ab
out t
he o
bjec
tives
of a
tax
reim
burs
emen
t sys
tem
,bu
t abo
ut th
eir
rela
tive
impo
rtanc
e. E
ven
a cu
rsor
y ex
amin
atio
n of
pos
sibl
e al
tern
ativ
e sy
stem
s re
veal
s th
atno
sin
gle
one
fully
mee
ts a
ll th
e ob
ject
ives
.”
The
prin
cipa
l obj
ectiv
e of
the
syst
em s
houl
d, a
ccor
ding
to th
e R
epor
t, be
the
achi
evem
ent o
f equ
ity. H
owev
er,
the
Rep
ort a
dded
, thi
s w
as a
diff
icul
t not
ion
to d
efin
e, fo
r va
rious
kin
ds o
f equ
ity m
ight
be
iden
tifie
d –
asbe
twee
n U
nite
d S
tate
s na
tiona
ls a
nd e
xpat
riate
sta
ff (“
inte
rnal
equ
ity”)
; as
betw
een
Uni
ted
Sta
tes
natio
nals
empl
oyed
by
the
orga
niza
tions
and
thos
e em
ploy
ed o
utsi
de (“
exte
rnal
equ
ity”)
; and
am
ong
Uni
ted
Sta
tes
natio
nals
at d
iffer
ent i
ncom
e le
vels
and
with
or w
ithou
t out
side
inco
me.
Oth
er o
bjec
tives
had
, acc
ordi
ng to
the
Rep
ort,
also
to b
e bo
rne
in m
ind:
eas
e of
adm
inis
tratio
n –
“som
e sy
stem
s ar
e fa
r m
ore
com
plic
ated
than
othe
rs”;
cost
– “t
he c
ost t
o th
e in
stitu
tions
is c
erta
inly
a fa
ctor
to b
e ta
ken
into
acc
ount
but
can
not b
e th
e so
lecr
iterio
n fo
r ch
oosi
ng o
ne s
yste
m a
s ag
ains
t ano
ther
”; c
ompr
ehen
sibi
lity;
and
, as
a su
bsid
iary
con
side
ratio
n,co
nfid
entia
lity.
68. T
he R
epor
t con
side
red
seve
ral p
ossi
ble
alte
rnat
ives
, inc
ludi
ng th
e sy
stem
use
d in
the
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
, and
set o
ut th
eir
resp
ectiv
e ad
vant
ages
and
dis
adva
ntag
es. I
t exp
ress
ed a
pre
fere
nce
for
an a
vera
ge d
educ
tions
syst
em u
nder
whi
ch th
e ta
x re
imbu
rsed
wou
ld n
ot e
xcee
d th
e av
erag
e ta
x pa
id b
y pe
rson
s th
roug
hout
the
Uni
ted
Sta
tes
at th
e sa
me
inco
me
leve
l as
the
staf
f mem
ber.
Thi
s sy
stem
impl
ied
that
it w
ould
stil
l be
open
toth
e in
divi
dual
sta
ff m
embe
r to
cla
im a
sta
ndar
d de
duct
ion
or to
item
ize
his
dedu
ctio
ns b
ut in
no
case
wou
ld h
isre
imbu
rsem
ent e
xcee
d th
e av
erag
e pa
id b
y hi
s co
unte
rpar
t in
outs
ide
empl
oym
ent.
The
Rep
ort s
aw v
ario
usad
vant
ages
for
this
sys
tem
, par
ticul
arly
in v
iew
of “
the
perc
eptio
n of
Am
eric
ans
outs
ide
the
Ban
k an
d Fu
nd o
fho
w th
eir
com
patri
ots
insi
de th
e tw
o in
stitu
tions
are
trea
ted”
. How
ever
, whi
le e
xpre
ssin
g th
eir
pref
eren
ce fo
rth
is s
yste
m o
ver
othe
rs, t
he a
utho
rs o
f the
Rep
ort t
ook
care
to e
mph
asiz
e th
at th
ere
was
no
sing
lech
arac
teris
tic o
f any
one
sch
eme
whi
ch c
oncl
usiv
ely
indi
cate
d th
at th
at s
chem
e sh
ould
be
favo
ured
bef
ore
all
othe
rs.
69. O
n th
e ba
sis
of th
is R
epor
t, th
e E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
s de
cide
d on
May
24,
197
9 to
intro
duce
the
aver
age
dedu
ctio
ns s
yste
m, w
ith e
ffect
from
Jan
uary
1, 1
980,
sub
ject
to tw
o co
nditi
ons
whi
ch h
ad n
ot b
een
prop
osed
by
the
Kaf
ka C
omm
ittee
, nam
ely,
a fi
ve-y
ear
trans
ition
per
iod
and
othe
r app
ropr
iate
saf
egua
rds.
70. T
he P
erso
nnel
Man
ual C
ircul
ar 1
/80,
dat
ed J
anua
ry 2
1, 1
980,
whi
ch
info
rmed
sta
ff of
the
new
sys
tem
sta
ted:
“... t
he a
rran
gem
ents
for
the
reim
burs
emen
t of t
axes
on
sala
ries
and
allo
wan
ces
paid
by
the
Wor
ld B
ank,
as
desc
ribed
in P
erso
nnel
Man
ual S
tate
men
t 3.0
5, s
houl
d be
repl
aced
, effe
ctiv
e Ja
nuar
y 1,
198
0, b
y a
syst
emof
tax
allo
wan
ces
base
d on
ave
rage
ded
uctio
ns ..
. Thi
s ci
rcul
ar, t
here
fore
, am
ends
and
sup
erse
des
in fa
ctth
e pr
ovis
ions
of P
MS
3.0
5 ...
PM
S 3
.05
will
be
revi
sed
in d
ue c
ours
e. In
the
mea
ntim
e, it
s pr
ovis
ions
will
cont
inue
to a
pply
exc
ept t
o th
e ex
tent
nec
essa
ry to
refle
ct th
e ch
ange
s an
noun
ced
in th
is M
anua
l Circ
ular
.”
Dec
isio
ns
http
://ln
web
90.w
orld
bank
.org
/crn
/wbt
/wbt
web
site
.nsf
/(res
ults
web
)/470
F6C
6098
A11
FDF8
5256
9ED
006B
B87
7[5/
20/2
014
11:5
4:49
AM
]
The
Circ
ular
reca
lled
that
“the
bas
ic c
once
pt o
f the
new
sys
tem
is to
pro
vide
for
U.S
. sta
ff m
embe
rs a
tax
allo
wan
ce e
quiv
alen
t to
the
aver
age
taxe
s pa
id b
y th
e ge
nera
lity
of U
.S. t
axpa
yers
at t
he s
ame
inco
me
leve
l”.C
onse
quen
tly, a
ccor
ding
to th
e C
ircul
ar, t
he E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
s re
com
men
ded
to th
e B
oard
of G
over
nors
that
Sec
tion
14(b
) of t
he B
ank'
s B
y-La
ws
be a
men
ded
effe
ctiv
e Ja
nuar
y 1,
198
0 to
read
:
“Pen
ding
the
nece
ssar
y ac
tion
bein
g ta
ken
by m
embe
rs to
exe
mpt
from
nat
iona
l tax
atio
n sa
larie
s an
dal
low
ance
s pa
id o
ut o
f the
bud
get o
f the
Ban
k, th
e G
over
nors
and
the
Exe
cutiv
e D
irect
ors,
thei
r A
ltern
ates
,th
e P
resi
dent
, and
sta
ff m
embe
rs a
nd o
ther
em
ploy
ees
of th
e B
ank,
exc
ept t
hose
who
se e
mpl
oym
ent
cont
ract
s st
ate
othe
rwis
e, s
hall
rece
ive
from
the
Ban
k a
tax
allo
wan
ce th
at th
e E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
sde
term
ine
to b
e re
ason
ably
rela
ted
to th
e ta
xes
paid
by
them
on
such
sal
arie
s an
d al
low
ance
s.
“In c
ompu
ting
the
amou
nt o
f tax
adj
ustm
ent t
o be
mad
e w
ith re
spec
t to
any
indi
vidu
al, i
t sha
ll be
pre
sum
edfo
r th
e pu
rpos
es o
f the
com
puta
tion
that
the
inco
me
rece
ived
from
the
Ban
k is
his
tota
l inc
ome.
All
sala
ries
and
allo
wan
ces
pres
crib
ed b
y or
pur
suan
t to
this
sec
tion
are
stat
ed a
s ne
t on
the
abov
e ba
sis.
” (e
mph
asis
adde
d)
This
reco
mm
enda
tion
was
sub
sequ
ently
ado
pted
by
the
Boa
rd o
f Gov
erno
rs a
nd n
ow fo
rms
Sec
tion
13(b
) of
the
By-
Law
s.
71. T
he E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
s de
cide
d, s
o th
e C
ircul
ar s
tate
d, th
at th
e ne
w s
yste
m s
houl
d ap
ply
imm
edia
tely
and
fully
onl
y to
thos
e st
aff m
embe
rs “w
ho a
ccep
t offe
rs o
f app
oint
men
t on
or a
fter
Janu
ary
1, 1
980”
. As
rega
rds
the
“exi
stin
g st
aff”,
that
is, t
he s
taff
who
wer
e on
dut
y pr
ior
to J
anua
ry 1
, 198
0 or
who
had
form
ally
acc
epte
dof
fers
of a
ppoi
ntm
ent b
efor
e th
at d
ate,
two
spec
ial p
rovi
sion
s w
ere
laid
dow
n. F
irst,
“in o
rder
to a
llevi
ate
the
impa
ct o
f the
cha
nge,
for
exis
ting
staf
f the
new
sys
tem
of t
ax a
llow
ance
s w
ill b
e in
trodu
ced
prog
ress
ivel
y ov
era
five-
year
per
iod”
. Sec
ond,
the
Exe
cutiv
e D
irect
ors
wis
hed
to ta
ke in
to a
ccou
nt th
e fa
ct th
at th
e ta
xal
low
ance
s un
der t
he n
ew s
yste
m w
ould
onl
y be
“rea
sona
bly
rela
ted”
to th
e ta
xes
effe
ctiv
ely
paid
by
each
sta
ffm
embe
r in
suc
h a
way
that
, in
the
term
s of
the
Circ
ular
, “th
e ta
x al
low
ance
s w
ill ra
rely
exa
ctly
equ
al th
e ta
xes
paya
ble
– it
may
be
mor
e, it
may
be
less
”. Th
at is
why
it w
as d
ecid
ed, s
aid
the
Circ
ular
,
“... t
hat t
he B
ank
will
con
tinue
to a
pply
to e
xist
ing
staf
f, fo
r th
e du
ratio
n of
thei
r se
rvic
e w
ith th
e B
ank,
asa
fegu
ard
cons
iste
nt w
ith th
e pr
ovis
ions
of s
ectio
n 14
(b) o
f the
form
er B
y-La
ws
of th
e B
ank
so a
s to
ens
ure
that
, as
a m
inim
um, s
uch
staf
f are
reim
burs
ed fo
r th
e ta
xes
they
are
requ
ired
to p
ay o
n th
eir
inco
me
from
the
Ban
k” (e
mph
asis
in th
e or
igin
al te
xt).
The
Circ
ular
sta
ted
that
in c
onse
quen
ce “a
ny e
xist
ing
staf
f mem
ber
who
… c
onsi
ders
that
the
tota
l am
ount
of
the
tax
allo
wan
ce re
ceiv
ed ..
. is
less
than
the
taxe
s du
e on
Ban
k in
com
e m
ay c
hoos
e to
app
ly fo
r a
supp
lem
enta
ry p
aym
ent”.
Thi
s pr
ovis
ion
is c
omm
only
refe
rred
to a
s th
e “s
afet
y-ne
t”.
72. T
he T
ribun
al m
ust n
ow a
sses
s w
heth
er in
ado
ptin
g th
e ne
w ta
x re
imbu
rsem
ent s
yste
m th
e B
ank
has
mad
ean
unl
awfu
l uni
late
ral c
hang
e in
the
cond
ition
s of
em
ploy
men
t of t
he fo
ur A
pplic
ants
affe
cted
.
73. T
he R
espo
nden
t con
tend
ed th
at th
e st
anda
rd d
educ
tion
syst
em w
as n
ot in
clud
ed in
the
cond
ition
s of
empl
oym
ent o
f the
App
lican
ts p
rior
to 1
979
but i
nste
ad a
mou
nted
to n
o m
ore
than
a m
ere
proc
edur
e no
tfo
rmin
g pa
rt o
f the
lega
l rel
atio
nshi
p be
twee
n th
e B
ank
and
the
App
lican
ts. T
he T
ribun
al c
anno
t acc
ept t
his
view
. The
Ban
k ru
led
in 1
946,
and
sub
sequ
ently
con
firm
ed th
is ru
ling
on v
ario
us o
ccas
ions
, par
ticul
arly
by
issu
ing
P.M
.S. 3
.05
in D
ecem
ber 1
973,
that
the
amou
nt o
f rei
mbu
rsem
ent s
houl
d be
cal
cula
ted
on th
e ba
sis
ofth
e pr
esum
ptio
n th
at a
ll U
nite
d S
tate
s st
aff m
embe
rs h
ad b
enef
ited
from
the
stan
dard
ded
uctio
n, w
ithou
t tak
ing
acco
unt o
f the
indi
vidu
al p
ositi
ons
in w
hich
this
or t
hat s
taff
mem
ber
had
in fa
ct c
laim
ed la
rger
item
ized
dedu
ctio
ns. T
he B
ank
rule
d in
196
3 th
at th
e st
anda
rd d
educ
tion
shou
ld b
e re
plac
ed b
y a
dedu
ctio
nco
rres
pond
ing
to s
tate
and
loca
l tax
pay
able
in c
ases
whe
re th
ose
paym
ents
exc
eede
d th
e am
ount
of t
hest
anda
rd d
educ
tion.
Suc
h ru
lings
, by
whi
ch th
e co
mpe
tent
aut
horit
ies
of th
e B
ank
esta
blis
hed
lega
l nor
ms,
wer
eun
deni
ably
par
t of t
he c
ondi
tions
of e
mpl
oym
ent o
f the
sta
ff m
embe
rs. T
he T
ribun
al c
onsi
ders
ther
efor
e th
atth
e pr
ovis
ions
of P
.M.S
. 3.0
5 pr
ovid
ing
for
tax
reim
burs
emen
t on
the
basi
s of
the
stan
dard
ded
uctio
n
Dec
isio
ns
http
://ln
web
90.w
orld
bank
.org
/crn
/wbt
/wbt
web
site
.nsf
/(res
ults
web
)/470
F6C
6098
A11
FDF8
5256
9ED
006B
B87
7[5/
20/2
014
11:5
4:49
AM
]
esta
blis
hed
by U
nite
d S
tate
s le
gisl
atio
n fo
rmed
par
t of t
he c
ondi
tions
of e
mpl
oym
ent o
f the
App
lican
ts L
amso
n-S
crib
ner,
Ree
se, R
eism
an-T
oof a
nd S
hapi
ro a
t the
dat
e w
hen
the
Ban
k to
ok th
e de
cisi
on to
“rep
lace
”, “a
men
d”an
d “s
uper
sede
” the
m b
y th
e te
rms
of C
ircul
ar 1
/80.
74. H
avin
g re
ache
d th
is c
oncl
usio
n, th
e Tr
ibun
al m
ust n
ow c
onsi
der w
heth
er th
e in
trodu
ctio
n of
the
new
prov
isio
ns in
rela
tion
to th
e fo
ur A
pplic
ants
cha
nges
the
fund
amen
tal a
nd e
ssen
tial e
lem
ents
of t
heir
cond
ition
sof
em
ploy
men
t.
75. T
he c
ondi
tions
in w
hich
the
tax
reim
burs
emen
t sys
tem
wer
e es
tabl
ishe
d fro
m th
e or
igin
of t
he B
ank
show
that
this
sys
tem
rest
ed o
n tw
o in
here
ntly
fund
amen
tal p
rinci
ples
, des
igne
d to
ens
ure
the
equa
lity
amon
g st
aff
mem
bers
of t
he B
ank
as a
n in
tern
atio
nal o
rgan
izat
ion,
rega
rdle
ss o
f the
ir na
tiona
lity.
The
firs
t is
that
all
empl
oyee
s of
the
Ban
k sh
ould
rece
ive
a sa
lary
free
of n
atio
nal t
axes
, as
was
exp
ress
ly s
tate
d in
Arti
cle
VII,
Sec
tion
9(b)
of t
he A
rticl
es o
f Agr
eem
ent.
That
is w
hy th
e le
tters
of a
ppoi
ntm
ent f
rom
the
very
beg
inni
ng fi
xed
sala
ries
in n
et te
rms,
and
all
incl
uded
the
follo
win
g st
atem
ent:
“You
r sa
lary
will
be
at th
e ra
te o
f ....
per
ann
uman
d w
ill b
e ne
t of i
ncom
e ta
xes
as p
rese
ntly
and
her
eafte
r pr
ovid
ed in
the
By-
Law
s an
d R
egul
atio
ns o
f the
Ban
k”. T
he s
econ
d pr
inci
ple,
a lo
gica
l cor
olla
ry o
f the
firs
t, is
that
thos
e st
aff m
embe
rs o
f the
Ban
k w
ho w
ere
subj
ect t
o ta
x by
thei
r S
tate
wou
ld h
ave
the
right
to b
e re
imbu
rsed
by
the
Ban
k fo
r th
e ta
xes
whi
ch th
ey w
ere
requ
ired
to p
ay. T
his
prin
cipl
e w
as s
et o
ut in
By-
Law
14(
b), b
y w
hich
the
Boa
rd o
f Gov
erno
rs d
ecid
ed in
194
6th
at “p
endi
ng n
eces
sary
act
ion
take
n by
mem
ber
gove
rnm
ents
to e
xem
pt ..
.” th
e B
ank
wou
ld re
imbu
rse
thos
eaf
fect
ed a
nd, m
ore
parti
cula
rly, t
he U
.S. s
taff
mem
bers
“for
the
taxe
s w
hich
they
are
requ
ired
to p
ay”.
Suc
h ar
eth
e fu
ndam
enta
l and
ess
entia
l ele
men
ts o
f the
con
ditio
ns o
f em
ploy
men
t of s
taff
recr
uite
d be
fore
Jan
uary
1,
1980
. The
cha
ract
er o
f the
saf
ety-
net m
echa
nism
add
ed b
y th
e B
ank
to th
e re
com
men
datio
ns o
f the
Kaf
kaR
epor
t con
stitu
tes
in th
e ci
rcum
stan
ces
of th
e pr
esen
t cas
e an
impl
icit
reco
gniti
on o
f the
fund
amen
tal c
hara
cter
of th
ese
elem
ents
.
76. T
he p
rinci
ple
of “r
eim
burs
emen
t for
the
taxe
s w
hich
they
are
requ
ired
to p
ay”
may
be
impl
emen
ted
in a
varie
ty o
f way
s, e
spec
ially
as
rega
rds
the
dedu
ctio
ns w
hich
are
to b
e ta
ken
into
acc
ount
. Var
ious
met
hods
of
calc
ulat
ion
are
poss
ible
. It i
s po
ssib
le, f
or e
xam
ple,
to e
xam
ine
the
indi
vidu
al s
ituat
ion
of e
ach
staf
f mem
ber
and
take
acc
ount
of i
tem
ized
ded
uctio
ns a
ctua
lly c
laim
ed; i
t is
poss
ible
als
o to
ado
pt th
e pr
esum
ptio
n of
ast
anda
rd d
educ
tion
or o
f ave
rage
ded
uctio
ns. A
bal
ance
has
to b
e st
ruck
am
ong
vario
us fa
ctor
s (e
quity
,si
mpl
icity
, cos
t) w
hich
som
etim
es c
ontra
dict
one
ano
ther
: rig
orou
s ex
actn
ess
cann
ot b
e ac
hiev
ed s
ave
at th
epr
ice
of c
ompl
icat
ions
; a s
impl
e so
lutio
n ca
n on
ly b
e ac
hiev
ed a
t the
cos
t of a
ppro
xim
atio
n. O
n al
l the
sequ
estio
ns it
was
by
a re
ason
ed ju
dgm
ent a
nd a
fter
a ba
lanc
e of
con
side
ratio
ns th
at th
e co
mpe
tent
aut
horit
ies
of th
e B
ank
pref
erre
d on
e fo
rmul
a to
ano
ther
, bei
ng c
onsc
ious
that
non
e co
uld
be p
erfe
ct in
all
resp
ects
.
77. T
his
dist
inct
ion
betw
een
the
prin
cipl
es o
f tax
reim
burs
emen
t and
the
met
hod
of im
plem
enta
tion
was
expr
esse
d as
ear
ly a
s in
the
Rep
ort o
f the
Ste
erin
g C
omm
ittee
of O
ctob
er 1
946.
The
Mem
oran
dum
add
ress
edto
the
Pre
side
nt s
ome
wee
ks la
ter,
on
Dec
embe
r 5, 1
946,
dea
lt at
leng
th w
ith w
hat i
t cal
led
the
“Met
hods
of
Com
putin
g th
e am
ount
of t
ax re
imbu
rsem
ent”
and
reco
mm
ende
d “th
at th
e ta
x re
imbu
rsem
ent b
e co
mpu
ted
onth
e ba
sis
of ..
. sta
ndar
d de
duct
ions
” rat
her t
han
on “a
mor
e ex
act m
etho
d of
com
puta
tion”
whi
ch w
ould
be
mor
eco
mpl
ex. T
he d
ecis
ion
of th
e E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
s of
Dec
embe
r 10,
194
6 ch
ose
the
met
hod
of s
tand
ard
dedu
ctio
n “in
com
putin
g th
e am
ount
of s
uch
tax
reim
burs
emen
t”. N
early
twen
ty y
ears
late
r, th
e re
form
of 1
963
was
pre
sent
ed b
y th
e P
resi
dent
as
a m
odifi
catio
n of
“the
Ban
k's
calc
ulat
ion
met
hod”
or o
f “th
e st
anda
rdde
duct
ion
met
hod”
. The
rele
vant
par
agra
ph o
f P.M
.S. N
o. 3
.05,
issu
ed in
Dec
embe
r 197
3, is
pla
ced
unde
r the
doub
le h
eadi
ng: “
IV. P
roce
dure
. A. C
ompu
tatio
n”. I
t thu
s ap
pear
s cl
early
from
the
rele
vant
doc
umen
tssu
bmitt
ed to
the
Trib
unal
that
if th
e rig
ht to
a s
alar
y ne
t of t
axes
and
the
right
to b
e “r
eim
burs
ed fo
r th
e ta
xes
they
are
requ
ired
to p
ay”
cons
titut
ed a
t the
tim
e of
alle
ged
nono
bser
vanc
e –
and
in fa
ct s
ince
194
6 –
afu
ndam
enta
l and
ess
entia
l ele
men
t of t
he te
rms
of a
ppoi
ntm
ent o
f the
four
Uni
ted
Sta
tes
App
lican
ts, t
he s
ame
is n
ot tr
ue o
f the
sta
ndar
d de
duct
ion,
sim
ple
met
hod
of c
alcu
latio
n or
pro
cedu
re o
f com
puta
tion.
78. I
t may
be
reca
lled
that
sev
eral
asp
ects
of t
he m
etho
d of
cal
cula
tion
of ta
x re
imbu
rsem
ent w
ere
inde
edun
ilate
rally
cha
nged
by
the
Ban
k be
fore
197
9. T
he 1
963
amen
dmen
t whi
ch –
in a
par
ticul
ar s
ituat
ion
refe
rred
toin
par
agra
ph 6
2 –
repl
aced
the
stan
dard
ded
uctio
n by
an
item
ized
ded
uctio
n co
nstit
utes
a s
igni
fican
t pre
cede
ntsh
owin
g th
at th
e m
etho
d of
com
puta
tion
of re
imbu
rsem
ent e
stab
lishe
d in
194
6 on
the
basi
s of
the
stan
dard
Dec
isio
ns
http
://ln
web
90.w
orld
bank
.org
/crn
/wbt
/wbt
web
site
.nsf
/(res
ults
web
)/470
F6C
6098
A11
FDF8
5256
9ED
006B
B87
7[5/
20/2
014
11:5
4:49
AM
]
dedu
ctio
n w
as n
ot s
acro
sanc
t and
cou
ld b
e m
odifi
ed fr
om ti
me
to ti
me.
79. T
he A
pplic
ants
insi
st b
oth
in th
eir
writ
ten
and
thei
r or
al p
lead
ings
on
the
wei
ght w
hich
they
atta
ched
to th
eir
gros
s in
com
e w
hen
they
dec
ided
to a
ccep
t the
Ban
k's
offe
r of
em
ploy
men
t or t
o re
mai
n w
ith th
e B
ank
rath
erth
an to
see
k m
ore
rem
uner
ativ
e po
sitio
ns e
lsew
here
. The
y m
aint
ain
that
the
poss
ibili
ty o
f rei
mbu
rsem
ent i
nex
cess
of t
axes
pai
d co
nstit
uted
an
inte
gral
par
t of t
heir
gros
s re
mun
erat
ion:
“The
am
ount
of r
eim
burs
emen
t,w
hate
ver i
ts re
latio
nshi
p to
the
taxe
s ac
tual
ly p
aid,
was
an
inte
gral
par
t of t
he U
nite
d S
tate
s st
aff m
embe
rsco
mpe
nsat
ion
… th
e st
anda
rd d
educ
tion
tax
reim
burs
emen
t for
mul
a w
as a
n es
tabl
ishe
d an
d si
gnifi
cant
par
t of
the
Uni
ted
Sta
tes
staf
f mem
bers
' com
pens
atio
n pa
ckag
e an
d co
ntrib
uted
a s
ubst
antia
l ind
ucem
ent f
or m
any
ofth
em to
acc
ept e
mpl
oym
ent a
t the
net
sal
arie
s se
t for
th in
thei
r le
tters
of a
ppoi
ntm
ent”.
80. A
s th
e Tr
ibun
al h
as c
oncl
uded
that
the
stan
dard
ded
uctio
n m
etho
d is
not
a fu
ndam
enta
l ele
men
t of t
heco
nditi
ons
of e
mpl
oym
ent o
f App
lican
ts, i
t fol
low
s th
at th
e de
term
inat
ion
of th
e gr
oss
inco
me
and
the
poss
ibili
tyof
reim
burs
emen
t in
exce
ss o
f tax
es, w
hich
are
but
cor
olla
ries
of th
is m
etho
d, a
re e
qual
ly n
on-e
ssen
tial
elem
ents
of t
he c
ondi
tions
of e
mpl
oym
ent o
f the
App
lican
ts. I
n an
y ev
ent,
any
info
rmat
ion
give
n to
App
lican
tsbe
fore
thei
r em
ploy
men
t with
the
Ban
k ab
out a
ny a
ppro
xim
ate
gros
s in
com
e fig
ures
mus
t be
deem
edsu
pers
eded
by
the
expl
icit
prov
isio
ns re
ferr
ing
to n
et s
alar
y in
the
lette
rs o
f app
oint
men
t.
81. T
he p
rece
ding
obs
erva
tions
are
rein
forc
ed b
y th
e st
atem
ents
mad
e in
the
broc
hure
of t
he Y
oung
Pro
fess
iona
ls P
rogr
am to
whi
ch a
ttent
ion
was
dra
wn
by A
pplic
ant S
hapi
ro. T
he re
leva
nt te
xt o
f the
bro
chur
e is
as fo
llow
s:
“At t
he p
rese
nt ti
me,
You
ng P
rofe
ssio
nal s
alar
ies
rang
e be
twee
n …
and
… d
olla
rs a
yea
r, n
et o
f inc
ome
taxe
s. In
cas
es w
here
sal
arie
s ar
e ta
xabl
e, th
e am
ount
pai
d in
taxa
tion
by th
e st
aff m
embe
r on
his
Ban
ksa
lary
is re
imbu
rsed
by
the
Ban
k”.
This
is a
rest
atem
ent o
f the
two
fund
amen
tal p
rinci
ples
of n
et s
alar
y fo
r al
l and
of r
eim
burs
emen
t of t
axes
for
the
Uni
ted
Sta
tes
staf
f mem
bers
. The
bro
chur
e do
es n
ot in
dica
te a
ny p
artic
ular
met
hod
of c
alcu
latio
n, it
doe
sno
t spe
ak o
f a s
tand
ard
dedu
ctio
n fo
rmul
a, a
nd it
doe
s no
t men
tion
gros
s in
com
e, le
t alo
ne re
imbu
rsem
ent i
nex
cess
of t
axes
.
82. A
ccor
ding
ly, t
he T
ribun
al c
oncl
udes
that
the
Ban
k do
es n
ot h
ave
the
pow
er u
nila
tera
lly to
abo
lish
the
tax
reim
burs
emen
t sys
tem
or t
o re
pay
a le
sser
am
ount
than
the
taxe
s w
hich
eac
h of
the
App
lican
ts is
requ
ired
topa
y (o
n th
e as
sum
ptio
n th
at B
ank
inco
me
is h
is o
r her
onl
y in
com
e). I
ndee
d, th
e B
ank
has
not d
one
so. T
heA
pplic
ants
con
tinue
afte
r th
e de
cisi
ons
of 1
979/
80 a
s be
fore
to re
ceiv
e a
net s
alar
y in
the
sam
e w
ay a
s no
n-U
nite
d S
tate
s st
aff m
embe
rs. T
he p
rinci
ple
of re
imbu
rsem
ent “
for t
he ta
xes
they
are
requ
ired
to p
ay”
is fu
llyre
spec
ted
by v
irtue
of t
he s
afet
y ne
t. In
no
case
doe
s an
y U
nite
d S
tate
s st
aff m
embe
r re
ceiv
e a
net s
alar
ylo
wer
than
that
whi
ch h
e w
ould
hav
e re
ceiv
ed if
he
had
not b
een
subj
ect t
o U
nite
d S
tate
s ta
xes.
All
taxe
s w
hich
he is
“req
uire
d to
pay
” ar
e re
imbu
rsed
by
the
Ban
k. T
he o
nly
chan
ge e
ffect
ed is
in th
e re
plac
emen
t of t
hest
anda
rd d
educ
tion
met
hod
with
ano
ther
met
hod.
The
Ban
k w
as e
ntitl
ed to
do
this
eve
n if
the
gros
s in
com
e of
certa
in U
nite
d S
tate
s st
aff m
embe
rs h
as b
een
redu
ced
as a
resu
lt, a
nd e
ven
if th
e re
imbu
rsem
ent i
n ex
cess
of
taxe
s w
hich
they
pre
viou
sly
rece
ived
is d
imin
ishe
d or
alto
geth
er d
isap
pear
s. A
ll th
ese
non-
esse
ntia
l ele
men
tsin
the
cond
ition
s of
em
ploy
men
t wer
e su
bjec
t to
unila
tera
l am
endm
ent b
y th
e B
ank.
83. A
lthou
gh th
e B
ank'
s po
wer
to s
ubst
itute
one
met
hod
of c
ompu
tatio
n fo
r an
othe
r is
disc
retio
nary
, thi
sdi
scre
tion
is n
ot a
n un
fette
red
one.
It re
mai
ns th
eref
ore
for
the
Trib
unal
to a
scer
tain
whe
ther
in m
akin
g th
eco
ntes
ted
deci
sion
s th
e B
ank
has,
or h
as n
ot, c
omm
itted
an
abus
e of
dis
cret
ion.
84. T
he T
ribun
al n
otes
, firs
t, th
at th
e ch
ange
in th
e ta
x re
imbu
rsem
ent m
etho
d ha
d no
retro
activ
e ef
fect
and
that
no
com
plai
nt o
f thi
s ki
nd h
as b
een
brou
ght f
orw
ard
by th
e A
pplic
ants
.
85. S
econ
d, a
s th
e Tr
ibun
al h
as s
how
n ab
ove
(par
agra
phs
64 e
t seq
), th
e ev
er-in
crea
sing
dis
crep
ancy
betw
een
the
taxe
s w
hich
sta
ff m
embe
rs w
ere
requ
ired
to p
ay a
nd th
e am
ount
of r
eim
burs
emen
t whi
ch th
eyre
ceiv
ed o
n th
e ba
sis
of th
e st
anda
rd d
educ
tion
met
hod
rend
ered
the
oper
atio
n of
this
met
hod
ineq
uita
ble.
The
Dec
isio
ns
http
://ln
web
90.w
orld
bank
.org
/crn
/wbt
/wbt
web
site
.nsf
/(res
ults
web
)/470
F6C
6098
A11
FDF8
5256
9ED
006B
B87
7[5/
20/2
014
11:5
4:49
AM
]
Sta
ff A
ssoc
iatio
n its
elf,
in it
s M
emor
andu
m o
f Apr
il 11
, 197
9, “S
taff
Ass
ocia
tion
Com
men
ts o
n S
taff
Com
pens
atio
n M
atte
rs,”
ack
now
ledg
ed th
at “t
he a
bilit
y of
indi
vidu
al U
.S. s
taff
to ta
ke a
dvan
tage
of t
hepr
ovis
ions
of t
he U
.S. t
ax c
ode
unde
r the
pre
sent
sys
tem
has
ena
bled
thos
e U
.S. s
taff
mem
bers
in a
pos
ition
todo
so,
to a
chie
ve n
et in
com
es a
bove
thei
r of
ficia
l net
pay
”. T
his
Mem
oran
dum
from
the
Sta
ff A
ssoc
iatio
n fu
rther
reco
gniz
es th
at u
nder
the
stan
dard
ded
uctio
n sy
stem
“the
obj
ectiv
e of
equ
al n
et p
ay fo
r eq
ual w
ork
on a
nin
divi
dual
bas
is is
not
ach
ieve
d.” T
hus,
the
Ban
k co
uld
reas
onab
ly c
oncl
ude
that
the
syst
em d
id n
ot w
ork
prop
erly
and
had
to b
e ch
ange
d. T
he T
ribun
al is
sat
isfie
d th
at th
e ob
ject
ive
of th
e B
ank
was
not
to re
duce
the
inco
me
of a
par
ticul
ar c
ateg
ory
of s
taff
mem
bers
by
reas
on o
f the
ir na
tiona
lity
but t
o en
sure
a b
ette
r fun
ctio
ning
of th
e in
stitu
tion
by a
mor
e eq
uita
ble
pers
onne
l pol
icy.
Thi
s di
d no
t inv
olve
an
abus
e of
dis
cret
ion
or a
mis
use
of p
ower
s on
the
part
of t
he B
ank.
86. I
t is
not f
or th
e Tr
ibun
al to
sub
stitu
te it
s ju
dgm
ent f
or th
at o
f the
Ban
k in
cho
osin
g th
e av
erag
e de
duct
ion
syst
em, r
athe
r tha
n so
me
othe
r sys
tem
, to
repl
ace
the
prev
ious
sys
tem
. Tha
t the
ave
rage
ded
uctio
n sy
stem
also
pre
sent
s so
me
inco
nven
ienc
es is
cer
tain
. As
the
Kaf
ka R
epor
t bro
ught
them
into
the
open
, the
Exe
cutiv
eD
irect
ors
wer
e fu
lly a
war
e of
them
. As
was
the
case
in 1
946,
the
1979
dec
isio
n re
pres
ente
d a
cons
ider
edch
oice
taki
ng in
to a
ccou
nt th
e va
rious
rele
vant
fact
ors.
The
App
lican
ts c
once
de th
at “i
t is
plai
nly
not t
hefu
nctio
n of
the
Trib
unal
to d
eter
min
e th
e be
st c
ompe
nsat
ion
polic
y fo
r th
e B
ank
to a
dopt
... n
or is
it th
eTr
ibun
al's
func
tion
to d
ecid
e w
hich
am
ong
the
vario
us p
ossi
ble
tax
reim
burs
emen
t sys
tem
s is
the
‘bes
t’ or
‘faire
st.’”
The
Trib
unal
fully
sha
res
this
vie
w.
87. N
ever
thel
ess,
the
App
lican
ts e
xpre
ss re
gret
that
onc
e th
e B
ank
deci
ded
to c
hang
e th
e m
etho
d, it
did
not
adop
t the
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
sys
tem
s. A
ccor
ding
to th
em, t
his
wou
ld h
ave
bette
r ach
ieve
d th
e ob
ject
ive
of in
tern
aleq
uity
. The
App
lican
ts m
aint
ain
that
if th
e E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
s di
d no
t cho
ose
this
sys
tem
it w
as o
nly
beca
use
such
a c
hoic
e w
ould
hav
e co
st th
e B
ank
mor
e. T
he c
hoic
e of
a p
artic
ular
met
hod
of ta
x re
imbu
rsem
ent m
aypr
oper
ly b
e de
term
ined
by
seve
ral f
acto
rs: e
quity
, eas
e of
adm
inis
tratio
n, c
ost,
com
preh
ensi
bilit
y,co
nfid
entia
lity.
Thu
s, th
e co
st o
f any
par
ticul
ar s
yste
m is
one
of s
ever
al fa
ctor
s w
hich
the
orga
niza
tion
may
take
into
acc
ount
. The
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
sys
tem
pre
sent
s, a
s do
all
the
othe
rs, b
oth
adva
ntag
es, f
or in
stan
ce, i
nac
hiev
ing
a si
gnifi
cant
deg
ree
of in
tern
al e
quity
, and
dis
adva
ntag
es, p
artic
ular
ly in
the
cost
to th
e or
gani
zatio
n.Th
e K
afka
Rep
ort a
naly
zed
them
as
it di
d th
e ot
her s
yste
ms
whi
ch it
exa
min
ed. I
t obs
erve
d in
ter
alia
that
,un
like
orga
niza
tions
suc
h as
the
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
, the
Ban
k's
Mem
ber
gove
rnm
ents
do
not r
efun
d to
it th
eam
ount
of t
axes
reim
burs
ed. A
s a
resu
lt, a
s th
e R
espo
nden
t say
s “th
e co
sts
of th
e ta
x re
imbu
rsem
ent s
yste
mar
e re
al c
osts
to th
e B
ank
whi
ch m
ust b
e de
duct
ed fr
om it
s in
com
e, w
hich
is g
ener
ated
in la
rge
part
from
inte
rest
and
fees
pai
d by
its
borr
ower
s in
less
dev
elop
ed c
ount
ries”
. The
Trib
unal
see
s no
abu
se o
f dis
cret
ion
inth
e fa
ct th
at th
e E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
s to
ok in
to a
ccou
nt th
e co
st o
f the
var
ious
sys
tem
s an
d, a
fter
havi
ngas
sess
ed th
e ad
vant
ages
and
dis
adva
ntag
es o
f eac
h, d
ecid
ed to
ado
pt th
e av
erag
e de
duct
ions
sys
tem
.
88. A
s ha
s be
en s
aid
(par
agra
ph 4
7) th
e m
anne
r in
whi
ch a
cha
nge
in th
e no
n-fu
ndam
enta
l ele
men
ts o
f the
term
s of
app
oint
men
t are
pre
pare
d or
app
lied
is a
lso
to b
e ta
ken
into
acc
ount
by
the
Trib
unal
whe
n it
seek
s to
asce
rtain
whe
ther
the
amen
dmen
t has
an
arbi
trary
or u
nrea
sona
ble
char
acte
r. Th
e lo
ng a
nd d
etai
led
stud
ies
whi
ch p
rece
ded
the
1979
dec
isio
ns s
how
that
this
was
not
a h
astil
y ad
opte
d re
form
, but
a c
hang
e st
udie
d at
leng
th a
nd m
ost c
aref
ully
pre
pare
d. T
he e
stab
lishm
ent o
f the
new
sys
tem
incl
uded
mea
sure
s sh
owin
gm
oder
atio
n an
d co
ncer
n fo
r st
aff.
The
Exe
cutiv
e D
irect
ors
did
not f
ollo
w th
e K
afka
reco
mm
enda
tions
blin
dly,
but i
ntro
duce
d in
to th
em tw
o im
porta
nt c
hang
es: t
he s
afet
y ne
t and
a tr
ansi
tiona
l per
iod
of fi
ve y
ears
“in
orde
rto
alle
viat
e th
e im
pact
of t
he c
hang
e.”
89. T
he p
rece
ding
con
side
ratio
ns le
ad th
e Tr
ibun
al to
con
clud
e th
at in
app
lyin
g th
e de
cisi
ons
in M
anua
lC
ircul
ar P
ers.
1/8
0 da
ted
Janu
ary
21, 1
980
to th
e A
pplic
ants
Lam
son-
Scr
ibne
r, R
eese
, Rei
sman
-Too
f and
Sha
piro
the
Ban
k di
d no
t com
mit
any
non-
obse
rvan
ce o
f the
ir co
ntra
cts
of e
mpl
oym
ent o
r ter
ms
ofap
poin
tmen
t.
V. S
ALA
RY
AD
JUS
TME
NT
90. T
he s
ix A
pplic
ants
con
tend
that
thei
r co
nditi
ons
of e
mpl
oym
ent i
nclu
de a
righ
t to
the
prot
ectio
n of
the
real
valu
e of
thei
r sa
larie
s ag
ains
t ero
sion
by
infla
tion
and
that
in g
rant
ing
incr
ease
s m
arke
dly
low
er th
an th
e
Dec
isio
ns
http
://ln
web
90.w
orld
bank
.org
/crn
/wbt
/wbt
web
site
.nsf
/(res
ults
web
)/470
F6C
6098
A11
FDF8
5256
9ED
006B
B87
7[5/
20/2
014
11:5
4:49
AM
]
incr
ease
s in
the
Was
hing
ton
CP
I the
Ban
k ha
s vi
olat
ed th
ose
cond
ition
s. T
he R
espo
nden
t den
ies
that
the
cond
ition
s of
em
ploy
men
t of t
he A
pplic
ants
incl
ude
a rig
ht to
an
auto
mat
ic a
djus
tmen
t of t
heir
sala
ries
to m
eet
an in
crea
se in
the
cost
of l
ivin
g an
d ad
ds th
at, e
ven
if su
ch a
righ
t had
bee
n pa
rt o
f the
con
ditio
ns o
fem
ploy
men
t bef
ore
1979
, the
Ban
k re
tain
ed th
e rig
ht, i
n th
e le
tters
of a
ppoi
ntm
ent a
ccep
ted
by th
e A
pplic
ants
,to
cha
nge
its s
alar
y po
licy.
91. T
he T
ribun
al fi
rst n
otes
that
no
prov
isio
n fo
r pe
riodi
c ad
just
men
t of s
alar
y an
d st
ill le
ss fo
r an
aut
omat
icad
just
men
t to
mee
t the
incr
ease
in th
e co
st o
f liv
ing
appe
ars
in a
ny o
f the
lette
rs o
f app
oint
men
t and
acce
ptan
ce. T
he T
ribun
al a
lso
note
s th
at th
ere
is n
o pr
ovis
ion
to th
is e
ffect
in th
e P
erso
nnel
Man
ual.
On
thes
epo
ints
, bot
h pa
rties
agr
ee.
92. T
he A
pplic
ants
mai
ntai
n, h
owev
er, t
hat a
pol
icy
of a
utom
atic
adj
ustm
ent o
f sal
arie
s to
mee
t inc
reas
es in
the
CP
I was
reco
mm
ende
d by
the
Pre
side
nt to
the
Exe
cutiv
e D
irect
ors
in R
epor
t R. 6
8-14
0 da
ted
June
30,
196
8an
d w
as a
dopt
ed b
y th
e E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
s at
thei
r m
eetin
g of
Aug
ust 1
3, 1
968.
Sin
ce th
en, s
o th
e A
pplic
ants
clai
m, t
his
polic
y ha
s be
en a
pplie
d, h
as b
ecom
e a
firm
ly e
stab
lishe
d pr
actic
e an
d ha
s th
eref
ore
beco
me
part
of
thei
r co
nditi
ons
of e
mpl
oym
ent.
The
Trib
unal
will
firs
t exa
min
e w
heth
er in
196
8 a
deci
sion
in th
is re
gard
was
mad
e an
d, s
econ
d, w
heth
er a
pra
ctic
e of
aut
omat
ic c
ost-o
f-liv
ing
adju
stm
ent w
as fo
llow
ed b
etw
een
1968
and
1978
.
93. R
epor
t No.
R. 6
8-14
0 is
ent
itled
: “P
ropo
sed
Gen
eral
Sal
ary
Incr
ease
.” A
fter r
ecal
ling
that
the
Ban
k ha
s no
t“s
ince
196
2 pr
ovid
ed g
ener
al s
alar
y in
crea
ses
unifo
rmly
app
lied
to m
eet c
ost-o
f-liv
ing
chan
ges”
the
Pre
side
ntsa
id: “F
or th
ese
reas
ons
I pro
pose
to m
odify
our
sys
tem
and
ado
pt a
pol
icy
of p
erio
dic
acro
ss-th
e-bo
ard
sala
ryin
crea
ses
for
prof
essi
onal
sta
ff to
mat
ch ri
ses
in th
e ‘c
ost-o
f-liv
ing’
in th
e ar
ea in
whi
ch w
e w
ork
and
live.
We
will
, of c
ours
e, c
ontin
ue o
ur p
olic
y of
gra
ntin
g m
erit
rais
es to
pro
fess
iona
l sta
ff ba
sed
on in
divi
dual
perfo
rman
ce a
nd a
bilit
y in
the
light
of p
erso
nal r
evie
ws.
.. H
owev
er, t
hese
incr
ease
s w
ill b
e se
para
te fr
omad
just
men
ts to
mee
t adv
ance
s in
the
‘cos
t-of-l
ivin
g.’ T
he b
asic
obj
ectiv
e w
ill c
ontin
ue to
be
to a
ttrac
t and
reta
in a
hig
hly
com
pete
nt in
tern
atio
nal s
taff
and
to m
otiv
ate
and
stim
ulat
e th
e hi
ghes
t lev
el o
f per
form
ance
by a
ll st
aff m
embe
rs.”
The
Pre
side
nt th
en p
rovi
ded
info
rmat
ion
on p
rice
incr
ease
s in
Was
hing
ton
sinc
e 19
68, o
n th
e in
crea
ses
insa
larie
s gr
ante
d by
the
Fund
, the
Inte
r-A
mer
ican
Dev
elop
men
t Ban
k, th
e U
nite
d N
atio
ns a
nd th
e U
nite
d S
tate
sG
over
nmen
t, on
com
para
ble
prac
tices
in th
e pu
blic
ser
vice
of C
anad
a an
d va
rious
Eur
opea
n co
untri
es, a
s w
ell
as o
n in
crea
ses
in a
cade
mic
sal
arie
s in
the
Uni
ted
Sta
tes.
He
conc
lude
d w
ith a
pro
posa
l to
“gra
nt a
n ac
ross
-th
e-bo
ard
sala
ry in
crea
se e
ffect
ive
at 1
Sep
tem
ber,
1968
... a
mou
ntin
g to
8 p
er c
ent.”
94. T
he E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
s ex
amin
ed th
e pr
oble
m o
n A
ugus
t 13,
196
8. T
he M
inut
es o
f the
Mee
ting
reco
rded
the
follo
win
g:
“Gen
eral
Sal
ary,
Incr
ease
. The
Exe
cutiv
e D
irect
ors
appr
oved
the
reco
mm
enda
tion
(R 6
8-14
0) fo
r a
gene
ral
sala
ry in
crea
se, w
ith th
e m
odifi
catio
n ad
opte
d at
the
mee
ting.
”
The
cont
ent o
f the
dis
cuss
ions
and
of t
he d
ecis
ions
take
n by
the
Exe
cutiv
e D
irect
ors
on th
e re
com
men
datio
n of
the
Pre
side
nt is
sta
ted
in a
n ag
reed
sum
mar
y of
the
mee
ting
prep
ared
by
the
parti
es. I
t app
ears
that
a d
ecis
ion
was
take
n to
pla
ce a
cei
ling
on th
e ge
nera
l inc
reas
e of
8%
reco
mm
ende
d by
the
Pre
side
nt in
suc
h a
way
that
the
high
er s
alar
ies
wou
ld n
ot b
enef
it fro
m th
e in
crea
se. F
urth
er:
“In re
spon
se to
que
stio
ns ra
ised
at t
he m
eetin
g ab
out p
arag
raph
4 o
f doc
umen
t R. 6
8-14
0, w
hich
sta
ted
that
the
Pre
side
nt p
ropo
sed
to a
dopt
a p
olic
y of
per
iodi
c ac
ross
-the-
boar
d sa
lary
incr
ease
s fo
r pr
ofes
sion
alst
aff,
the
Pre
side
nt e
xpla
ined
that
he
prop
osed
to fo
llow
suc
h po
licy
and
he p
lann
ed to
hav
e pe
riodi
cre
view
s an
d m
ake
reco
mm
enda
tions
to th
e E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
s w
here
it w
as n
eces
sary
to h
ave
thei
rap
prov
al o
f acr
oss-
the-
boar
d in
crea
ses.
He
cons
ider
ed it
abs
olut
ely
esse
ntia
l tha
t the
re b
e a
clea
r-cu
tes
tabl
ishe
d po
licy
in th
e ad
min
istra
tion
of th
e B
ank'
s sa
larie
s an
d th
at w
as th
e po
licy
that
he
prop
osed
to
Dec
isio
ns
http
://ln
web
90.w
orld
bank
.org
/crn
/wbt
/wbt
web
site
.nsf
/(res
ults
web
)/470
F6C
6098
A11
FDF8
5256
9ED
006B
B87
7[5/
20/2
014
11:5
4:49
AM
]
have
the
sala
ry a
dmin
istra
tive
depa
rtmen
t fol
low
. Whe
re th
e ap
plic
atio
n of
suc
h po
licy
requ
ired
appr
oval
of
the
Exe
cutiv
e D
irect
ors,
a d
ecis
ion
wou
ld b
e br
ough
t to
them
for
appr
oval
.”
The
sam
e da
y th
e st
aff w
ere
info
rmed
by
Adm
inis
trativ
e C
ircul
ar th
at:
“In th
e fa
ce o
f the
con
tinue
d ris
e in
the
cost
of l
ivin
g in
the
Was
hing
ton
area
, a g
ener
al in
crea
se in
sal
arie
sha
s be
en a
ppro
ved
for
the
staf
f of t
he B
ank
and
Cor
pora
tion.
Pre
sent
sal
ary
rate
s of
pro
fess
iona
l sta
ffm
embe
rs, b
ecau
se th
ey h
ave
not r
efle
cted
cos
t-of-l
ivin
g in
crea
ses
sinc
e S
epte
mbe
r 196
6, w
ill b
e ra
ised
by
appr
oxim
atel
y 8%
...”
95. T
he fo
rego
ing
show
s th
at th
e P
resi
dent
reco
mm
ende
d an
incr
ease
of a
cer
tain
per
cent
age
effe
ctiv
eS
epte
mbe
r 1, 1
968,
add
ing,
firs
t, th
at h
e in
tend
ed to
mak
e pe
riodi
c re
com
men
datio
ns to
the
Exe
cutiv
eD
irect
ors
for
acro
ss-th
e-bo
ard
sala
ry in
crea
ses
and,
sec
ond,
that
he
wou
ld re
com
men
d to
the
Exe
cutiv
eD
irect
ors
to fo
llow
in th
eir
perio
dic
deci
sion
s a
clea
r-cu
t and
est
ablis
hed
polic
y. T
he R
epor
t (as
cla
rifie
d by
the
expl
anat
ions
of t
he P
resi
dent
dur
ing
the
mee
ting
of th
e E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
s) th
us a
mou
nted
onl
y to
a s
tate
men
tof
the
Pre
side
nt's
inte
ntio
ns a
nd o
f the
pol
icy
that
he
reco
mm
ende
d th
e E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
s to
follo
w in
the
futu
re. T
he T
ribun
al c
anno
t attr
ibut
e th
e ef
fect
of a
dec
isio
n cr
eatin
g rig
hts
and
oblig
atio
ns a
s be
twee
n th
eB
ank
and
its s
taff
to a
sta
tem
ent o
f pol
icy
by w
hich
the
Pre
side
nt in
form
ed th
e E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
s of
his
inte
ntio
ns. T
he P
resi
dent
's re
com
men
datio
n of
Jun
e 30
, 196
8 ca
nnot
, the
refo
re, b
e co
nsid
ered
as
havi
ngm
odifi
ed, a
nd b
ecom
e pa
rt o
f, th
e co
nditi
ons
of e
mpl
oym
ent o
f the
App
lican
ts.
96. A
s re
gard
s th
e E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
s' d
ecis
ion
of A
ugus
t 13,
196
8, it
is c
lear
from
the
parti
es' a
gree
dsu
mm
ary
that
this
dec
isio
n ne
ither
repe
ated
the
Pre
side
nt's
reco
mm
enda
tion
nor
stat
ed a
gen
eral
pol
icy
that
the
Exe
cutiv
e D
irect
ors
inte
nded
to fo
llow
in th
e fu
ture
. The
Exe
cutiv
e D
irect
ors
mer
ely
deci
ded
to g
ive
the
staf
fan
incr
ease
of a
fixe
d am
ount
on
Sep
tem
ber 1
, 196
8. S
houl
d th
e P
resi
dent
sub
sequ
ently
reco
mm
end
furth
erin
crea
ses,
as
he s
aid
he w
ould
, the
Exe
cutiv
e D
irect
ors
wou
ld d
ecid
e on
suc
h re
com
men
datio
ns w
ithin
the
fram
ewor
k of
thei
r po
wer
s: “a
dec
isio
n w
ould
be
brou
ght t
o th
em fo
r ap
prov
al.”
The
Exe
cutiv
e D
irect
ors
thus
reta
ined
thei
r fu
ll fre
edom
to a
ppro
ve o
r not
in e
ach
futu
re c
ase
any
sala
ry in
crea
se w
hich
the
Pre
side
nt m
ight
prop
ose
to th
em. T
he C
ircul
ar a
nnou
ncin
g th
e in
crea
se to
the
staf
f did
not
con
tain
any
com
mitm
ent t
oco
mpe
nsat
e au
tom
atic
ally
for
futu
re in
crea
ses
in th
e co
st o
f liv
ing.
97. T
he A
pplic
ants
mai
ntai
n, s
econ
dly,
that
the
impl
emen
tatio
n by
the
Ban
k of
a p
olic
y to
adj
ust t
he s
alar
ies
ofits
sta
ff to
mat
ch c
ost-o
f-liv
ing
incr
ease
s ha
s gi
ven
rise
to a
con
sist
ent a
nd e
stab
lishe
d pr
actic
e, w
hich
has
beco
me
an in
tegr
al p
art o
f the
ir co
nditi
ons
of e
mpl
oym
ent.
The
Res
pond
ent d
enie
s th
at s
uch
a pr
actic
e w
ases
tabl
ishe
d.
98. I
f the
pra
ctic
e al
lege
d by
the
App
lican
ts e
xist
s it
cann
ot b
e re
gard
ed a
s th
e im
plem
enta
tion
of a
dec
isio
nta
ken
in 1
968,
sin
ce, a
s th
e Tr
ibun
al h
as ju
st s
how
n, n
o de
cisi
on w
as ta
ken
in 1
968
to m
aint
ain
sala
ries
at a
leve
l int
ende
d to
elim
inat
e co
mpl
etel
y th
e ef
fect
s of
infla
tion.
As
indi
cate
d in
par
agra
ph 2
3, th
e pr
actic
e of
an
inte
rnat
iona
l org
aniz
atio
n m
ay u
nder
cer
tain
con
ditio
ns b
e an
inde
pend
ent s
ourc
e of
righ
ts a
nd d
utie
s in
the
lega
l rel
atio
nshi
p be
twee
n an
org
aniz
atio
n an
d its
sta
ff. T
he T
ribun
al m
ust t
here
fore
con
side
r whe
ther
or n
otth
e pr
actic
e in
voke
d by
the
App
lican
ts e
xist
s, a
nd if
it d
oes,
whe
ther
it h
as b
ecom
e a
cond
ition
of e
mpl
oym
ent.
99. B
etw
een
1968
and
197
8 th
e B
ank
incr
ease
d sa
larie
s ea
ch y
ear
and
som
etim
es tw
ice
in a
yea
r. In
conf
orm
ity w
ith th
e in
tent
ion
whi
ch h
e ha
d ex
pres
sed
to th
e E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
s, th
e P
resi
dent
sub
mitt
ed to
them
eac
h ye
ar a
reco
mm
enda
tion
to th
is e
ffect
. Eac
h ye
ar th
e E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
s re
ache
d a
conc
lusi
on o
nth
is re
com
men
datio
n an
d a
circ
ular
was
issu
ed to
info
rm th
e st
aff o
f the
dec
isio
n ad
opte
d. C
lose
exa
min
atio
n of
the
reco
mm
enda
tions
and
circ
ular
s re
latin
g to
eac
h of
the
year
s 19
69 to
197
9 le
ads
the
Trib
unal
to s
ever
alob
serv
atio
ns.
100.
The
firs
t is
that
the
rise
in th
e co
st o
f liv
ing
was
inde
ed m
entio
ned
in s
ome
case
s as
bei
ng th
e de
cisi
vere
ason
for
the
incr
ease
. The
circ
ular
of M
ay 9
, 197
3, fo
r ex
ampl
e, s
aid
that
“the
se in
crea
ses
are
desi
gned
tom
aint
ain
the
real
leve
l of s
alar
ies
in th
e fa
ce o
f ris
ing
pric
es...
” On
Oct
ober
17
of th
e sa
me
year
the
Pre
side
nt
Dec
isio
ns
http
://ln
web
90.w
orld
bank
.org
/crn
/wbt
/wbt
web
site
.nsf
/(res
ults
web
)/470
F6C
6098
A11
FDF8
5256
9ED
006B
B87
7[5/
20/2
014
11:5
4:49
AM
]
prop
osed
a fu
rther
incr
ease
sta
ting
that
“the
key
fact
or d
eter
min
ing
the
need
for
a ge
nera
l sal
ary
incr
ease
is, o
fco
urse
, the
mov
emen
t in
pric
e le
vels
in th
e W
ashi
ngto
n ar
ea,”
and
the
circ
ular
of N
ovem
ber 7
, 197
3 ex
plai
ned
that
a n
ew in
crea
se h
ad b
een
deci
ded
beca
use
of th
e “e
spec
ially
sha
rp ri
se in
loca
l pric
e le
vels
sin
ceFe
brua
ry.”
Five
yea
rs la
ter,
in 1
978,
the
Pre
side
nt e
xpla
ined
that
“the
rise
in th
e co
st o
f liv
ing
in th
e W
ashi
ngto
nar
ea h
as fo
r se
vera
l yea
rs b
een
a cu
stom
ary
and
impo
rtant
fact
or in
our
con
side
ratio
n of
sta
ff co
mpe
nsat
ion.
”
101.
But
the
Trib
unal
als
o no
tes
a se
cond
poi
nt o
f eve
n gr
eate
r sig
nific
ance
: sev
eral
fact
ors
othe
r tha
n co
st o
fliv
ing
wer
e ta
ken
into
acc
ount
in fo
rmul
atin
g on
e or
ano
ther
sal
ary
incr
ease
.
102.
One
of t
hose
mos
t fre
quen
tly m
entio
ned
was
the
need
to m
aint
ain
the
com
petit
iven
ess
of th
e B
ank
in th
ere
crui
tmen
t of h
ighl
y qu
alifi
ed p
erso
nnel
and
, con
sequ
ently
, the
nec
essi
ty o
f mai
ntai
ning
Ban
k sa
larie
s at
ale
vel c
ompa
rabl
e at
leas
t to
thos
e of
its
prin
cipa
l com
petit
ors:
the
Uni
ted
Sta
tes
Gov
ernm
ent,
othe
r int
erna
tiona
lor
gani
zatio
ns s
uch
as th
e U
nite
d N
atio
ns, O
.E.C
.D.,
the
Eur
opea
n C
omm
on M
arke
t, U
nite
d S
tate
s fin
anci
alin
stitu
tions
and
indu
stria
l cor
pora
tions
, and
aca
dem
ic in
stitu
tions
. The
196
9 ci
rcul
ar, f
or e
xam
ple,
told
the
staf
fth
at th
ere
wer
e tw
o re
ason
s fo
r th
e in
crea
se, n
amel
y th
at “o
ther
em
ploy
ers,
bot
h pu
blic
and
priv
ate,
hav
ead
just
ed th
eir
sala
ry s
truct
ures
upw
ard,
and
the
cost
of l
ivin
g in
the
Was
hing
ton
area
has
con
tinue
d to
rise
.” In
1971
the
Pre
side
nt in
his
reco
mm
enda
tion
exam
ined
in d
etai
l the
fact
ors
“whi
ch h
ave
furth
er e
rode
d ou
rco
mpe
titiv
e m
argi
n.”
The
reco
mm
enda
tion
of th
e P
resi
dent
for
1973
spo
ke o
f “a
bala
nce
betw
een
som
etim
esco
nflic
ting
fact
ors:
(a)
the
eros
ion
of th
e re
al in
com
e of
the
staf
f due
to th
e ris
e in
the
Was
hing
ton
cost
of l
ivin
gan
d th
e cu
rren
cy re
alig
nmen
ts...
(b)
the
com
petit
iven
ess
of p
rese
nt B
ank
grou
p co
mpe
nsat
ion…
” The
197
7C
ircul
ar a
lso
invo
ked
thes
e tw
o fa
ctor
s, b
eing
bas
ed o
n a
stud
y of
the
com
pens
atio
n of
twen
ty-s
even
“ana
logo
us o
rgan
izat
ions
.” Th
e “p
ract
ice
of a
nalo
gous
org
aniz
atio
ns” w
as in
voke
d al
so in
the
1975
circ
ular
. In
1979
the
Kaf
ka R
epor
t not
ed th
at “t
he c
ompa
rison
of B
ank
jobs
with
cer
tain
out
side
jobs
has
alw
ays
been
par
tof
the
proc
ess
of d
eter
min
ing
pay.
..” T
he A
pplic
ants
hav
e re
cogn
ized
that
the
cost
-of-l
ivin
g el
emen
t was
not
the
sole
crit
erio
n go
vern
ing
the
incr
ease
s ad
opte
d du
ring
this
dec
ade:
“Rat
her,
the
obje
ctiv
e w
as to
pre
vent
the
real
valu
e of
Ban
k sa
larie
s fro
m b
eing
ero
ded
by in
flatio
n an
d to
kee
p th
ose
sala
ries
com
petit
ive”
.
103.
Sev
eral
oth
er fa
ctor
s w
ere
also
take
n in
to c
onsi
dera
tion
by th
e P
resi
dent
and
the
Exe
cutiv
e D
irect
ors.
Thus
the
reco
mm
enda
tion
of th
e P
resi
dent
for
1973
men
tione
d th
at a
s a
cons
eque
nce
of a
stu
dy c
arrie
d ou
t by
a co
nsul
ting
firm
“we
belie
ve th
at th
e B
ank
grou
p pr
ofes
sion
al s
alar
y st
ruct
ure
shou
ld b
e de
sign
ed to
take
acco
unt o
f: (a
) th
e co
mpe
titiv
e si
tuat
ion;
(b)
the
need
to p
rovi
de re
ason
able
diff
eren
tials
bet
wee
n gr
ades
...; (
c)th
e ne
ed to
pro
vide
reas
onab
le s
cope
for
the
rew
ard
of p
erfo
rman
ce.”
The
reco
mm
enda
tion
of th
e P
resi
dent
for
1974
not
ed th
at “m
any
mem
ber
gove
rnm
ents
and
mos
t oth
er o
rgan
izat
ions
do
not a
djus
t sal
arie
s so
lely
on
the
basi
s of
pric
e le
vel c
hang
es” a
nd s
aid
that
“sal
ary
chan
ges
may
be
indu
ced
as w
ell b
y (a
) ad
vanc
es in
stan
dard
of l
ivin
g ...
; (b
) ch
ange
s in
pay
rela
tions
hips
with
oth
er o
rgan
izat
ions
.” Th
e 19
76 C
ircul
ar e
xpla
inin
g“th
e un
derly
ing
philo
soph
y” o
f the
sal
ary
chan
ges
cite
d th
e fo
llow
ing
fact
ors:
cos
t of l
ivin
g, c
ompe
titiv
enes
s, re
alin
com
e gr
owth
and
sta
ff m
oral
e. T
he p
rece
ding
sho
ws
that
, in
real
ity, a
wid
e ra
nge
of fa
ctor
s w
ere
take
n in
toac
coun
t by
the
Ban
k in
dec
idin
g ye
ar a
fter
year
on
the
leve
l of i
ncre
ase
to g
rant
to th
e st
aff.
104.
The
Trib
unal
obs
erve
s, th
ird, t
hat i
n ea
ch o
f the
yea
rs u
nder
con
side
ratio
n th
e P
resi
dent
and
the
Exe
cutiv
e D
irect
ors
mad
e a
bala
nced
cho
ice
amon
g th
ese
fact
ors
acco
rdin
g to
the
cond
ition
s pr
evai
ling
in e
ach
year
. Thu
s, th
e M
emor
andu
m o
f the
Pre
side
nt fo
r 19
73 s
aid:
“We
have
sou
ght t
o ac
hiev
e a
bala
nce
betw
een
som
etim
es c
onfli
ctin
g fa
ctor
s.” T
he c
ircul
ar o
f 197
6, a
fter
refe
rrin
g to
the
vario
us fa
ctor
s ta
ken
into
cons
ider
atio
n, s
tate
d: “T
he e
xten
t of r
espo
nse
to th
ese
qual
itativ
e as
pect
s is
ver
y m
uch
a m
atte
r of j
udge
men
tin
the
cont
ext o
f eco
nom
ic, f
inan
cial
and
soc
ial c
onsi
dera
tions
.” It
is c
erta
in th
at a
mon
gst t
he fa
ctor
s ta
ken
into
cons
ider
atio
n by
the
Ban
k w
as th
e ev
olut
ion
of th
e co
st o
f liv
ing
and
that
this
was
a “k
ey fa
ctor
” “or
cus
tom
ary
and
impo
rtant
fact
or”.
But
it is
equ
ally
cer
tain
that
this
was
onl
y on
e am
ongs
t sev
eral
, som
etim
es “c
onfli
ctin
g”fa
ctor
s.
105.
The
Trib
unal
obs
erve
s, fo
urth
, tha
t the
exe
rcis
e by
the
Pre
side
nt a
nd th
e E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
s of
thei
rju
dgm
ent d
id n
ot le
ad in
the
year
s 19
69 to
197
8 to
sys
tem
atic
incr
ease
s eq
ual t
o th
ose
of th
e W
ashi
ngto
n C
PI.
The
Cha
rt s
ubm
itted
by
the
App
lican
ts in
thei
r C
onso
lidat
ed M
emor
andu
m s
how
s th
at o
nly
in 1
974
and
1976
was
ther
e an
exa
ct c
oinc
iden
ce b
etw
een
the
rise
in th
e C
PI a
nd th
e sa
lary
incr
ease
. In
the
othe
r nin
e ye
ars
ther
e w
ere
diffe
renc
es, s
omet
imes
of i
mpo
rtanc
e, w
ith s
alar
y in
crea
ses
exce
edin
g th
e C
PI i
ndex
whe
n th
e
Dec
isio
ns
http
://ln
web
90.w
orld
bank
.org
/crn
/wbt
/wbt
web
site
.nsf
/(res
ults
web
)/470
F6C
6098
A11
FDF8
5256
9ED
006B
B87
7[5/
20/2
014
11:5
4:49
AM
]
surv
eys
foun
d th
at th
e pa
y of
cer
tain
sta
ff le
vels
was
not
com
petit
ive
with
that
of o
ther
em
ploy
ers.
The
Circ
ular
of 1
973,
for
exam
ple,
sai
d th
at th
e in
crea
ses
“des
igne
d to
mai
ntai
n th
e re
al le
vel o
f sal
arie
s in
the
face
of r
isin
gpr
ices
” ha
d be
en a
dopt
ed “w
ith a
djus
tmen
ts o
f var
ying
am
ount
s to
take
into
acc
ount
the
mar
ket c
ondi
tions
for
the
type
s of
ski
lls e
mpl
oyed
in th
e B
ank
Gro
up.”
106.
The
App
lican
ts d
o no
t den
y th
at s
omet
imes
ther
e w
as a
diff
eren
ce b
etw
een
the
CP
I inc
reas
e an
d th
esa
lary
incr
ease
. The
y as
sert,
how
ever
, tha
t in
all t
hese
cas
es th
e sa
lary
incr
ease
was
at l
east
the
equi
vale
nt o
fth
at in
the
cost
of l
ivin
g an
d th
at “m
aint
enan
ce o
f the
real
val
ue o
f Ban
k co
mpe
nsat
ion
was
the
min
imum
esse
ntia
l”. T
his
inte
rpre
tatio
n is
con
tradi
cted
by
the
fact
that
in 1
969,
197
0, 1
971
and
1973
– a
ccor
ding
to th
esa
me
Cha
rt in
the
Con
solid
ated
Mem
oran
dum
– th
e in
crea
ses
wer
e ta
pere
d fo
r th
e st
aff a
t hig
her l
evel
s, w
hoco
nseq
uent
ly re
ceiv
ed in
crea
ses
belo
w th
e C
PI i
ndex
. Thi
s pr
actic
e of
“tap
erin
g” –
the
exis
tenc
e of
whi
ch th
eA
pplic
ants
reco
gniz
ed –
is b
y its
elf a
suf
ficie
nt b
asis
for
disc
ardi
ng th
e th
esis
of “
the
min
imum
ess
entia
l.”
107.
On
occa
sion
, the
Pre
side
nt a
nd th
e E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
s ev
en e
xpre
ssly
opp
osed
a s
alar
y ad
just
men
tco
rres
pond
ing
exac
tly to
the
incr
ease
in th
e C
PI.
In O
ctob
er 1
974,
the
Pre
side
nt in
form
ed th
e st
aff t
hat h
ew
ould
not
be
follo
win
g up
the
requ
est o
f the
Sta
ff A
ssoc
iatio
n fo
r a
supp
lem
enta
ry m
id-y
ear
incr
ease
alth
ough
such
an
incr
ease
had
bee
n gi
ven
in th
e pr
eced
ing
year
bec
ause
of a
par
ticul
arly
ste
ep ri
se in
infla
tion.
The
Pre
side
nt re
cogn
ized
that
ther
e ha
d ag
ain
been
a “s
harp
rise
in p
rice
leve
ls” i
n 19
74, b
ut, h
e ad
ded,
“the
re h
asbe
en a
dra
mat
ic c
hang
e in
the
polit
ical
clim
ate
of th
e w
orld
,” a
nd it
was
pra
ctic
ally
impo
ssib
le to
obt
ain
the
agre
emen
t of t
he E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
s fo
r a
sala
ry a
djus
tmen
t at t
hat t
ime.
Eve
n m
ore
perti
nent
is th
eM
emor
andu
m o
f the
Pre
side
nt o
f May
1, 1
975.
In th
is m
emor
andu
m th
e S
taff
Ass
ocia
tion
is d
escr
ibed
as
conc
erne
d “w
ith th
e pe
rcei
ved
diffe
renc
es in
app
roac
hes
to p
erio
dic
sala
ry a
djus
tmen
ts: i
n re
cent
yea
rs b
oth
EE
C a
nd O
EC
D h
ave
gran
ted
at le
ast b
iann
ual a
djus
tmen
ts w
hich
fully
com
pens
ate
for
pric
e le
vel c
hang
es in
net t
erm
s an
d at
all
leve
ls, t
oget
her w
ith fu
rther
per
iodi
c ad
just
men
ts in
tend
ed to
pro
vide
real
inco
me
grow
th.”
The
mem
oran
dum
add
s th
at th
e st
aff i
s al
so d
istu
rbed
by
the
diffe
renc
es b
etw
een
the
Ban
k pr
actic
es a
nd th
eU
nite
d N
atio
ns s
yste
m. T
he la
tter
“pro
vide
s fo
r au
tom
atic
ally
-trig
gere
d co
st o
f liv
ing
adju
stm
ents
for
prof
essi
onal
sta
ff w
hich
com
pens
ate
in n
et te
rms
for
80-9
0% o
f pric
e le
vel c
hang
es a
s th
ey o
ccur
.” Th
em
emor
andu
m a
lso
stat
es th
at “t
he S
taff
Ass
ocia
tion
has
pres
sed
repe
ated
ly a
nd s
trong
ly fo
r th
e in
dexa
tion
ofsa
larie
s w
ith s
ome
form
of a
utom
atic
trig
gerin
g re
late
d ei
ther
to th
e pa
ssag
e of
tim
e or
to a
giv
en p
erce
ntag
eris
e in
the
cost
of l
ivin
g.” T
he P
resi
dent
turn
ed d
own
this
dem
and
for
an a
utom
atic
adj
ustm
ent o
f sal
arie
s to
mee
t the
rise
in p
rices
, sta
ting:
“The
re is
no
sim
ple
form
ula
by w
hich
the
degr
ee o
f com
petit
iven
ess
of a
com
pens
atio
n pa
ckag
e ca
n be
mea
sure
d w
ith p
reci
sion
... T
here
can
be
no s
ubst
itute
for
the
exer
cise
of j
udge
men
t in
dete
rmin
ing
aco
mpe
nsat
ion
pack
age
at a
ny g
iven
tim
e in
rela
tion
to a
ll th
e fa
ctor
s in
volv
ed.”
108.
The
con
side
ratio
ns s
et o
ut a
bove
lead
the
Trib
unal
to c
oncl
ude
that
bet
wee
n 19
68 a
nd 1
979
ther
e di
d no
tex
ist a
ny e
stab
lishe
d an
d co
nsis
tent
pra
ctic
e of
incr
easi
ng s
alar
ies
acro
ss th
e bo
ard
to a
deg
ree
at le
ast e
qual
to th
e in
crea
se in
the
CP
I. Th
e S
taff
Ass
ocia
tion
had,
inde
ed, d
eman
ded
such
a p
olic
y bu
t the
Ban
k ex
pres
sly
refu
sed
it. E
ach
incr
ease
was
dec
ided
in th
e lig
ht o
f the
circ
umst
ance
s of
the
time
and
havi
ng re
gard
to v
ario
usfa
ctor
s am
ong
whi
ch th
e in
crea
se in
the
cost
of l
ivin
g pl
ayed
an
impo
rtant
, but
in n
o w
ay a
dec
isiv
e an
dce
rtain
ly n
ot a
n ex
clus
ive,
role
. The
incr
ease
s w
ere
som
etim
es e
qual
to th
e in
crea
se in
the
CP
I, so
met
imes
grea
ter,
som
etim
es lo
wer
. App
lyin
g by
way
of a
nalo
gy th
e ap
proa
ch o
f the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Cou
rt o
f Jus
tice
one
may
not
e th
at th
e fa
cts
“dis
clos
e so
muc
h un
certa
inty
and
con
tradi
ctio
n, s
o m
uch
fluct
uatio
n an
d di
scre
panc
y...
that
it is
not
pos
sibl
e to
dis
cern
in a
ll th
is a
ny c
onst
ant a
nd u
nifo
rm u
sage
, acc
epte
d as
law
...”
(Asy
lum
cas
e,IC
J R
epor
ts 1
950,
p. 2
77).
109.
The
Trib
unal
ther
efor
e co
nclu
des
that
ther
e di
d no
t exi
st in
197
9, a
t the
tim
e of
alle
ged
non-
obse
rvan
ce o
fth
e co
ntra
cts
of e
mpl
oym
ent o
r ter
ms
of a
ppoi
ntm
ent,
any
deci
sion
or p
ract
ice
to a
utom
atic
ally
incr
ease
sala
ries
to a
t lea
st e
qual
the
rise
in th
e co
st o
f liv
ing
so a
s to
form
par
t of t
he c
ondi
tions
of e
mpl
oym
ent.
From
this
it fo
llow
s th
at th
e Tr
ibun
al n
eed
not c
onsi
der a
noth
er a
rgum
ent a
dvan
ced
by th
e A
pplic
ants
, nam
ely,
that
they
had
agr
eed
to e
nter
the
serv
ice
of th
e B
ank
in th
e ex
pect
atio
n of
a g
uara
ntee
d m
aint
enan
ce o
f the
real
valu
e of
thei
r re
mun
erat
ion,
and
that
the
Ban
k di
d no
t hav
e th
e rig
ht to
dis
appo
int t
his
expe
ctat
ion.
As
alre
ady
stat
ed, n
o pa
rticu
lar i
mpo
rtanc
e ca
n be
atta
ched
to s
uch
subj
ectiv
e co
nsid
erat
ions
. In
any
even
t, th
ere
coul
d
Dec
isio
ns
http
://ln
web
90.w
orld
bank
.org
/crn
/wbt
/wbt
web
site
.nsf
/(res
ults
web
)/470
F6C
6098
A11
FDF8
5256
9ED
006B
B87
7[5/
20/2
014
11:5
4:49
AM
]
have
bee
n no
reas
onab
le e
xpec
tatio
n of
the
mai
nten
ance
of a
dec
isio
n or
pra
ctic
e w
hich
did
not
exi
st.
110.
Acc
ordi
ngly
the
Ban
k w
as fr
ee in
197
9, a
s it
had
been
at a
ny ti
me,
to c
hoos
e th
e m
etho
d w
hich
app
eare
dto
it th
e m
ost a
ppro
pria
te fo
r ac
hiev
ing
the
obje
ctiv
es o
f its
per
sonn
el p
olic
y as
def
ined
by
the
Arti
cles
of
Agr
eem
ent.
The
Kaf
ka R
epor
t rec
omm
ende
d re
cour
se to
a “c
ompa
rato
r” m
etho
d co
nsis
ting
of a
mix
ture
, in
equa
l par
ts, o
f the
pub
lic a
nd p
rivat
e se
ctor
s in
the
Uni
ted
Sta
tes.
In o
rder
to e
nsur
e th
at th
e B
ank
wou
ld b
eab
le to
attr
act h
igh
qual
ity p
erso
nnel
incl
udin
g ca
ndid
ates
from
cou
ntrie
s w
ith h
igh
pay
leve
ls, t
he R
epor
tsu
gges
ted
addi
ng a
pre
miu
m o
f 10%
to th
e le
vels
of r
emun
erat
ion
prod
uced
by
this
met
hod.
On
the
basi
s of
thes
e re
com
men
datio
ns th
e E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
s de
cide
d on
May
25,
197
9 to
giv
e a
9.5%
incr
ease
in n
etsa
larie
s ef
fect
ive
Mar
ch 1
, 197
9, e
xpla
inin
g th
at “t
his
is in
line
with
ave
rage
real
pay
incr
ease
s of
the
U.S
.pr
ivat
e se
ctor
com
para
tors
ove
r th
e pa
st y
ear”
. By
a ci
rcul
ar o
f Mar
ch 1
4, 1
980,
the
staf
f was
info
rmed
that
,pe
ndin
g th
e ou
tcom
e of
the
surv
ey c
omm
issi
oned
from
a c
onsu
lting
firm
it h
ad b
een
deci
ded
to a
war
d an
incr
ease
of 8
.3%
, effe
ctiv
e M
arch
1, 1
980,
whi
ch c
ould
be
revi
sed
retro
activ
ely
taki
ng a
ccou
nt o
f the
resu
lts o
fth
e su
rvey
. Thi
s in
crea
se w
as g
rant
ed “i
n th
e lig
ht o
f com
pens
atio
n pa
y m
ovem
ents
and
the
cont
inui
ng h
igh
rate
of i
nfla
tion.
” In
taki
ng th
is d
ecis
ion,
the
Circ
ular
add
ed, “
a nu
mbe
r of f
acto
rs w
ere
take
n in
to a
ccou
nt ..
.G
ener
al in
form
atio
n on
pay
tren
ds in
Ger
man
y an
d Fr
ance
was
mad
e av
aila
ble
to E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
s. T
hech
ange
in th
e W
ashi
ngto
n C
PI f
rom
Feb
ruar
y 19
79 to
Feb
ruar
y 19
80 w
as a
lso
pres
ente
d.”
111.
In h
oldi
ng th
at th
e co
nditi
ons
of e
mpl
oym
ent o
f sta
ff m
embe
rs d
id n
ot in
197
9 co
ntai
n an
y ru
le o
f law
rela
ting
to th
e m
etho
d of
adj
ustm
ent o
f sal
arie
s or
to th
e ta
king
into
con
side
ratio
n of
cer
tain
fact
ors
inpr
efer
ence
to o
ther
s, th
e Tr
ibun
al is
not
ass
ertin
g th
at th
e co
nditi
ons
of e
mpl
oym
ent c
onta
in n
o ru
les
wha
tsoe
ver r
egar
ding
sal
ary
adju
stm
ent.
True
, nei
ther
the
lette
rs o
f app
oint
men
t and
acc
epta
nce
nor
the
Arti
cles
of A
gree
men
t, no
r an
y w
ritte
n ru
le o
r reg
ulat
ion,
incl
ude
any
prov
isio
n re
quiri
ng th
e B
ank
as a
mat
ter o
fla
w to
mak
e pe
riodi
c ad
just
men
ts o
f sal
arie
s. H
owev
er, t
he T
ribun
al c
onsi
ders
that
a c
onsi
sten
t pra
ctic
e of
perio
dic
adju
stm
ent h
as b
een
esta
blis
hed,
and
that
the
Ban
k m
akes
thes
e ad
just
men
ts o
ut o
f the
con
vict
ion
that
it is
lega
lly o
blig
ed to
do
so. I
n hi
s M
emor
andu
m to
the
Exe
cutiv
e D
irect
ors
date
d A
pril
19, 1
972,
the
Pre
side
nt w
rote
:
“It is
by
now
our
est
ablis
hed
prac
tice
to re
view
the
staf
f com
pens
atio
n pr
ogra
mm
e an
nual
ly in
ear
ly s
prin
gw
ith a
vie
w to
intro
duci
ng w
hate
ver c
hang
es m
ay b
e ap
prop
riate
effe
ctiv
e M
ay 1
.”
Sin
ce th
en, t
his
prac
tice
has
been
affi
rmed
yea
r by
yea
r, a
nd th
e in
crea
ses
adop
ted
in 1
979
and
1980
, as
wel
las
thos
e de
cide
d up
on s
ince
the
filin
g of
pro
ceed
ings
in th
e pr
esen
t cas
e, h
ave
conf
irmed
it. T
heci
rcum
stan
ces
with
in w
hich
cer
tain
App
lican
ts h
ave
been
recr
uite
d an
d, in
par
ticul
ar, c
erta
in in
form
atio
npr
ovid
ed to
them
at t
he ti
me
of th
eir
appo
intm
ent f
urth
er c
onfir
m th
e ex
iste
nce
of th
is o
blig
atio
n.
112.
The
Trib
unal
con
side
rs in
con
sequ
ence
that
the
Ban
k is
obl
iged
to c
arry
out
per
iodi
c re
view
s of
sal
arie
s,ta
king
into
acc
ount
var
ious
rele
vant
fact
ors.
The
Ban
k is
und
er n
o du
ty to
adj
ust s
alar
ies
auto
mat
ical
ly to
incr
ease
s in
the
cost
of l
ivin
g an
d it
reta
ins
a m
easu
re o
f dis
cret
ion
in th
is re
gard
. Thi
s do
es n
ot m
ean
that
the
rises
in th
e co
st o
f liv
ing
in a
per
iod
of in
flatio
n co
nstit
ute
a fa
ctor
that
can
be
igno
red
or d
isre
gard
ed in
the
exer
cise
of t
hat d
iscr
etio
n. O
n th
e co
ntra
ry, t
he e
stab
lishe
d pr
actic
e, a
nd s
tate
men
ts c
onfir
min
g th
at p
ract
ice,
have
cre
ated
a le
gal o
blig
atio
n to
mak
e pe
riodi
c ad
just
men
ts re
flect
ing
chan
ges
in th
e co
st o
f liv
ing
and
othe
rfa
ctor
s. In
the
opin
ion
of th
e Tr
ibun
al s
uch
an o
blig
atio
n is
a fu
ndam
enta
l ele
men
t in
the
App
lican
ts' c
ondi
tions
of e
mpl
oym
ent w
hich
the
Ban
k do
es n
ot h
ave
the
right
to c
hang
e un
ilate
rally
. In
this
resp
ect,
the
Trib
unal
take
spa
rticu
lar n
ote
of th
e st
atem
ent m
ade
in th
e R
espo
nden
t's J
oint
Mem
oran
dum
to th
e ef
fect
that
:
“It is
stil
l the
inte
ntio
n of
the
Ban
k to
adj
ust s
alar
ies
perio
dica
lly to
refle
ct c
hang
es in
var
ious
fact
ors,
incl
udin
g co
st o
f liv
ing.
”
113.
The
dec
isio
ns n
ow c
onte
sted
bef
ore
the
Trib
unal
are
fully
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith th
e ob
ligat
ion
of th
e B
ank.
The
Trib
unal
con
clud
es th
at, i
n ad
optin
g th
e de
cisi
ons
whi
ch th
e si
x A
pplic
ants
con
test
, the
Ban
k ha
s no
t fai
led
to o
bser
ve th
e co
ntra
cts
of e
mpl
oym
ent o
r ter
ms
of a
ppoi
ntm
ent o
f the
App
lican
ts.
Dec
isio
ns
http
://ln
web
90.w
orld
bank
.org
/crn
/wbt
/wbt
web
site
.nsf
/(res
ults
web
)/470
F6C
6098
A11
FDF8
5256
9ED
006B
B87
7[5/
20/2
014
11:5
4:49
AM
]
DE
CIS
ION
:
For t
hese
reas
ons,
the
Trib
unal
una
nim
ousl
y de
cide
s to
reje
ct th
e ap
plic
atio
ns.
E. J
imen
ez d
e A
rech
aga
/S/ E
duar
do J
imen
ez d
e A
rech
aga
Pre
side
nt
B.M
. de
Vuy
st
/S/ B
runo
M. d
e V
uyst
Exe
cutiv
e S
ecre
tary
At W
ashi
ngto
n, D
.C.,
June
5, 1
981