On 23 December 2024, the Administrative Tribunal registered appeal No. 766/2024 – L. D. (III) v. Secretary General of the Council of Europe.

The appellant is a former member of staff of the Organisation whose appointment as assistant lawyer at the Registry of the European Court of Human Rights, under a Junior Professional Programme at grade B3, expired on 30 April 2024. She challenges the decision of the director of Human resources not to follow up her formal complaint of harassment and not to communicate to her the investigation report in its unredacted version.

The first ground relied on by the appellant in support of her appeal concerns the lack of effectiveness of the investigation carried out due to the breach of several procedural guarantees. In this regard, the appellant complains that the Directorate of human resources supervised the investigations whereas, according to the appellant, the principle of independence would have required entrusting the investigations to the DIO (Directorate of internal oversight). The appellant also complains of a breach of the adversarial principle, of the lack of expertise of the private company in charge of the investigations and of the fact that she was deprived of the right to be assisted by legal counsel. The second ground of the appeal concerns a manifest error of assessment by the Administration in concluding, on the basis of the investigation report, that the appellant's allegations of harassment were unfounded.

On those grounds, the appellant asks the Tribunal to annul the contested decision and, principally, to find that her harassment complaint is well-founded and, alternatively, to refer the case to the Council of Europe for a proper investigation. 
She also puts forward a number of claims for damages, including compensation for the non-material damage suffered and reimbursement of the costs of the proceedings.

By her appeal No 761/2024, the appellant had challenged the decision to terminate her employment with the Organisation on the ground that her probationary period had been unsuccessful. By her appeal No. 762/2024, she also challenged the decision of the director general of Administration to second her to a directorate general of the Organisation from 25 March to 30 April 2024. This decision was taken following her formal complaint of harassment.

The indication of the subject-matter of the appeal is based on the details given by the appellant when the appeal was lodged and it is not binding on the Tribunal.

This information is given to enable those who so wish to exercise their right to intervene under Article XI of the Statute of the Administrative Tribunal.