notification letter indicated that the Claimant was recruited as a
Project Accountant under RISP. One may thus ask whether the
Respondent is vested with powers to amend or review a Council’s
decision. Articles 9 and 16 of the Treaty do not provide for such a
competence.
Indeed, Article 9 of the Treaty provides for organs of the
Community and the Secretariat is one of them. Article 9(4) states
as follows:
“The organs and institutions of the Community shall
perform the functions, and act within the limits of the
powers conferred upon them by or under this Treaty.”
As for Article 16 of the Treaty, it provides that:
“….the regulations, directives and decisions of the
Council taken or given pursuance of the provisions of
this Treaty shall be binding on the Partner States, on
all organs and institutions of the Community other
than the Summit, the Court and Assembly…..”
Consequently and from the reading of the said Article, it is our
understanding that the Staff Rules and Regulations (2006) as
well as Council’s decisions are binding on the Respondent and we
do not find why and with which authority the Council’s decision
was distorted by the Respondent.
Furthermore, the basic rights, duties and obligations of the staff
members of the Community are enshrined in Staff Rules and
Regulation (2006).
CLAIM NO.1 OF 2012
As regards the appointment of EAC Staff,
Page 19