[1]: section 5.2 In 2012, Ban Ki-moon, the Secretary-General of the United Nations, in his Annual Reports to the General Assembly, titled "Improvement of the status of women in the United Nations system" stated that Special Measures are "procedures designed to accelerate the achievement of gender parity at the Professional levels and above"[2] and that the aim of these procedures was to ensure "gender balance in recruitment and promotion" and rectify "past and current forms and effects of discrimination against women".[2]: p.
[4] The general recommendation "clarifies the nature and meaning of article 4, paragraph 1, in order to facilitate and ensure the implementation of Temporary special measures and accelerate progress in achieving gender equality in employment and professional fields".
[4]: paragraph 18 The 'temporary special measures', includes 'preferential treatment; targeted recruitment, hiring and promotion; numerical goals connected with time frames; and quota systems'.
[4]: paragraph 22 The UN Committee on CEDAW in its general recommendations number 25 commended the Secretary General on his initiative to implement 'temporary special measures', noting "The use of temporary special measures by the Secretary-General of the United Nations is a practical example in the area of women's employment, including through administrative instructions on the recruitment, promotion and placement of women in the Secretariat.
[5][6] In 1984, the UN Secretariat, in order to better focus efforts to wards achieving Gender Equality, prepared its first five-year "Action plan to improve the status of women for the period 1985–90".
50, fn 64 At the current rate of progress, according to the secretary general's report, gender parity at the D-1 to higher levels will be achieved after 102 years.
[2]: paragraph 133 Reasons most frequently cited for failure to meet the General Assembly targets for Gender Equality, and slide in women's representation at the D1 and above level, according to the Secretary General, are: [a] failure by some "entities" in the "implementation of special measures for gender equality", and [b] tardy implementation of five year Actions Plans [para 143].
..."[1]: section1.1 [13] Section 1.6 of ST/AI/1999/9 mandates that "Cumulative seniority shall be taken into account when considering women candidates for promotion, except when it would adversely affect their situation.
[1]: Sections 4.1 and 4.5 The Steering Committee for the Improvement of the Status of Women in the Secretariat (ST/SGB/1999/9) is responsible for monitoring and implementation of policies of gender equality, including Special Measures.
[18]: p2, preamble [18]: p17, section 13.2 The new Staff selection system was listed in 2014 with Gender Affirmative A/I ((ST/AI 1999/9)) as applicable law for Appointments, placement and promotion.
United Nations Administrative tribunal with Judge Sumar Sen as president, in a seminal Judgment on affirmative action, held: "that the various resolutions for Improvement of the status of women in the Secretariat which have been referred to and statements of the Secretary-General have conceded the existence of an unsatisfactory history with respect to the recruitment and promotion of women that does not accord with Article 8 of the Charter.
[21] In such circumstances, the Tribunal considers that Article 8 of the Charter must be regarded as a source of authority for reasonable efforts to improve the status of women.
[17]: paragraph XIX United Nations Administrative Tribunal, with Mr. Luis de Posadas Montero, Vice-President, Presiding, reaffirmed Grinblat (1992), and held that "the affirmative action measure establishes a right to preferential treatment for women whose qualifications 'are substantially equal to the qualifications of competing male candidates'", and ruled that "as the Applicant was the only woman short-listed for the post, and as she was equally, if not more, qualified for the post, she had a right to promotion, in the light of ST/SGB/237".
[23]: paragraph V United Nations Administrative Tribunal (Mr. Mayer Gabay, President; Ms. Marsha A. Echols; and Mr. Omer Yousif Bireedo) in the case of an unsuccessful male candidate who challenged the promotion of a woman as unlawful and in violation of his rights of due process, citing UNAT Judgements No.
"[24]: paragraph V The Tribunal concluded that the male candidate had received "full and fair consideration" for the post and that the Organization was not bound by the recommendation of the hiring department.
[24]: paragraph VII The Tribunal held that the Secretary-General "acted within his discretionary authority in deciding to promote a substantially equally qualified female candidate to the D-1 level post".
[25]: paragraph II In August 2012, the Organization acknowledged ST/AI/1999/9 (Special measures for achieving Gender Equality) as applicable law on gender balance, noting that "The general provisions to give women preferential treatment for appointments are found in ST/AI/1999/9" and that "selection, vacancies shall be filled by a woman if her qualifications: (a) meet the requirements for the vacant post and (b) are substantially equal or superior to those of competing male candidates (sec.
[26]: paragraph 54 The Tribunal Judge Coral Shaw confirmed the mandatory character of the "rules in ST/AI/1999/9 concerning preferential treatment of women in selection processes".
A tabulation of the salient cases in which gender A/I has been a subject of litigation, and judgments by the tribunal, is below: The Tribunal also notes that the mandatory rules in ST/AI/1999/9 concerning preferential treatment of women in selection processes only applies if the female candidate in question is found suitable for the job and her qualifications are substantially equal or superior to that of the male competitors.
[26]: paragraph 54 The Tribunal Judge Coral Shaw confirmed the mandatory character of the "rules in ST/AI/1999/9 concerning preferential treatment of women in selection processes".