text: was directed at the non-implementation of the appellant's promotion from the General Service to the Professional category, 'in spite of his examination success', due to (a) non-compliance with ST/AI/313, (b) breaches in confidentiality during the examination and (c) irregularities- 8 - in the post allocation process. In the view of the Panel, none of these issues constitute administrative decisions as referred to above, but rather procedural matters falling strictly within the purview of the CEB [Central Examination Board]. For this reason, the Panel decided that it was not competent to consider the case." At the request of the representative of the Respondent, the JAB reconvened to consider the case on the merits and reiterated its original decisions, namely "(a) that the appeal was time bound [sic] and that there was no basis for a waiver of time-limits and (b) that the subject matter of the appeal falls outside the competence of the JAB." On 8 September 1988, the Officer-in-Charge of the Department of Administration and Management informed the Applicant that the Secretary-General had re-examined his case in light of the Board's response and taken note that the Board had reiterated its original decision not to entertain his appeal under paragraphs (e) and (j) of staff rule 111.2. On 23 November 1988, the Applicant filed with the Tribunal the application referred to above. Whereas the Applicant's principal contentions are: 1.Since the CEB had no authority to disregard administrative instructions, the decision by the Respondent not to adhere to the procedure set forth in ST/AI/313 violated the Applicant's rights under staff regulation 11.1 and the JAB should have considered the merits of his appeal. 2.The JAB report on the merits was misleading and misrepresented the facts. 3.The refusal of the Administration to make more than four Finance posts available was motivated by animus against the
analysis: The text appears to be a legal document related to a staff member's appeal process within an international organization. The language used is formal and technical, with references to specific regulations and procedures. The issues discussed are administrative in nature, involving promotion, examination results, and post allocation processes. These topics are not directly related to any of the specific fields of economic development, natural resources, or industry, but rather to the internal workings of the organization.