In these pages, I describe my case against the International Office of Epizootics (OIE) [1] and how it has been handled by the Administrative Tribunal (ILOAT) of the International Labour Organization (ILO) [2]. I consider the way my rights have been denied by the first organization, and “protected” by the second, to be quite scandalous. My claim is that the abuse and illegality commited by the OIE has been transformed by the ILOAT into a case of blatant denial of justice.	I believe the information in the following pages will be of interest to: 1. International civil servants considering an attempt to defend their rights before the ILOAT. 2. People interested in how employees, as well as taxpayers’ money, are abused within the OIE. 3. Anyone interested in how employees, as well as taxpayers’ money, can be abused within intergovernmental organizations.
My case in summary: In September 1998, I reported that the OIE’s office in Buenos Aires, led by a former OIE President, Emilio Gimeno, was submitting fraudulent expense reports. I was asked to look the other way. I refused. In February 1999, I was dismissed from the OIE. In the interval between these two dates I was subjected to false and unjustified attacks on my work and received humiliating working instructions. I took my case to the ILOAT which is supposed to protect the rights of staff members of intergovernmental organizations.
The ILOAT procedure is as follows: The initial complaint brief, a reply from the defendant organization, a rejoinder from the complainant, a surrejoinder from the defendant, then judgment from the ILOAT. In my brief and rejoinder, I provided evidence that the OIE had acted abusively and illegally against me. I also provided evidence of pension fund shenanigans perpetrated by the OIE’s French civil service managers. In February 2000, ILOAT rendered Judgment 1907. I lost in no unclear terms. This puzzled me until I learned that the President of the ILOAT, who sat my case and decided on who should sit with him, was a French civil servant. The judge in question is also a former colleague of the OIE’s legal advisor (from the Institut d'études politiques de Paris - Sciences-Po). Furthermore, he and the OIE’s External Auditor are alumni of the elite French civil service school, l’Ecole nationale d’administration. In April and September 2000, I submitted an “Application for Review” (AFR) to the ILOAT. I based my AFR on the grounds that, among other things, the tribunal has committed material error, disregarded facts, and cannot be considered as providing sufficient safeguards concerning its impartiality and objectivity. In January 2001, the ILOAT dismissed my application for review.  This is the case in a nutshell. If you are interested to know more, I can only encourage you to take a look at the pages on this site. I have put online all my letters to the OIE prior to my dismissal and my four submissions, to date, to the ILOAT, as well as the judgment against me. I also provide other links of interest. Some of the evidence provided to the tribunal is included in this site but not, for practical reasons, all. Should you want to ask me questions or make suggestions, you are more than welcome to contact me at Contact. Patrick Reis-Ekelund March 2001	Highlights: Regular Bonuses, Probation Rules, Agreement with Thailand, Accounts of Regional Representation, Disciplinary Rules, Disregard of Resolutions, Misleading Information, Disregard of Financial Regulations, Pension Fund, Material error, Impartiality, Links betweeen the OIE and the Tribunal, Self-nominated Judge with links to the OIE  Pages related to my case: [3] March 1999 - Information provided to the Delegates of OIE Member States following my dismissal (this information was included as evidence in my subsequent submissions to ILOAT) April 1999 - My complaint Brief submitted to the Administrative Tribunal (ILOAT) September 1999 - My Rejoinder (following the OIE’s Reply) submitted to ILOAT Appendix I to Rejoinder - Pension Fund shenanigans in favor of French civil servants February 2000 - The Administrative Tribunal’s decision, Judgment 1907 10 April 2000 - My Application for Review (AFR) submitted to ILOAT 19 September 2000 - My AFR Rejoinder (following the OIE’s Reply) submitted to ILOAT 31 January 2001 - The Administrative Tribunal's decision, Judgment 2021 Links to relevant sites: International Office of Epizootics International Labour Organization Administrative Tribunal of the ILO Unido-Watch

[1] The OIE, more commonly known under its French name Office International des Epizooties, is an intergovernmental organization based in Paris (France). As the world organisation for animal health, the main objectives of the OIE are to: inform Governments of the occurrence and course of animal diseases, such as e.g. mad cow disease, throughout the world, and of ways to control these diseases;  coordinate, at the international level, studies devoted to the surveillance and control of animal diseases; harmonize regulations for trade in animals and animal products among Member States. The Director General of the OIE when I worked for the organisation was Dr Jean Blancou, a French civil servant. On 1 January 2001, he was replaced by another French civil servant, Dr Bernard Vallat.
[2] The International Labour Organization is the UN specialized agency, based in Geneva (Switzerland), which seeks the promotion of social justice and internationally recognized human and labour rights. The ILO formulates international labour standards in the form of Conventions and Recommendations setting minimum standards of basic labour rights. The ILO Administrative Tribunal (ILOAT) hears complaints from serving and former officials of the ILO or other international organizations. The current Director General of the ILO is Juan Somavia.
[3] These documents appear as first published/submitted with only minor alterations (e.g. address changes).