5 Hrs
Source:
اليوم السابع
_1777352142843_145525226.png&w=64&q=75){kind=small}
When does suspicion imply innocence says court
The Court of Cassation confirmed that doubt regarding the validity of the charge and the lack of conclusive evidence proving the violation do not justify imposing an administrative penalty on the employee. It clarified that establishing an administrative violation requires evidence that reassures the decision-making authority, and that doubt should be interpreted in favor of the employee. It also emphasized that the employee is considered innocent until the violation is proven with evidence strong enough for conviction, and that the assessment of evidence is within the authority of the court, provided that the evidence is established and based on a proper origin in the case files. This means that doubt and uncertainty prevent the imposition of punishment, underscoring the necessity of clear and conclusive evidence before condemning an employee for disciplinary violations.
Size: 120%Text Size
Notice: This Is an AI-Generated Summary
Comments (0)