This chapter explores the disparity between UNHCR’s formal accountability structures—such as the Inspector General’s Office, Ethics Office, Ombudsman, and Staff Council—and the reality of how power and misconduct are managed. Although oversight mechanisms are in place on paper, high-profile cases like Caroline Hunt-Matthes and the Lubbers harassment scandal expose a culture of retaliation, selective enforcement, and protection of senior officials. Organisational justice theory helps explain how such double standards damage trust, demotivate staff, and foster a climate of silence. Psychodynamic perspectives reveal the use of institutional defences—denial, scapegoating, ritualisation—that conceal anxiety but hinder learning. Hogan assessments indicate that conformity, impression management, and external validation are rewarded over honesty, enabling narcissistic and manipulative personalities to flourish. The result is an imbalance of accountability: staff and refugees alike encounter obstacles to redress, while senior managers often evade scrutiny. This failure not only erodes morale but also directly undermines UNHCR’s legitimacy and its ability to uphold refugee protection.