ELEN
Εκλογη Εξελιξη μελων δεπ δικηγορος

Election & Promotion of Faculty Members (DEP) – Lawyer

Election & Promotion of Faculty Members (DEP): Legal Protection of Your Academic Career

Appointment to an academic rank represents the culmination of years of research and effort. However, election and promotion procedures at Greek Universities are often marred by deficient reasoning, formal omissions or erroneous comparative evaluation. At ZIAMPARAS & ASSOCIATES, we approach University Law with the seriousness and scientific precision that the academic community deserves.

A Twofold Approach: Why Our Analysis Stands Out

The judgment of an electoral body is not unassailable. What is required is a lawyer who understands both the administrative framework and the logical structure of evaluation.

  • We treat evaluation reports and minutes of election as “data systems”. We identify the logical gaps and contradictions in the reasoning that lead to unlawful decisions.

  • We interpret the concepts of “scientific excellence” and “relevance of the cognitive subject” in a way that establishes strong grounds of annulment before the Administrative Courts and the Council of State (StE).

Services for Faculty Members (DEP) & Candidates:

  1. Review of the APELLA Procedure: Monitoring lawfulness at every stage, from the formation of the electoral body to the final session.

  2. Objection & Application for Annulment: Challenging election or promotion minutes for breach of essential procedural form, erroneous assessment of qualifications or improper composition of the body.

  3. Memoranda to Electoral Bodies: Drafting of well-substantiated memoranda highlighting the strengths of your CV and research output.

  4. Disciplinary & Service-Status Matters: Legal representation in disciplinary proceedings and disputes concerning the service status of faculty members.

“Academic progression must be judged on the basis of merit and transparency. We ensure that your career path is not derailed by administrative failings or arbitrariness.”

Protect Your Work

The deadlines for challenging election acts are mandatory and non-extendable. Timely legal advice is decisive in safeguarding your rights.

In greater detail:

Who is regarded as a member of the Teaching and Research Staff (DEP) of Greek Universities?

The Teaching and Research Staff (DEP) consists of Professors, Associate Professors, Assistant Professors and Lecturers. Faculty members are public officials and enjoy functional independence in the exercise of their teaching and research duties.

Faculty members are required to provide teaching, research-scientific and administrative work. More specifically:

  • The teaching work of faculty members mainly comprises the teaching of undergraduate and postgraduate courses, the organisation, supervision and operation of laboratories and clinics, laboratory or clinical exercises and assignments, participation in tutorials and seminars, the writing of teaching aids, cooperation with undergraduate and postgraduate students, the conduct of examinations and student assessment, as well as supervisory duties during the examination process.
  • The research-scientific work of faculty members mainly includes basic or applied research, guidance and supervision in the preparation of dissertations, diploma theses and doctoral theses, as well as participation in conferences and research seminars.
  • The administrative work of faculty members mainly comprises participation in the governing bodies of the higher education institutions (Sector General Assembly, Department General Assembly, Department Board, Senate), participation in committees and councils of the institution, holding the office of Sector Director, Department Chair, Faculty Dean, Vice-Rector or Rector, as well as participation in electoral bodies and rapporteur committees.

Faculty members are appointed under a full-time regime and may, exceptionally, be classified under part-time status upon application, in accordance with the applicable legislation, provided they do not fall within the conditions of incompatibility and suspension of the faculty status. Faculty members are entitled to promotion to the immediately higher rank, in accordance with the applicable provisions.

What does the draft law placed in public consultation provide for the election and promotion of faculty members?

1. The Chair of the Department for whose needs the post is announced convenes the Electoral Body in a first session within ten (10) days from the deadline for the submission of candidacies, as set out in the call. The Department Chair participates in the sessions of the electoral body and acts as presiding officer, without the right to vote, unless he or she also participates as a member of the electoral body. If the deadline for convening the electoral body lapses unused, jurisdiction passes to the Dean of the Faculty and, in the case of a single-department Faculty, to the Rector of the Institution.

2. At the first session of the electoral body, it is examined whether any of its members presents an impediment to participation. The following are defined as impediments to participation in an electoral body: a) the status of spouse or cohabiting partner, or kinship by blood or affinity in the direct or collateral line up to the fourth degree, or the existence of a particular bond, special relationship or hostility with any of the candidates; b) the placement of the faculty (DEP) member under suspension status; c) the taking of unpaid leave at the time of the session of the electoral body. Specifically as regards the existence of an impediment in respect of an elector due to a particular bond, special relationship or hostility with any of the candidates, the electoral body, without the participation of the member in respect of whom the impediment is invoked, decides with reasoning whether the impediment exists. If an impediment to participation is established, the member is replaced by lot, conducted by analogous application of Article 146 for the replacement of the member.

3. At its first session, the electoral body selects from among its regular members holding the same cognitive subject three (3) members who form the three-member rapporteur committee. The three-member rapporteur committee consists of one (1) internal elector and two (2) external electors. If there is no sufficient number of members of the same cognitive subject, the selection is made among members of the electoral body with a related cognitive subject.

4. The three-member rapporteur committee, within an exclusive deadline of three (3) months from the first session of the electoral body, submits the rapporteur’s report to the Department Chair and to the members of the electoral body and uploads it to the electronic management system referred to in Article 142.

5. The rapporteur’s report shall include at least:

a) analysis and evaluation of the formal and substantive qualifications, work and personality of each candidate, providing a judgment on his or her contribution to the advancement of science;

b) an opinion as to whether the candidates meet the qualifications required by law and, in particular, as to the relevance of the doctoral thesis and of the candidates’ overall scientific, teaching, clinical or artistic work to the cognitive subject of the post to be filled, as well as whether they possess the additional preconditions and qualifications for election to a DEP post of the rank corresponding to that of the announced position, in accordance with paragraph 6 of Article 143;

c) where it is judged that more than one candidate meets the criteria of point (b) for election to a DEP post, a comparative and merit-based ranking of the candidates is carried out, based on their scientific, research, teaching and other work.

In order to provide an accurate picture of each candidate, the committee must analyse and assess the candidate’s work, scientific activity and other substantive qualifications.

6. The Three-Member Rapporteur Committee may request letters of recommendation from professors of equivalent foreign higher education institutions or foreign researchers in the same or a related cognitive subject to that of the post to be filled.

7. Candidates who are judged to meet the qualifications required by law for election to a DEP post under Article 143 are invited by the Department Chair to deliver a scientific lecture on one (1) topic relating to the cognitive subject of the announced post, before the members of the electoral body and the academic community, including interested students. The scientific lecture of the candidates is in any event held before the submission of the rapporteur’s report and may be conducted remotely by electronic means.

8. If a member of the three-member rapporteur committee resigns or ceases to serve, or if it is established that the rapporteur’s report cannot be drafted, the members of the three-member committee may submit, jointly or separately within the same deadline, a memorandum which in no case substitutes for a rapporteur’s report.

9. Within an exclusive deadline of thirty (30) days from the submission of the rapporteur’s report, the Department Chair convenes the electoral body for the conduct of the election. Members of the Department Assembly may attend the session without the right to vote. If the deadline for the submission of the rapporteur’s report lapses unused, the Department Chair is required to convene the electoral body within a deadline of thirty (30) days from the unused expiry of the deadline, so that the members of the electoral body may proceed to evaluate the candidacies submitted and the accompanying supporting documents, by analogous application of the procedure of paragraph 4. If the deadline for convening the electoral body lapses unused, jurisdiction passes to the Dean of the relevant Faculty and, in the case of a single-department Faculty, to the Rector of the higher education institution, who chairs the electoral body without the right to vote. The convocation takes place within an exclusive deadline of ten (10) days from the deadline by which the Department Chair was required to convene the Electoral Body.

10. The invitation is notified to the members of the electoral body and to the candidates at least seven (7) days before the date of the session of the electoral body for the election or promotion. Candidates are entitled to submit a relevant memorandum at least three (3) days before the session of the electoral body, which they upload to the integrated electronic management system referred to in Article 142.

11. Sessions of the members of the Rapporteur Committees and of the Electoral Bodies may be held by teleconference, ensuring the confidentiality of the session, the verification of the identity of the members of the electoral body, the security of electronic transmission of voice, data and image, and the integrity of the information transmitted. If the session is held by teleconference, this is mandatorily noted in the minutes of the session. The sessions of the electoral bodies may be video-recorded, provided that the Internal Regulation of the Institution so provides.

12. At the start of the session, candidates may orally develop their views on the content of the rapporteur’s report and respond to questions from members of the Electoral Body, after which they withdraw from the session. The members of the electoral body may engage in discussion on the content of the rapporteur’s report and on the candidates’ responses.

13. The minutes of the election shall mandatorily include the following elements:

a) the rapporteur’s report of the Three-Member Committee or the memoranda submitted, where no rapporteur’s report has been submitted;

b) the candidates’ memoranda;

c) the vote of each member of the electoral body, mandatorily accompanied by specific and sufficient reasoning, based on the candidate’s overall scientific, teaching, clinical or artistic work.

If no rapporteur’s report has been submitted, the minutes of the election shall include the elements of paragraph 5.

14. Where it is judged that more than one candidate meets the necessary qualifications for election, the electoral body shall also vote on whether the remaining candidates may be selected, in the event that the first selected candidate does not accept the appointment, the appointment act is revoked, or an objective impediment to appointment exists. For this purpose, a list is drawn up with the merit-based ranking of the remaining candidates. For inclusion of a candidate in the list in descending order of merit, at least six (6) positive votes are required.

15. If only one (1) candidate is participating in the election or promotion procedure and is judged to meet the necessary qualifications, the candidate’s election takes place only if six (6) positive votes are obtained; otherwise, the procedure is declared unsuccessful.

16. If there are several candidates and none obtains at least six (6) positive votes, the vote is repeated at the same session between the two (2) leading candidates. If there is a tie among more than two (2) candidates, all those tied participate in the second vote. If, in the second vote, none of the candidates obtains at least six (6) positive votes, the procedure is declared unsuccessful.

How is the election or promotion procedure for faculty members concluded (redistribution and re-announcement of posts)?

1. The election procedure shall be concluded at the latest within twelve (12) months from the issuance of the decision allocating the new faculty (DEP) posts. The promotion procedure shall be concluded at the latest within twelve (12) months from the date of submission of the faculty member’s promotion request to the Department Assembly.

2. The minutes of election or promotion are uploaded by the Department Chair to the integrated electronic management system referred to in Article 142 and notified to the Dean of the Faculty, the Rector and the Governing Council.

3. If the election procedure for a new faculty member is not completed within the deadline of paragraph 1, the announcement automatically ceases to be valid and the relevant post for the Department is abolished. By decision of the Senate, the new faculty posts that were not filled due to the unused expiry of the deadline are reallocated to other Departments of the higher education institution. By way of exception, the deadline for completing the election procedure for a new faculty member may be extended by decision of the Senate of the institution, upon request of the Department Chair, for a period not exceeding thirty (30) days, where the number of candidates is particularly high.

4. Following the completion of the new allocation of posts, the Rector of the institution shall, within an exclusive deadline of one (1) month, issue the announcement of the new faculty post in the next-ranked cognitive subject of the Department to which the post was allocated, as determined at the time of allocation of posts by the Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs. For the procedure of forming the electoral body and the rapporteur committee, the procedure of Article 146 applies analogously, drawing from the registers of internal and external electors that were in force at the time of the initial allocation of the post.

5. If an election procedure is declared unsuccessful, the post is re-announced by the Rector of the institution, following a decision of the Deanery and a recommendation of the Department Assembly, in the same or in the next-ranked cognitive subject which has not been announced from those determined by the decision under Article 138.

What is the procedure for the appointment of faculty members?

1. By act of the Rector, issued within one (1) month from the completion of the election or promotion procedure of the faculty member, the elected or promoted faculty member is appointed.

2. Those appointed or promoted are required, within three (3) months from the notification of the relevant Rector’s act, to take up their duties. By decision of the Rector, upon submission of a substantiated request by the appointed faculty member, the deadline for taking up duties may be extended for a period not exceeding six (6) months. The granting of the extension is mandatory if the faculty member requesting the extension has permanent residence abroad on the date of his or her appointment.

3. If the deadline set for taking up duties lapses unused, the elected person is deemed not to have accepted the appointment and the relevant act is revoked by act of the Rector. In the case of an election, the Department Assembly may select the next candidate in the order of ranking, if any.

4. If there is no next candidate in the order of ranking, the Rector of the higher education institution, following a decision of the Deanery and a recommendation of the Department Assembly, announces the post in the same or in the next-ranked cognitive subject which has not been announced from those determined by the allocation decision under Article 138 at the time of allocation of posts by the Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs.

5. The acts of appointment or promotion of faculty members of higher education institutions are notified without delay to the Minister of Education and Religious Affairs for the exercise of the legality review provided for in Article 151.

How is the legality review of the election and promotion of faculty members carried out by the Governing Council?

1. Within thirty (30) days from the notification of the minutes of election, a legality review of the procedure is carried out by the Governing Council, which may request the assistance of the legal service of the higher education institution. The review focuses in particular on deficiencies in the reasoning concerning the evaluation of candidates’ qualifications.

2. The Dean of the Faculty to which the Department belongs, the candidate who participated in the election procedure, or any other person with a legal interest, may submit an objection against the minutes of the electoral body before the Governing Council within an exclusive deadline of thirty (30) days from the upload of the minutes to the integrated electronic management system referred to in Article 142. If an objection is submitted against the minutes of election, the deadline of paragraph 1 is automatically extended by another thirty (30) days.

3. By decision of the Governing Council, following the conduct of the legality review, the minutes of election may be remitted with reasoning, requesting the repetition of the procedure from the point at which the deficiency arose. If the deadline of paragraph 2 lapses unused, the objections are deemed rejected and the Rector proceeds with the issuance of the appointment act in accordance with Article 149.

How is the legality review of the election and promotion of faculty members carried out by the Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs?

1. The Minister of Education and Religious Affairs reviews the lawfulness of the election or promotion procedures for faculty members of higher education institutions, ex officio or upon petition by any person with a legal interest. The petition is filed within sixty (60) days from the publication of the Rector’s act on election or promotion.

2. By decision of the Minister of Education and Religious Affairs, a three-member committee is established with an annual term of office, tasked with reviewing the lawfulness of the election or promotion procedures of faculty members of higher education institutions, examining the petitions submitted for the annulment of the minutes of election, submitting recommendations for the remittal of the election or promotion files where breach of legislation and deficiency in observing the election or promotion procedures arise, and submitting an opinion to the Minister after examination of the file. The Committee consists of two (2) Legal Counsel of the State and the Head of the General Directorate of Higher Education of the Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs.

3. The legality review by the Minister is concluded within an exclusive deadline of six (6) months from the date the election or promotion file reaches the Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs.

How is the cognitive subject of faculty members modified?

1. Faculty members, irrespective of the rank in which they serve, may apply for a modification of their cognitive subject, provided the following conditions are met: a) they have an extensive teaching and overall scientific record (writing, research, laboratory or clinical), of which at least fifty per cent (50%) of their published scientific work falls within the cognitive subject for which they apply; b) the cognitive subject in which they apply to be classified exists in the register of cognitive subjects of the Department in accordance with Article 144; c) twelve (12) months have elapsed since the date of their election or last promotion to the rank in which they serve.

2. The modification of cognitive subject is carried out by decision of the Minister of Education and Religious Affairs upon request of the faculty member, following a decision of the Department Assembly and an opinion of the Sector in which the faculty member serves to the effect that the conditions of paragraph 1 are met.

3. The procedure of this article applies analogously to members of the Special Educational Staff (EEP) and Laboratory Teaching Staff (EDIP).

How are transfers of faculty members carried out?

1. Faculty members of higher education institutions at the rank of Professor or Associate Professor may apply for transfer to a Department of the same or another higher education institution, provided that the following conditions are met: a) they have completed five (5) years of continuous and uninterrupted service in the Department in which they serve (Department of origin); b) they have not received another transfer within the last ten (10) years; c) the Department to which they wish to be transferred (host Department) is located outside the region of Attica or the regional unit of Thessaloniki; d) their cognitive subject is included in the register of cognitive subjects of the host Department; e) at least one (1) faculty member with the same cognitive subject as that of the applicant is serving in the Department of origin. Point (c) does not apply to faculty members already serving in Departments of higher education institutions located in the region of Attica or the regional unit of Thessaloniki. Verification of compliance with conditions (a), (b), (c) and (e) is the responsibility of the Department of origin, while verification of condition (d) is the responsibility of the host Department.

2. The transfer of a faculty member to another Department of the same higher education institution is effected by decision of the Senate of the institution, issued upon request of the interested faculty member and following an opinion of the Deanery of the Faculty and of the Assembly of the Department of origin, upon request of the interested faculty member. The opinions of the Department Assembly and the Deanery on transfer requests of faculty members must be fully reasoned. In adopting them, particular consideration is given to the educational and research needs of the Department of origin for the continued smooth operation of its activities, its staffing and especially the number of faculty members serving with the same cognitive subject, as well as the continued fulfilment of the Department’s self-sufficiency requirements. Before the issuance of the Senate’s decision, the opinion of the Assembly of the host Department and of the Deanery of the Faculty to which the host Department belongs is sought. Transfer applications to another Department of the same higher education institution are examined within an exclusive deadline of ninety (90) days; otherwise, they are deemed tacitly rejected.

3. The transfer of a faculty member to a Department of another higher education institution requires the issuance of a decision of the Senate of the institution where the faculty member serves, in accordance with the procedure of paragraph 2, in which the consent of the institution to the transfer of the budgetary credit for the post of the transferring faculty member is recorded. If the decision of the Senate is positive, the interested faculty member submits a request to the Assembly of the host Department of the institution to which he or she wishes to be transferred, attaching the decision of the Senate of the institution of origin. The Assembly of the host Department may request the submission of additional information for the evaluation of the faculty member’s application, in particular information relating to teaching and overall scientific work (writing, research, laboratory or clinical). If the decision of the Department Assembly on the request is positive, it is forwarded to the Deanery of the Faculty for an opinion and then to the Senate of the institution, which approves or rejects the faculty member’s transfer request. If the decision of the host Department Assembly is negative, the request is rejected. Transfer applications to a Department of another higher education institution are examined within an exclusive deadline of ninety (90) days from the submission of the application and the necessary supporting documents to the host Department; otherwise, they are deemed tacitly rejected.

4. The transfer is concluded by issuance of an act of the Rector of the institution to which the host Department belongs. Faculty members who are transferred to another Department of the same or of another institution are classified in the same rank that they held at the time of submission of the transfer application and have the same service status.

5. The conditions of points (a), (b) and (c) of paragraph 1 do not apply to transfer applications of faculty members due to the abolition of the Department in which they served, nor to faculty members serving in the General Departments of higher education institutions.

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ON THE ELECTION AND PROMOTION OF FACULTY MEMBERS (DEP)

1. What can I do if I consider the electoral body’s judgment unfair?

The decision of the electoral body constitutes an administrative act and is open to challenge. A candidate who has been bypassed or judged negatively may file an objection before the legality review body of the higher education institution, as well as an application for annulment before the Council of State. Typical grounds of annulment include deficient reasoning of the vote, erroneous assessment of the relevance of the cognitive subject, improper composition of the electoral body, failure to observe deadlines and breach of essential procedural form. As a rule, specialised analysis of the rapporteur’s report and the minutes of election reveals points that support a successful challenge.

2. Within what time frame must I challenge the act of election?

The deadlines are mandatory and non-extendable, and failure to observe them renders the petition inadmissible. The application for annulment before the Council of State is, as a rule, filed within sixty days from the notification or full knowledge of the contested act. For objections before the bodies of the higher education institution, the specific deadlines of the institution’s internal regulation apply, usually short. Timely action is critical, because once the deadlines lapse the act becomes unchallengeable. For this reason, consultation with a lawyer must take place as soon as the minutes are uploaded to the APELLA system.

3. Which court hears disputes concerning the election of faculty members?

Disputes arising from acts of election, promotion and appointment of faculty members fall within the annulment jurisdiction of the Council of State, since they are administrative acts concerning academic public officials. For certain incidental disputes relating to service status or of a disciplinary nature, jurisdiction may lie with the Administrative Court of Appeals. In parallel, in urgent cases, an application for suspension of execution may be filed, so that the appointment of another candidate does not proceed while the annulment proceedings are pending. Correctly identifying the competent court is a precondition of admissibility.

4. What documents do I need in order to challenge the decision?

All elements of the APELLA procedure are required: the announcement of the post, the minutes of the formation of the electoral body, the rapporteur’s report of the three-member committee, the minutes of the session containing the reasoned votes of each elector, the candidates’ memoranda and your CV with publications. Useful materials also include items substantiating the relevance of your work to the cognitive subject, bibliometric indicators, citation data and comparative information regarding the other candidates. The more complete the file, the stronger the substantiation of the deficient or erroneous judgment of the electoral body.

5. What are the prospects of annulment for such a petition?

The prospects depend primarily on the quality of the reasoning of the minutes. The Council of State has repeatedly annulled acts of election due to formulaic, stereotypical or non-existent reasoning, due to erroneous judgment on the relevance of the cognitive subject, due to the participation of an elector subject to an impediment, or due to failure to observe deadlines. By contrast, in the substantive judgment as to scientific excellence, the court exercises self-restraint. Accordingly, the success of the petition depends on identifying specific legal deficiencies in the minutes and not merely on disagreement with the merit-based judgment. As a rule, specialised analysis of the documents reveals such deficiencies.

6. What is the role of the lawyer in this procedure?

The lawyer monitors the lawfulness of the APELLA procedure from the formation of the electoral body until the issuance of the minutes, drafts a substantiated memorandum to the electoral body highlighting the candidate’s qualifications and establishing the strength of the CV. In the event of a negative or deficient judgment, the lawyer files an objection and an application for annulment, submits an application for suspension of execution and represents the client before the Council of State. The lawyer also provides assistance in disciplinary proceedings and matters of service status. The experience of ZIAMPARAS D. & ASSOCIATES in University Law ensures the scientifically substantiated defence of your academic career.


Proudly powered by WordPress