ELEN
ενορκη διοικητικη εξεταση

Sworn Administrative Inquiry (EDE) – Lawyer

A sworn administrative inquiry (EDE) is conducted whenever the service has serious suspicions or clear indications of the commission of a disciplinary offence. Following written and oral inquiries, the competent service of the Ministry of the Interior provides information on the conduct of a Sworn Administrative Inquiry (E.D.E.), pursuant to Article 126 of the Civil Servants Code (Law 3528/2007), as replaced by the second article of Law 4057/2012 (Government Gazette A’ 54), aiming at the correct and uniform application of the relevant provisions and at safeguarding the credibility of the said procedure as a preliminary step within the disciplinary process.

What is the procedure of a Sworn Administrative Inquiry (EDE)?

In application of the relevant provisions, the procedure for assigning and conducting an E.D.E. is as follows:

  • Identification of the need to conduct an EDE (when and for what purpose?)
  • Assignment of the EDE (by whom it is ordered, by whom it is carried out, deadline for completion)
  • Conduct of the EDE (investigative acts)
  • Submission of a reasoned report
  • Initiation of disciplinary prosecution / Conduct of supplementary EDE / Completion of the procedure without disciplinary prosecution – Filing.

When is a Sworn Administrative Inquiry (EDE) conducted, and what is its purpose?

A sworn administrative inquiry (E.D.E.) is conducted whenever the service has (a) serious suspicions, that is, noteworthy and significant information, or (b) clear indications, that is, serious indications which are prima facie persuasive, of the commission of a disciplinary offence (Interpretation of the Civil Servants Code, A.I. Tachos – I.L. Symeonidis, Articles 106-third, Sakkoulas Publishing, Athens-Thessaloniki, 2007, p. 1349 et seq.).

The purpose of the EDE is the gathering of evidence (not informally, as in the preliminary examination) for the establishment of:

i) the commission of a disciplinary offence,

ii) the identification of the persons who may be responsible, and iii) the investigation of the circumstances under which it was committed, including the investigation of elements of culpability and attribution (Article 106 of the Civil Servants Code).

The sworn administrative inquiry EDE constitutes an investigative method situated between the preliminary examination (Article 125) and the disciplinary investigation (Article 127), through which the administration is enabled to detect any offences and persons responsible, so that, if necessary, the disciplinary procedure may subsequently be initiated. By means of the EDE, both the institutional standing of the service and the personality of the civil servant are protected against unfounded and unproven accusations and rumours (Legal Council of the State, Opinion 271/2001). A sworn administrative inquiry (EDE) may also be ordered following the conduct of a preliminary examination, where the person conducting the preliminary examination considers that the disciplinary offence under examination requires further investigation.

The sworn administrative inquiry EDE does not constitute the commencement of a disciplinary prosecution and does not interrupt the statute of limitations for the disciplinary offence under examination. Accordingly, the civil servant against whom suspicions or indications of having committed a disciplinary offence are accumulating cannot, during the conduct of the EDE, be characterised as a defendant or as a person under disciplinary prosecution. It is also pointed out that, until the completion of the disciplinary procedure that may be initiated following the conduct of the EDE and the issuance of a disciplinary decision, the presumption of innocence of the civil servant applies, by analogous application of the corresponding fundamental rule of criminal law (Legal Council of the State, Opinion 271/2001).

To whom is the conduct of a Sworn Administrative Inquiry (EDE) entrusted?

Any disciplinary superior, as defined under the provisions of Article 117 of the Civil Servants Code, as replaced by the second article of Law 4057/2012 and amended by Article 6(2) of Law 4325/2015, has the right to order a sworn administrative inquiry EDE (Annex – Template 1).

The sworn administrative inquiry is assigned to and carried out by a permanent civil servant, that is, exclusively by an employee with a public-law employment relationship of Grade A’ of the same Ministry or legal entity of public law (Article 126(2) of the Civil Servants Code, as amended by Article 41(1) of Law 4590/2019), and it is absolutely prohibited to assign the conduct of the EDE to a civil servant of a lower grade than that of the person to whom the act is attributed. From the combined reading of the provisions of Article 126 of the Civil Servants Code, according to which the EDE is conducted by a civil servant of equal grade to the person under examination, and of Article 97(c) of the Civil Servants Code, according to which there is no precedence among civil servants of the same branch and grade, it follows that the civil servant conducting the EDE need not also be senior to the civil servant to whom the act is attributed (Athens Court of Administrative Appeals 62/2015, 1588/2008).

At the discretion of the person ordering the conduct of the sworn administrative inquiry and on the basis of the circumstances of the disciplinary offence under investigation, the EDE may, for reasons of safeguarding objectivity, also be assigned to a permanent civil servant of Grade A’ of another Ministry or, in the case of a legal entity of public law, of the supervising Ministry (Article 126(2) of the Civil Servants Code, as amended by Article 41(1) of Law 4590/2019). It is noted that, since the provisions confer this option, disciplinary superiors should, weighing the factual circumstances of each case and the need to ensure objectivity, examine whether there is reason to assign the conduct of the E.D.E. to a permanent civil servant of another Ministry or, in the case of a legal entity of public law, of the supervising Ministry.

If the civil servant to whom the commission of the disciplinary offence is attributed is the head of an organisational unit of any level, the order to conduct a sworn administrative inquiry is assigned to a head of an organisational unit of at least the same level.

Furthermore, pursuant to Article 100(13) of Law 4622/2019, the Governor of the National Transparency Authority (E.A.D.) may order the conduct of an E.D.E., the fully reasoned conclusions of which shall be communicated to him without delay. In such case, if disciplinary liability arises, the initiation of disciplinary prosecution constitutes a binding administrative action for the competent bodies, to be exercised within an exclusive deadline of ten days from receipt of the conclusions. The aforementioned E.D.E. is conducted, by order of the Governor of the Authority, in derogation from the relevant provisions of the Civil Servants Code, by Inspectors-Auditors of the Authority designated by the Governor of the Authority and one permanent civil servant of at least Grade A’ of the audited entity, authority or service, who is proposed by their respective body of origin, within a deadline set in the relevant invitation of the Governor of the Authority. If the deadline so set elapses without action, the Governor of the Authority assigns the conduct of the E.D.E. solely to Inspectors-Auditors of the Authority. The Governor of the Authority, when assigning the conduct of an E.D.E., shall notify a summary of the matter to the competent inspector-auditor and to the service in which the civil servant serves or to which they organically belong. In all other respects, the E.D.E. is conducted in accordance with the provisions governing the relevant body, and where there is no specific provision, the corresponding provisions of the Civil Servants Code apply by analogy. Refusal to give a statement in an E.D.E. conducted as above constitutes a standalone disciplinary offence punishable by a fine of up to six months’ salary. If, on the basis of the E.D.E. conducted as above, it is established that a disciplinary offence has been committed of those punishable, pursuant to Article 109(2) of the Civil Servants Code, by the penalty of permanent dismissal, the Governor of the Authority (E.A.D.) himself initiates the disciplinary prosecution and refers the case to the competent disciplinary council. Inspectors-Auditors serving at the E.A.D. may conduct E.D.E. proceedings upon a relevant order of the Governor of the Authority, who in any event may initiate or order the initiation of disciplinary prosecution or the taking of other administrative measures, while an E.D.E. may also be conducted during the audit, upon a recommendation of the Inspectors-Auditors and an order of the Governor of the Authority, in which case the E.D.E. is conducted solely by Inspectors-Auditors of the Authority.

Further, according to Opinion No. 271/2001 of the Legal Council of the State, during the conduct of the EDE, the right of the civil servant to whom the commission of a disciplinary offence is attributed to seek the recusal of the person conducting it is not expressly provided for under Article 126 of the Civil Servants Code, whereas a corresponding provision exists in Article 127 of the Civil Servants Code regarding the disciplinary investigation. Nevertheless, if, during the conduct of the EDE, grounds justifying the recusal of the person conducting it are raised and established, or if the EDE conducted suffers from any other defect relating either to the person conducting it or to flaws, omissions, or irregularities affecting its validity or creating in the person under examination suspicions as to a lack of impartiality and objectivity—beyond, of course, any justified dissatisfaction arising from the proper performance of the duties of the person conducting the EDE—it must be accepted that the disciplinary superior who ordered the EDE, to whom the interested party may direct in writing a request for recusal during the conduct of the EDE, or even ex officio—if relevant information should come to his attention in any manner—is obliged to examine the merits of the request and take appropriate action either to remedy any injustices or simply to mitigate justified or even probable grievances, in application of the principle of impartiality, as a general principle of administrative law (Article 36 of the Civil Servants Code – Conflict of Interest, and Article 7 of the Code of Administrative Procedure – Law 2690/1999).

In any event, the lawful performance of duties, with the consequent dissatisfactions or unfavourable circumstances which arise from the very nature of the procedure, cannot, without further specific and proven elements, establish the notion of enmity, and general and indefinite allegations which do not demonstrate in a specific and clear manner a ground for recusal cannot be taken into consideration. Action, however, taken despite the existence of grounds for recusal entails the nullity of the relevant administrative act, by reason of the resulting presumption of bias on the part of the body acting, even if it is not proven that the decision taken is in fact biased.

The sworn administrative inquiry EDE is completed within two (2) months from the date on which the decision assigning its conduct was notified to the civil servant. The civil servant conducting the sworn administrative inquiry may request, by fully reasoned application, an extension of this deadline of up to one month. It is noted that the said deadline was provided for under the provisions of the Civil Servants Code (Law 3528/2007) for reasons of expediting the proceedings, so that if the person assigning the E.D.E. determines, with reasoning, that for reasons of public interest its completion within a shorter time is imperative, they may set for the person conducting the E.D.E. a shorter deadline than two (2) months. In any case, the right of the person conducting the E.D.E. to request, by fully reasoned application, an extension of this deadline of up to one month remains in effect.

How is a Sworn Administrative Inquiry (EDE) conducted?

By reference of the provisions of Article 126 of the Civil Servants Code, the provisions of paragraphs 5, 7 and 8 of Article 127 of the Civil Servants Code, as well as the provisions of Articles 129 and 131 of the Civil Servants Code which apply to the disciplinary investigation, also apply by analogy to the conduct of the EDE. According to these:

  • The EDE is confidential.
  • The EDE may be extended to the investigation of other offences by the same civil servant, provided sufficient evidence emerges.
  • The duties of clerk are performed by a civil servant designated by the person conducting the EDE (Annex – Template 2).

As regards the issue of access to the materials of the EDE, according to Opinion 501/2007 of the Legal Council of the State, as well as other opinions issued by the Legal Council of the State on the same issue (451/2012, 454/2012, 457/2012, 458/2012), the confidentiality of the EDE is not lifted by the submission of the conclusions report by the person conducting it, but its preservation is linked to whether disciplinary prosecution will be initiated against the civil servants to whom the conclusions report of the EDE attributes any disciplinary liability. If, on the basis of the conclusions report of the EDE, disciplinary prosecution is initiated, the person under disciplinary prosecution may obtain access to the materials of the EDE prior to the submission of their defence statement, as expressly provided in Article 135(3) of the Civil Servants Code. During the intervening period, between the submission of the EDE report and the possible initiation of disciplinary prosecution, the confidentiality of the EDE is preserved for as long as the competent disciplinary bodies are at the stage of examining the materials of the EDE, and for this reason access to the materials of the EDE is not permitted (cf. Legal Council of the State, Opinions 221/2007, 178/2000, 610/1999). If, on the contrary, on the basis of the said EDE report, the competent disciplinary bodies determine that disciplinary prosecution should not be initiated against the civil servants involved, and the relevant file is placed in the archive, then access to its materials may be obtained by anyone establishing a legitimate interest, under the conditions and restrictions provided by Article 5 of the Code of Administrative Procedure or any other special provisions.

During the examination of the civil servant to whom the commission of a disciplinary offence is attributed, the provisions of Articles 130(3) and 132 of the Civil Servants Code apply by analogy regarding the examination of witnesses and the examination of the civil servant to whom the commission of a disciplinary offence is attributed, respectively.

How are witnesses examined in a Sworn Administrative Inquiry (EDE)?

Article 130(3) of the Civil Servants Code grants the right to examine witnesses during the conduct of the EDE and until the examination of the civil servant to whom the commission of a disciplinary offence is attributed, upon their written application addressed to the person conducting the EDE, while the person conducting the EDE is obliged to examine at least five of the proposed witnesses. The failure to examine a proposed witness constitutes a breach of an essential procedural formality (Annex – Templates 3 and 4).

Witnesses are examined under oath, in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure (KPD). The non-appearance or refusal to give a statement by a witness without good cause constitutes a misdemeanour and, if the witness is a civil servant, also a disciplinary offence (Article 107(1)(l) of the Civil Servants Code, as in force). Pursuant to Article 218 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, as amended and in force, regarding the procedure for the oath of witnesses: “1. Every witness must, before being examined in court, take a public oath. To this end, they are asked whether they prefer to take a religious or civil oath. 2. The form of the Christian oath is as follows: ‘I swear before God to tell the whole truth and only the truth, without adding or concealing anything.’ 3. If the witness believes in a religion or denomination prescribing a different form of oath, they take the oath according to that form. 4. The civil oath is given as a solemn declaration in the following form: ‘I declare, invoking my honour and my conscience, that I shall tell the whole truth and only the truth, without adding or concealing anything.'”

These provisions establish a right of the civil servant under examination to propose up to five witnesses, and a corresponding obligation of the administration to examine at least these, irrespective of whether, in its judgment, the proposed witnesses are unrelated to the relevant disciplinary case or their examination is inappropriate. However, the said proposal of witnesses for examination must be made by the end of the EDE or, at the latest, by the time of the defence statement of the person under disciplinary prosecution, provided, however, in this latter case, that they were not given the opportunity to propose witnesses at the EDE stage (see Council of State 505/2010, 2480/2008, 1758/2007, Athens Court of Administrative Appeals 1299/2013, etc.). There is no obligation of the person conducting the EDE to examine witnesses by way of confrontation with the person under examination, upon the latter’s request (Athens Court of Administrative Appeals 946/2015).

It is noted that, pursuant to Article 130(4) of the Civil Servants Code, if the sworn administrative inquiry was not directed against a specific person, the disciplinary council, where it ultimately takes up the matter, is obliged to conduct a supplementary investigation, in order to enable the person under prosecution to be examined unsworn or to propose the examination of witnesses, unless they declare before the council that they do not wish to be examined unsworn or to propose the examination of witnesses.

Furthermore, during the conduct of the EDE, the provisions of Articles 129 and 131 of the Civil Servants Code, regarding the investigative acts of inspection and the appointment of expert witnesses, also apply by analogy.

How is an inspection conducted in a Sworn Administrative Inquiry (EDE)?

The inspection is carried out personally by the person conducting the EDE in the presence of a clerk, except where the inspection must take place outside the seat of the person conducting the EDE (Article 129(1) and Article 127(4) of the Civil Servants Code).

The inspection of public documents or of private documents which have been deposited with a public authority is carried out at the office where they are kept.

Documents held by a private individual are handed over to the person conducting the EDE and must be returned upon completion of the disciplinary procedure. By way of exception, the inspection of private documents which are absolutely necessary for the handling of an ongoing matter of their holder or of another person is carried out by the person conducting the EDE at the place where they are located. The person conducting the EDE, upon request of the private individual, is obliged to provide, free of charge, a receipt of delivery and a certified copy of the documents received.

How are expert witnesses appointed in a Sworn Administrative Inquiry (EDE)?

The persons appointed as expert witnesses by the person conducting the sworn administrative inquiry EDE are civil servants, employees of legal entities of public law and Local Government Authorities (OTAs), as well as officers of the armed forces, the security forces and the coast guard (Annex – Template 5).

In cases where the sworn administrative inquiry EDE is conducted to investigate cases involving minors, it is recommended that the expert assessment be carried out by specialised scientific personnel (e.g., child psychologists), so that they have the appropriate knowledge to assist in the diagnosis and documentation of the events under investigation.

Expert witnesses, prior to conducting the expert assessment, take an oath in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Article 194 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, as replaced by Article 39(1) of Law 4055/2012). According to that article, if the expert witness does not take the oath as prescribed, the expert assessment is null (Annex – Template 6).

How is the civil servant to whom the commission of a disciplinary offence is attributed examined in the Sworn Administrative Inquiry (EDE)?

Pursuant to Article 132 of the Civil Servants Code, which applies by analogy to the conduct of the EDE, the civil servant to whom the commission of a disciplinary offence is attributed is summoned to be examined as a matter of course (Annex – Template 7). The person conducting the EDE has the obligation to summon the civil servant to whom the commission of a disciplinary offence is attributed for examination, on pain of nullity of the procedure, since the summons to examination constitutes an essential procedural formality, the breach of which may possibly be cured later in the procedure by the examination of the person under prosecution in the context of the disciplinary investigation or their defence statement, where disciplinary prosecution is initiated (Council of State 2245/1997, 2160/1971). (Interpretation of the Civil Servants Code, A.I. Tachos – I.L. Symeonidis, Articles 106-third, Sakkoulas Publishing, Athens-Thessaloniki, 2007, p. 1379 et seq.).

The civil servant is examined unsworn and may be present accompanied by a lawyer, but not represented through a lawyer, that is, without the presence of the civil servant himself. The non-appearance of the civil servant or their refusal to be examined does not impede the progress of the EDE (Annex – Template 9). It is noted that, while the examination of the person under prosecution under Article 132 of the Civil Servants Code is in principle oral (in contrast to the provision for the written submission of the defence statement under Article 135), this does not constitute a prohibition on the submission of a written memorandum in order to satisfy the constitutionally guaranteed right to a prior hearing (Article 20(2) of the Constitution), and consequently, this memorandum, although it does not substitute for personal appearance before the person conducting the sworn administrative inquiry EDE, must be taken into account and mentioned in the conclusions of the E.D.E.

Pursuant to Article 138 of the Civil Servants Code, as replaced and in force, which concerns the service of documents on the person under prosecution or, in this instance, on the civil servant to whom the commission of a disciplinary offence is attributed, the summons to defence statement and any invitation or notice to the person under examination are served by a bailiff or other public officer on the person concerned in person or at the residence which they have declared to their service, on a person with whom they cohabit. A certificate is drawn up of such service. If service is not possible for any reason, including the case of unknown residence of the person under examination, the document is posted at the premises of the civil servant’s service, and a record is drawn up signed by one witness. In case of refusal to accept service, the person effecting the service draws up an act in which the refusal is certified (Annex – Template 8).

It is pointed out that, pursuant to the second sentence of Article 134(1) of the Civil Servants Code, as replaced and in force, the examination of the civil servant during the stage of the sworn administrative inquiry or the disciplinary investigation does not in any case substitute for the summons to defence statement.

When is a Sworn Administrative Inquiry (EDE) completed and when is the relevant Reasoned Report submitted?

The sworn administrative inquiry EDE is completed by the submission of a reasoned report by the civil servant who conducts it. This report is submitted, together with all the materials gathered, to the disciplinary superior who ordered the conduct of the inquiry.

This report, which must be reasoned—the reasoning constituting an essential procedural formality—must include the following (Annex – Template 10):

  1. BACKGROUND – The history of the case is set out, any preliminary examination that has preceded, the order of the person ordering the EDE, as well as the accompanying documents and the legal framework on the basis of which the case is being investigated.
  2. ACTIONS – DOCUMENTS – The investigative acts and actions of the person conducting the EDE are described (examination of witnesses, inspection, expert assessment, examination of the civil servant), and the documents accompanying the case are referenced, as well as those possibly submitted by witnesses. Also referenced are those documents which the person conducting the EDE has possibly requested and obtained from various services or from private individuals.
  3. FINDINGS – Includes: (a) the precise assessment of the witness statements taken, without the need to copy their content; (b) the precise assessment of the documents and all evidentiary material; (c) the correlation of all the materials gathered; (d) commentary on all the foregoing with a view to drawing logical conclusions; and (e) the determination as to whether there was intent or negligence.
  4. CHARACTERISATION OF THE ESTABLISHED DISCIPLINARY OFFENCES – A precise characterisation is made of the acts and omissions which constitute disciplinary offences, or also of any criminal offences if any exist, without expressing a view on the possible penalty that may be imposed.
  5. CONCLUSIONS – The conclusions arising from the findings are set out. Their formulation must be clear.

If the report establishes the commission of a disciplinary offence by a specific civil servant, the disciplinary superior is obliged to initiate disciplinary prosecution within three (3) months of the submission of the report (Article 126(4) of the Civil Servants Code, as amended by Article 41(2) of Law 4590/2019), while in the event no such finding emerges, they may file the case.

Furthermore, if from the content of the E.D.E. report doubts arise as to the commission of disciplinary offences or as to the persons involved in them, without, however, the suspicions which prompted it being dispelled, the conduct of a supplementary E.D.E. may be ordered. However, in cases where, despite any doubts, serious indications of the commission of such offences by specific persons emerge, further investigation of the case by the competent disciplinary council should be pursued through the conduct of a disciplinary investigation, in accordance with Article 128 of the Civil Servants Code (Legal Council of the State, Opinions 73/2012, 444/2012). However, given that the E.D.E. is completed by the drawing up and submission of a reasoned report, the order to conduct a second E.D.E. for the same charges contravenes the principle of good administration (Council of State 1626/1999), unless new elements have arisen in the case under investigation.

It is recalled that, pursuant to circular No. DIDAD/F.69/55/9899/15-4-2014 of our Service (ADA: VIINX-XX5), the E.D.E., which does not constitute the commencement of disciplinary prosecution, is not included within the meaning of disciplinary procedure under Article 114 of the Civil Servants Code and is not suspended, the provisions of Article 114 of the Civil Servants Code not applying in this case, in order to achieve the swift completion of disciplinary cases and to avoid disrupting the smooth operation of services.

The recipients of this circular are requested to communicate it, by every appropriate means, to the civil servants and to all bodies subordinate to or supervised by them.

The Decentralised Administrations are requested to communicate this to the second-tier OTAs they supervise and to their legal entities, in order to facilitate the competent services in the application of the relevant provisions.

For the full circular and templates, see diavgeia.gov.gr

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT Sworn Administrative Inquiry (EDE) – Lawyer

1. What does it mean for me that an EDE has been initiated against me?

The Sworn Administrative Inquiry is an investigative procedure ordered when the service has serious suspicions or clear indications of the commission of a disciplinary offence. It does not constitute the commencement of disciplinary prosecution, nor does it confer upon you the status of defendant, nor does it interrupt the statute of limitations. Until the issuance of any disciplinary decision, the presumption of innocence applies in your favour. Its purpose is to gather evidence in order to establish whether an offence has been committed, which persons are responsible, and under what circumstances the events occurred. Whether disciplinary prosecution will be initiated, whether a supplementary EDE will be ordered, or whether the case will be filed depends on its findings. Proper handling from the very first moment is critical.

2. What can I do to defend myself?

You have the right to submit a written memorandum, to propose up to five witnesses for examination—with an obligation on the part of the person conducting the inquiry to examine them—and to seek their recusal if there are grounds undermining impartiality. Failure to examine a proposed witness constitutes a breach of an essential procedural formality which may invalidate the procedure. You may submit documents, request an inspection or expert assessment, and develop your position in detail in the defence statement. If disciplinary prosecution is subsequently initiated, you obtain full access to the file before your defence statement. Any procedural defect or ground for recusal that arises constitutes a strong weapon in any subsequent application before the Court of Administrative Appeals or the Council of State.

3. How long does the EDE procedure take?

The EDE is generally completed within two months of the notification to the civil servant carrying it out of the decision assigning it. The person conducting it may request, by fully reasoned application, an extension of up to one month. In urgent cases of public interest, a shorter deadline may also be set. The total duration, however, depends on what follows: if disciplinary prosecution ensues, with referral to a disciplinary council or recourse to the administrative courts, the time may be extended significantly. The filing of the case after submission of the conclusions report may also be delayed, as the competent bodies examine the materials before deciding whether to initiate the disciplinary procedure.

4. Which court hears the case if I challenge a disciplinary decision?

Generally competent for the challenge of disciplinary decisions is the Court of Administrative Appeals, while for severe penalties, such as permanent dismissal, jurisdiction lies with the Council of State. The deadline for filing a petition or application for annulment is generally sixty days from the notification of the decision. In parallel, suspension of enforcement may be sought, so that the disciplinary sanction is not implemented until a final court judgment is issued. Grounds for annulment may include breach of an essential procedural formality of the EDE, failure to examine proposed witnesses, lack of impartiality on the part of the person conducting it, inadequate reasoning, or violation of the right to a prior hearing.

5. What documents and evidence do I need for my defence?

You need the summons and the act of assignment of the EDE, in order to identify the charges and the person conducting it. Service documents, correspondence, orders of superiors, circulars, hand-over and take-over protocols, detailed duties of your position, and any prior evaluations are gathered. Important are the names and contact details of witnesses who can confirm your position, as well as any factual element that excludes your culpability or substantiates mitigating circumstances. If there is a parallel criminal procedure, copies of the relevant case file are useful. All material is organised and accompanied by a detailed memorandum responding point by point to the alleged acts.

6. What is the role of the lawyer in an EDE?

The lawyer undertakes the preparation of your defence statement and memorandum, the selection and preparation of defence witnesses, as well as the formulation of any application for the recusal of the person conducting the inquiry where grounds of bias exist. The lawyer monitors compliance with the essential procedural formalities and records every defect that may be exploited subsequently. After the submission of the conclusions report, the lawyer analyses the materials of the case file, drafts the defence statement before the disciplinary council, and, if a penalty is imposed, files a petition or application for annulment before the Court of Administrative Appeals or the Council of State, with a parallel request for suspension. The firm’s experience in administrative and disciplinary cases of civil servants ensures coordinated defence at every stage.


Proudly powered by WordPress