Clerk Recruitment Contest: The Constitutional Court declares itself incompetent in the face of an appeal

Their main grievance pertains to the introduction of a criminal procedure test instead of criminal law, as they claim was mentioned in the initial docimological table. They believe that this choice could have created confusion among the candidates and constitutes a breach of the principle of equality before the law and that of equal access to public jobs, as guaranteed by articles 8, 26 paragraph 1st, and 30 of the Constitution.

The applicants consider that this change could have distorted the fairness of the competition, suggesting favoritism that could benefit some candidates at the expense of others.

Questioned in the context of the procedure, the Minister of Labor and Public Function, through his chief of staff, asked the Court to declare itself incompetent, believing that the request falls under the control of legality and not constitutionality. In addition, he denied accusations of partiality, asserting that the test in question addressed notions that are indeed part of general criminal law, notably the presumption of innocence and criminal proof. He also specified that all the candidates have been subject to the same composition conditions.

After reviewing the case, the Constitutional Court rendered its decision. In its verdict, it declared itself incompetent to hear the request. The high court justified its position by recalling that the request does not fall within its remit as defined by articles 114 and 117 of the Constitution.

This judgment thus closes the constitutional route of this litigation, leaving the option for the applicants, if they wish, to refer to another competent jurisdiction.