Dear X,
On 3 May 1999, you lodged a complaint with the European Ombudsman, concerning an alleged failure by the European Commission to publish the reserve list established for open competition COM/1/1046, in which you participated, and to properly explain the criteria for the final selection of candidates included in that list.
On 28 May 1999, I forwarded the complaint to the President of the European Commission, with a request for comments by the end of September 1999. The Commission sent its opinion on 2 August 1999, which I forwarded to you on 6 August 1999 with an invitation to make observations. To date I have not received any observations from you.
I am now writing to let you know the results of the inquiries that have been made.

THE COMPLAINT

In July 1998, after having successfully passed the examinations of competition COM/A/1046(1) for the recruitment of administrators in the Food and Veterinary Office of DG XXIV of the Commission, the complainant was informed that the complainant's name had been placed on the reserve list.
The complainant had later contacted DG XXIV as well as the Food and Veterinary Office in Dublin in November 1998 and January 1999. The complainant sought, both in writing and by telephone, to obtain some information pertaining to the competition, in particular, the criteria of selection within the reserve list and also the names of the candidates. The complainant considered that the replies given did not provide the complainant with the requested information.
When the complainant phoned the same services in April 1999 the complainant was informed that the recruitment was closed even though the complainant believed the reserve list was valid until 2000.
In summary, the complainant (i) seemed to be dissatisfied with the selection procedure for the recruitment of administrators from the reserve list in which the complainant had been included, and (ii) claimed that basic rules on transparency had not been respected by the Commission.

THE INQUIRY

The Commission's opinion
The Commission began by explaining that the fact that a successful candidate has been placed on a reserve list does not automatically imply a right to be recruited by the institution. It gives merely the possibility to be called for a potential opening by one of its services.
All successful candidates featured on the list of competition COM/A/1046 were part of one and the same group without consideration being placed on their merits. The names of these candidates were listed alphabetically.
The publication of the list was not foreseen in the rules of the above-mentioned competition. However, at a later stage, the Commission decided that in future it would publish the reserve lists of general competitions. This decision was made after the publication of competition COM/A/1046 and only applied to competitions published from March 1998 (Competition COM/A/1046 was published on 13 May 1997).
The Commission stated that 45 amongst the 160 successful candidates of COM/A/1046 had already been recruited. It further added that the list was to be valid until 31 December 1999, although the Commission considered it likely that its validity be extended until 31 December 2000.
Even though the list had been established without distinction to the specialities asked for in the rules of the competition, linguistic qualifications and the particular experience of each candidate were to be taken into account when filling vacant positions. As a result the Commission confirmed that each recruitment had been subject to a detailed examination of all the successful candidates compared with the vacant positions.
The Commission also informed that on 6 May 1999, it had requested a meeting with the complainant with a view to a potential hiring. Following this interview, the complainant had received an offer of employment by DG VI dated 15 July 1999.
The complainant's observations
To date no observations have been received from the complainant.
Having contacted the complainant by telephone, the Ombudsman's services confirmed that the complainant had in fact been recruited by the Commission where the complainant was completing a probationary period as an official.

THE DECISION

1 Discrimination of the complainant in the selection of candidates from the reserve list
1.1 At the time of the complaint, even though the name of the complainant had been included in the reserve list for competition COM/A/1046, the complainant had not yet received any offer of employment from the Commission. The complainant thus expressed dissatisfaction of the way the institution was carrying out this process.
1.2 It appears from the information submitted by the Commission in its opinion, that its services, following an interview with the complainant, had sought to recruit the complainant as an official by letter of 15 July 1999. Moreover, the Ombudsman has confirmed that the complainant is currently working as an official for the Commission.
1.3. The Ombudsman therefore considers that it is not necessary to pursue the inquiry into this aspect of the case.
2 Lack of transparency of open competition COM/A/1046
2.1. The complainant has claimed that the Commission failed to respect minimum standards of transparency in its recruitment of officials among the successful candidates in open competition COM/A/1046. The complainant has argued that specific requests for information on the criteria for the selection of successful candidates or the publication of the list were not fully met.
2.2 These substantive questions, as well as some others related to openness and transparency of Community competitions have been the subject of an own initiative inquiry launched by the European Ombudsman into the secrecy which forms part of the recruitment procedures of the Commission (own initiative 1004/97/(PD)GG). As a result of this inquiry, the Ombudsman prepared a special report on the matter that has been sent to the European Parliament on 18 October 1999, and a copy of which is enclosed with this decision.
Thus, the Ombudsman considers that it is not necessary to pursue the inquiry into this aspect of the case. The complainant will be informed by the Ombudsman of the outcome of this procedure.
3 Conclusion
On the basis of the European Ombudsman's inquiries into this complaint, there appears to have been no maladministration by the European Commission. The Ombudsman has therefore decided to close the case.
Yours sincerely
Jacob SÖDERMAN

---

(1) OJ C 145 A/1, 13.5.1997