The present study illustrates a sensitive issue of the disciplinary procedure concerning civil servants, insufficiently debated in the speciality literature, namely the possibility of the titular of the disciplinary complaint to resort to the courts in order to refute the report by which the disciplinary investigation is finalized with a proposal to classify the complaint. The research is structured starting from the solution given to this issue by the courts themselves, in the few decisions that deal with the subject, a solution which the author attempts to combat in the light of the current legislation in force, insufficient in its turn, corroborated with the relevant approaches taken from the decisions of the Constitutional Court.
Apart from the elements of novelty and originality of the analysis, it is distinguished by its applied character, knowing the ideas conveyed by the author being necessary not only for the civil servants involved in disciplinary conflicts – as defending parties or as members of the disciplinary commissions –, but also for the judges called upon to decide on the legality and grounds of the solutions for dismissal of the disciplinary complaints. The thesis of inadmissibility of the actions seeking the annulment of the dismissal solutions should be reconsidered, the author’s opinion being that the commissions’ reports can be included among the administrative acts (by express or tacit validation by the leader to whom they are presented) or in the refusal to perform an administrative operation, as a challengeable act under Article 8 (1) of the Law on administrative disputes No 554/2004. It is certain that concealing reports from the commission against any form of control is not only harmful (at least at moral level) to the titular of the complaint, but also abnormal, unjust and unlawful.
