Dear Sir or Madam. The conditions for advertising a vacancy in a public or municipal administration almost always include a requirement to pass a professional examination in administrative procedure. This condition is always accompanied by the additional statement 'If the successful candidate has not passed the professional examination in administrative procedure, he/she must pass it within three months of taking up the post'.  In determining the suitability of a candidate, the Human Resources Services (public and municipal administrations) have informed us that the administrative procedure examination is NOT taken into account as an additional condition and that this is also a directive from the competent ministry. It is therefore completely irrelevant whether or not the candidate has passed the examination.
Of course, education and work experience are the most important conditions for the selection of a candidate, but in practice this is not taken into account. The conditions for a vacant post (e.g. adviser in the spatial planning department - administrative unit or municipality) do not specify the type of education (in this case, it should be architecture or construction), and work experience is negligible.
Why does the State not change the guidelines on the conditions for a vacant civil servant post in a period of austerity, or why are certain conditions laid down in more detail? There are many suitable candidates on the labour market who have already passed an examination in administrative procedure, as well as many highly educated staff with more than the required work experience.  If an administrative procedure examination were required, the State would save money. The cost of the exam, with additional materials and training, would be between EUR 100 and EUR 200 and more, plus the fact that the official would be incapacitated for up to three months, as he would not have to do his job fully (make decisions on various matters).
It would also be preferable, depending on the vacant post, to specify the type of training and the experience required. In the spatial planning sector in particular, these conditions are vague and lead to problems, which are reflected in lengthy building permit procedures and spatial planning policy. These problems have also been identified by the Ministry of Infrastructure and Spatial Planning, Directorate for Spatial Planning, in the concept of normative changes in the field of spatial planning and building construction. The problems of professionalism are significant because officials are unfamiliar with and lack knowledge in the field of construction and spatial planning (approximately 90%). Consultants do not know how to read architectural plans, they do not know the basics of construction and spatial planning elements. They often ask for additional explanations from the professional literature, additional certificates from official records, although they are obliged to obtain them themselves in accordance with the Law on Administrative Procedure. When interpreting spatial planning acts, they take the opposite decision, despite the explanations of the experts, which leads to longer procedures, additional costs, all in contravention of the Administrative Procedure Act. Much of this would be solved by selecting candidates with the correct professional training (and/or additional, extensive, even expensive training of staff).