Report on the work of the Investigation and Disciplinary Office (IDOC)

1. IDOC’s work
    
   The Commission set up the Investigation and Disciplinary Office (IDOC) on 19 February 2002 (Decision C(2002) 540).
    
   IDOC’s main operational task is to ensure that officials, former officials and members of the Commission comply with their obligations. These obligations are defined in the Staff Regulations and in specific rules in various forms (Financial Regulation, service memos, code of conduct, etc.)¹.
    
   There are various specific procedures for fulfilling this mission.
    
   Firstly, IDOC conducts administrative inquiries at the request of the Director-General for Personnel and Administration, in agreement with the Secretary-General. IDOC acts independently in these inquiries, receiving no instructions from anyone.
    
   The purpose of an administrative inquiry is to establish the facts, taking account of all aggravating and extenuating circumstances, and determine any individual liabilities of officials and former officials, with due regard to their rights to defend themselves.
    
   To that end the members of IDOC seek evidence, hear witnesses and draw up a report to the Director-General for Personnel and Administration, who then decides what action to take on the report. If the case relates to a financial irregularity, IDOC must also consult the Specialised Financial Irregularities Panel² before finalising its report.
    
   The person concerned is always informed when an administrative inquiry is initiated and is also given an opportunity to comment on the conclusions of the inquiry report in so far as they mention facts that concern him or her³ .
    
   It should be pointed out that OLAF has the right to pre-empt IDOC in its own area of responsibility and that IDOC can open an administrative inquiry only if OLAF is not already conducting its own inquiry or intends to do so. IDOC and OLAF hold regular and structured discussions on the basis of a Memorandum of Understanding of July 2003.
    
   Secondly, IDOC prepares disciplinary proceedings that may lead to the application by a panel of three Directors-General (“AIPN tripartite”) of a penalty ranging from a written warning to removal from post. An admonition or written reminder not constituting a disciplinary penalty may also be imposed.
    
   These proceedings are opened by a decision of the Director-General for Personnel and Administration, and may follow on from an administrative inquiry or an OLAF inquiry or may be initiated directly where the facts are clear-cut (e.g. where they have been established in a criminal court judgment).
    
   In particular IDOC compiles the file on the proceedings, which is transmitted in its entirety to the official concerned so that he/she can prepare for the hearings provided for in the Staff Regulations.
    
   If the penalty is a pecuniary one (deferment of advancement to a higher step, relegation in step, etc.) the file must be submitted to the Disciplinary Board for a reasoned opinion. From 1 May 2004 the Director of IDOC or his/her replacement will represent the administration before the Disciplinary Board. In the interests of sound administration of justice, the members of IDOC who conducted the preliminary administrative inquiry (if there was one) may not be involved in the disciplinary stage on behalf of the administration.
    
   Another important principle is that criminal proceedings have a suspensive effect on disciplinary ones. That is to say the outcome of criminal proceedings against the official in question must be awaited before any disciplinary decision is taken. This means that where for example OLAF detects misappropriation of funds and the case is referred to the national judicial authorities, a considerable amount of time may elapse between the incident and the disciplinary penalty being imposed.
    
   Thirdly, IDOC undertakes factual verifications for other Commission departments not calling individual responsibilities into question. On this basis IDOC may be involved in dealing with complaints and requests for assistance under Article 24 of the Staff Regulations or requests for the occupational nature of an invalidity case to be recognised.
    
   It is also important to note that IDOC’s mission differs from that of other departments, in particular those which provide officials with social welfare, legal or psychological support (e.g. in cases of harassment).
    
   IDOC also has a regulatory role.
    
   Not only does IDOC prepare the Commission’s implementing rules on disciplinary matters, it also does so in related areas such professional incompetence (Article 51 of the Staff Regulations), financial liability (Article 22) and whistle-blowing.
    
   Lastly, IDOC also has a role to play in prevention and information. In this context the decision setting up IDOC provides for the publication each year of the disciplinary decisions taken by the appointing authority. Such information is a way of reminding Commission staff of their obligations which the institution expects them to comply with.
    
   The last report covered the period ending 15 July 2002 (Administrative Notice of 29 July 2002). So that comparisons can be drawn with previous and future years, it was thought preferable to end this present report on 31 December 2003.
    

2. Statistical overview
    
   Disciplinary measures adopted between 16 July 2002 and 31 December 2002 concerned the following:

   • 5 officials or members of the temporary staff in category A or LA (total for 2002: 10)
   • 1 category B official (total for 2002: 3)
   • 1 category C official (total for 2002: 3)
   • no category D officials (total for 2002: 2)
      
   with the following decisions:
   • 2 admonitions
   • 1 written warning
   • 1 reprimand
   • 1 one-year deferment of advancement to a higher step
   • 1 relegation in step
   • 1 acquittal
      
   The cases involved:
   • Misuse of PC and internet for pornographic purposes
   • Sexual harassment
   • Misuse of competition papers
   • Signature of invoices in favour of fictitious beneficiaries
   • Lack of care due to negligence in connection with the issuing of fictitious invoices, use of budget headings for purposes other than those intended
   • Irregularities in connection with a mission
   • Drafting of false reports and suppression of information
      
   Disciplinary measures adopted between 1 January and 31 December 2003 concerned the following:
    
   • 6 category A or LA officials (including one retired official)
   • 2 category B officials
   • 1 category C official
      
   with the following decisions:
   • 1 written warning
   • 2 reprimands
   • 1 removal from post under Article 51 of the Staff Regulations
   • 4 decisions to take no action
   • 1 withdrawal of the decision to initiate proceedings
      
   The cases involved:
   • Professional incompetence
   • Undeclared conflict of interests
   • Irregular use of budget headings
   • Harassment and internet misuse
   • Repeated unauthorised absences
   • Breach of the obligation to inform the appointing authority of spouses’s paid employment
   • Falsification of documents
   • Irregularities in a competition to establish permanent officials

___________________

FOOTNOTES

^1. See Conduct: Golden rules for Commission staff.
^2. Set up by Commission Decision C(2003)2247 of 9 July 2003. Its chairman is a former President of the Court of Auditors.
^3. Except in cases requiring absolute secrecy.