Commission Against Corruption, Macao SAR

In 2022, the CCAC received a report suspecting that in the procedures of two promotion exams held by a public security department at the same time, one of the effective members of the jury panel of one of the exams was also a candidate of another exam, meaning that the worker and the effective members of the jury panels of both of the exams, who were fellow members, also had a candidate-jury panel member relationship with each other, which went against the recusal regime.

Following an investigation, the CCAC verified that the relationship between the workers involved was not subject to compulsory recusal provided for in the law. In addition, since jury panel is a collegial body, its powers and duties are shared by all of the members. The scores are determined by resolution after deliberation rather than personal decision. Therefore, it could not ascertain that there was administrative illegality or situation that caused nullification of the procedures.

Nevertheless, in view of the necessity of impartiality of exam and assessment procedures and the credibility of the scores, it is worthwhile for the Public Administration to take measures to fully protect them. The CCAC considered that the placement of members of the relevant jury panels was an action of internal management that could be adjusted. Therefore, the CCAC reflected its opinion to the relevant department and suggested reviewing the stringency of placement of members of jury panels of promotion exam procedures in order to prevent the same situation from happening again in the future. The department accepted the CCAC’s suggestion and promised to pay attention to the relevant situation in the future.