TAR Lazio: in general, the possibility of submitting the application and participating in the test cannot be excluded even for subjects not yet graduates
by Pietro Alessio Palumbo
With two sentences of 7 July, the Lazio TAR shed light on some gray areas in view of the next medical access tests. With sentence 9334, the TAR clarified that the mere possibility recognized by the current system, even to young people still not in possession of a diploma, to participate in the selective medical test is not suitable for generating legitimate reliance on the possibility – regardless of the achievement of the degree of study – to proceed with enrollment. In fact, the recognized possibility for students not yet graduated, but interested in access to a course of study with restricted access, must be recognized to acquire knowledge about the methods and contents of carrying out the tests in order to calibrate for the future the preparation once the requirements for matriculation have been completed. Therefore, in general, the possibility of submitting the application and taking part in the test cannot be ruled out even for subjects not yet in possession of the aforementioned qualification.
The sentence
With sentence 9315, the TAR clarified that the failure to sign the data contained in the personal data sheet during the test, even though it is mandatory for the candidate, constitutes a mere profile of formal irregularity and therefore the exclusion of the competitor is illegitimate. In particular, according to the procedure, the tests are subject to cancellation by the classroom commission if the answer form is signed or marked by the candidate or by a member of the commission. Well, according to the TAR, the following should be highlighted: the fact that the announcement imposes exclusion from the competition due to the aforementioned irregularity integrates the compromise of the anonymity of the task as a prerequisite; but the same cannot be said for the failure to sign the data contained in the personal data sheet. On closer inspection, if it is doubted that the personal data sheet containing the candidate’s data, if not signed, can be illegally “replaced” this in practice is prevented by the fact that each answer form is combined with its personal data sheet on the basis of a label containing a code coincident: which is to demonstrate that that particular answer form was filled in by the person whose data are transcribed in the form, even if not signed.