In Maresme, the Catalan Anti-Fraud Office, Antifrau, has asked the Maresme Regional Council to formally review the selection and hiring process for the director of Governance, Transparency and Internal Services.
The office, which reports to the Catalan Parliament, acted after a complaint raised doubts about whether the candidate met the access requirements set out in the job notice. Documents seen by La Vanguardia and confirmed by Antifrau say the council did not properly verify the minimum experience needed for the post.
The job specification required either public employee status in group A1 or at least five years of experience in the public or private sector in technical or management roles. Antifrau says the candidate only provided proof through bar association certificates and a sworn statement, which said she had worked as a lawyer alongside another full-time job for about 20 hours a week.
According to Antifrau’s preliminary review, the council’s assessment committee later accepted that the current director had 3.94 years of experience, below the five-year threshold for admission. Even so, the candidate was allowed into the process and went on to be hired.
The office says that if the minimum requirement was not met, the admission decision, and later steps in the process, could be invalid. It also questioned how the vacancy was advertised, saying the candidate was called to a test without her name being made public, which it says could breach Catalan transparency rules.
CCM president Rafa Navarro, of Junts, said the council has a clear conscience and that the process was carried out with “absolute transparency”. He said both internal and external candidates were allowed to apply, as required, and argued that Antifrau’s calculations were wrong and had already been addressed. La Vanguardia said it had requested supporting documents from the council but had not received them at the time of publication.
Antifrau has not declared the appointment null. Instead, it has asked the council to review the admission act, approved by presidential decree, and to assess whether there were any administrative responsibilities or transparency breaches. The office also said complainants can make their case public if they choose, and that the matter is closed at the investigation stage once recommendations have been issued.