The applicants argue they have a legitimate interest in the case, having participated in the recruitment process. They claim the procedure was marred by irregularities that violate constitutional principles of equality, merit, and capacity required for public service access.

Among the alleged anomalies, the officers highlight the omission of a mandatory medical phase, the lack of a medical board, and potential conflicts of interest due to personal and professional relationships between tribunal members and certain candidates. They also question the handling of merit assessments and the presence of unregistered documents.

The request includes a call for a precautionary suspension of the current sub-inspector selection process. The claimants fear that failing to halt it could consolidate administrative acts they consider void due to their connection with the previous file.

During the April plenary session, the municipal government confirmed that the process for an official review of the challenged actions has already been initiated, addressing concerns raised regarding the transparency of the recruitment.