The question raised concerns permission for an inexcusable duty for an indispensable period of time. Specifically, if a career official of the General Administration of the State, who is in turn a Mayor without partial or exclusive dedication, can avail himself of the permission “for a time indispensable for the performance of an inexcusable duty of a public or personal nature” for the performance of certain functions of the office of Mayor.

First of all, the legal framework for implementation must be analysed. Article 48(j) of Royal Legislative Decree 5/2015, of 30 October, approving the revised text of the Law on the Basic Status of Public Employees provides that public officials shall have the right to a permit:

“For an indispensable time for the fulfillment of an inexcusable duty of a public or personal nature and for duties related to the conciliation of family and working life.”

In order to delineate this figure, we must bear in mind that the “inexcusable duty” is configured as an indeterminate legal concept that has been defined, as provided in the Manual of Procedures for the Management of Human Resources, published by the Resolution of 14 December 1992 of the Secretary of State for Public Administration, as that obligation incumbent on a person whose non-compliance generates a civil, criminal or administrative responsibility; and it also extends to those duties related to the conciliation of family and working life.

On the basis of the above, the criteria maintained by the Directorate-General of the Civil Service concerning permission for officials to perform an inexcusable duty of a public or personal nature can be systematized in the following:

(a) It must be an inexcusable duty, such as "an obligation incumbent on a person whose failure to do so results in civil, criminal or administrative liability". This concept may include civic duties such as participation in electoral processes and the exercise of the right to vote.

(b) Apart from cases involving an inexcusable duty, the granting of the permit is a matter of authority, and the Administration must therefore weigh the circumstances of the specific case, interpreting TREBEP ' s 48 (j) in an extremely restrictive manner, with the competent organ for granting the permit being responsible for assessing the circumstances in each case.

(c) Permission must be granted for the time necessary for the performance of the inexcusable duty and cannot be granted on a general basis.

(d) With regard to the public or personal nature of the duty to perform, it has been determined that the voluntary assumption of private activities should not take precedence over the statutory obligations obliging the official to perform the service.

(e) In any case, permission for an inexcusable duty and for duties connected with conciliation is characterized by two basic notes: its residual character and its duration, which will be the time required for the performance of the duty. For all these reasons, it must be limited to specific and unpredictable situations, which do not last over time, and exceptional ones, which are not repeated.

Therefore, career officials of the General Administration of the State are entitled to a permit for an inexcusable duty for the indispensable time.

Based on the above, it is necessary to analyze whether the performance of the functions of mayor falls within the activities of a public duty that are caused by such permission. In this regard, article 75.6 of Law 7/1985, of 2 April, on the Basis of the Local Regime, a rule directly applicable to the official because it is an elective office of a Local Corporation, provides the following:

“For the purposes of the provisions of article 37.3.d) of the Workers’ Statute and article 30.2 of Law 30/1984, the time indispensable for the performance of the elective office of a local Corporation is understood to be that necessary for attendance at the sessions of the plenary of the Corporation or of the Commissions and attention to the Delegations of which the interested party is a part or carries out.”

In this way, it is recognized as an inexcusable duty of a public or professional nature (Article 30.2 of Law 30/1984) to attend plenary sessions, committees and to attend to delegations.

In conclusion, on the basis of the regulations set out above, attendance at the plenary sessions of the Commission Corporation and attention to the Delegations of which the interested party is a party or which he carries out, always has the condition of inexcusable duty, and the permission provided for this purpose must be granted, without any limitation other than its concession for the indispensable time.

All of the above is without prejudice to remember that, according to the regime of competences of this management center, the answers to queries issued by this general directorate are merely informative and, consequently, do not have the character of a binding criterion, nor do they give rise to rights or expectations of law, nor do they imply any link with the type of procedures to which they refer. In addition, since they are not mandatory or binding, the bodies to which such replies are addressed may, where appropriate, finally take a decision that does not correspond to the opinion contained therein.

The answers to queries contained in this bulletin deal with the issues raised in the light of the regulations in force at the time of their issuance, so that these answers may be affected by subsequent legislative changes or judicial resolutions.