Exposing Regional Disparities in Spain's Judiciary Civil Service Exams

The process of obtaining the position of _Gestor Procesal_ in the Spanish judicial system, a crucial step for career advancement within the civil service, consists of two multiple-choice tests and a written exam. While the selection process is designed to ensure merit-based hiring, this study reveals systemic inconsistencies that undermine fairness and transparency. Through a comprehensive analysis of the exam for _Gestor Procesal_, the study identifies significant regional disparities in pass rates and scoring distributions, which deviate from expected Gaussian patterns. Non-parametric tests confirm statistically significant differences in success rates among regions, suggesting that factors beyond candidate performance—such as subjective evaluation criteria and structural inequalities—shape hiring outcomes. These findings raise concerns about institutional justice and social equity. Inconsistent evaluation criteria create systemic disadvantages, undermining procedural and distributive fairness. Furthermore, human capital theory is challenged by evidence that structural factors, rather than merit, determine success rates. Beyond its technical implications, this issue impacts social mobility, labor market segmentation, and public trust in democratic institutions. The disparities in career opportunities may contribute to regional inequalities and exacerbate precarity among interim staff, many of whom remain in temporary positions for years. Our study underscores the urgent need for policy reform, particularly in standardizing evaluation criteria, ensuring greater transparency in exam administration, and addressing structural inefficiencies in judicial hiring. By exposing these inequities, this research provides critical insights for policymakers seeking to enhance the fairness, efficiency, and credibility of Spain’s judicial personnel selection process.