The applicability of the theoretic concept of public decision has specific characteristics as it pertains to each of the state's powers (legislative, executive and judicial). In practice, the decision takes different forms: managerial on the level of the executive power, political on the level of the legislative power and legal on the level of the judicial power. These approaches are not separate, but they are embodied by the tri-dimensional view (managerial, administrative and political) of the public decision, as it follows: the government, as a representative of the executive power applies the political decision coming from the legislative level and observes the other adopted decisions. These can refer to changes, suspensions, introductions, repeals, dismissals, replacements, approvals, extensions or reinstatements. How is this process carried out in Romania? Normally, is the public decision typology righteously balanced in between the three powers? The case study will follow the evolution of this typology for the Law on the Civil Servants' Statute, Law on the Local Public Administration and the Law on Education. The study is proceeding via bibliographical research, so that the reasoning behind the paper is clearly underlined. Further, the manuscript makes use of direct observation and legislative analysis with regard to the typology of the public decisions. By analysing the three laws, this investigation aims at showing that even though in the public decision field there are no frontiers between the three decision approaches, namely managerial, administrative and political, this "cross-frontiers" feature does not need to cause ambiguity.
