Court ruling on the statement of excess

Before dealing with today’s subject, we pause briefly to reflect on two recent news items. The first was the statement by the UNAIDS Country Director about the high cost of anti-retroviral drugs (ARVs) because procurement is being undertaken on an ad hoc emergency basis rather than on a planned basis.

The Public Procurement Commission mandated by the Constitution to provide oversight of the procurement process, is yet to be activated despite the lapse of 14 years. This is because of the Cabinet’s unwillingness to surrender its role of giving its “no objection” to the award of contracts of $15 million and over. Under this watch by the Cabinet, several large contracts that were awarded ran into serious difficulties, the latest being that of the Specialty Hospital which was terminated and for which the State is yet to recover US$4.2 million from the contractor. It was the same contractor who was handed another contract for US$4 million almost three years ago to supply 14 drainage pumps. However, to date we are yet to determine how many of these pumps have been delivered and whether they met the required specifications.

Since November 2013, advertisements were placed for the prequalification of suppliers of drugs and medical supplies for the period 2014-2017 but it was not until July 2014 that a decision was made. A local pharmaceutical company with close ties with the Administration, which has been the Government’s main supplier for almost a decade, was deemed the