Search

Africa's Public Procurement & Entrepreneurship Research Initiative – APPERI

Tag

Law

Tanzanian minister calls time on procurement corruption


SupplyManagement

28 June 2013 | Adam Leach

The United Republic of Tanzania plans to review its procurement legislation to close loopholes that make it possible for corrupt officials to profit from the public purse.

Addressing parliament this week, minister of state Stephen Wassira, pledged to take action to ensure items could not be purchased at inflated prices under the law, which results in unreasonably high profit margins for suppliers. As well as helping to reduce corruption, he said the more robust rules would boost competitiveness among businesses looking to supply to government.

Announcing his intention, Wassira, said: “The time has come to review the law. You can hide under the law and steal according to the law. If we do not act now and [instead] let corruption thrive, everything we buy or make will be substandard. And if we continue like this we will erode development.”

Around 70 per cent of the country’s development budget will be channelled through public sector procurement. The minister used this to strengthen the case for ensuring regulations are tight and robust.

Nigeria: Osun Has Not Abrogated Procurement Act – Aregbesola


Osun Defender

Governor Rauf Aregbesola of Osun State has debunked the claims in certain quarters that his administration had repealed the Public Procurement Law.

He told members of the Chartered Institute of Purchasing and Supply Management of Nigeria who visited him in Osogbo that his administration only amended some sections of the law to correct the abnormalities in it.

The governor, who had earlier been decorated as an honorary member of the institute, which was conferred on him in absentia in 2001 when the institute was not chartered, said that the amendment was done in a bid to correct sections of the procurement law which was deliberately done by some individuals in the past to make them sacred cows.

Aregbesola said with the amendment his administration had institutionalised the law,adding that the exercise was in favour of the institute.

In his address, the institute’s president, Alhaji Muhammed Alliu, said that they were happy over the peace and tranquility that had continued to reign in Osun State.

Alliu described the governor as a leader whose conduct and policies were centered on the people, noting that it was on record that Osun was one of the few states in the federation that had domesticated the procurement law.

Source: Leadership.

Rethinking the Fight Against Corruption


Brookings News

By Daniel Kaufmann

Fighting corruption requires a new understanding of how the global problem has evolved, for it is bigger and broader than petty bribery or crooked deals in developing countries. Merely adopting a new anti-corruption law, creating another commission, or launching another ‘campaign’ will not get the job done. We can no longer fight corruption by simply fighting corruption alone.

Corruption is a symptom of a larger disease — the failure of institutions and governance, resulting in poor management of revenues and resources and an absence of delivery of public goods and services. We must think beyond anti-corruption rhetoric and traditional tactics. We need to be more strategic and rigorous, identifying and addressing corruption’s underlying causes and examining the weaknesses in key institutions and government policies and practices. We have to focus our efforts on the broader context of governance and accountability. Only then can we see the many other shapes and forms corruption can take and address this epidemic.

Of its many guises, legal corruption is a particularly pernicious one that gets insufficient attention. Legal corruption refers to efforts by companies and individuals to shape law or policies to their advantage, often done quasi-legally, via campaign finance, lobbying or exchange of favors to politicians, regulators and other government officials. It is dealings between venal politicians and powerful financial and industrial executives. In its more extreme form, legal corruption can lead to control of entire states, through the phenomenon dubbed ‘state capture,’ and result in enormous losses for societies.

In many developing countries, legal and illegal corruption coexists, and it has become commonplace for multinational oil and mining companies to collude with elite politicians to deprive citizens of the benefits of their natural resourcesNigeria lost $35 billion over the last 10 years through corruption and mismanagement of its oil industry. The evidence suggests — and the people of these developing countries attest — growth cannot sustain where corruption thrives.

The reach of legal corruption, however, is not limited to countries with weak governments. It has also enabled Wall Street investment banks to unduly influence financial oversight institutions, bringing the U.S. and the global economy to the brink four years ago, and in recent months allowed collusion between U.K. and possibly U.S. banks to fix the global interest rate for their benefit.

This kind of corruption is a complex, multidimensional problem that needs to be confronted at every level. If we, as an international community, are going to get at its core, we need to recognize that improving governmental institutions is key. Good governance only starts with elections and higher levels of transparency. Elections cannot be effective unless they are free, fair and clean, and complemented by real freedom of expression. Transparency with impunity will not bring forth justice or make governments accountable. Broader governance reforms require serious progress in rule of law to make any real, lasting impact. Equally important is a free press. While we have seen progress towards democracy in many parts of the world, roughly two-thirds does not have a fully free media and, in some countries, the movement is backwards.

As crucial is the management of the world’s natural resources. Today, 700 million people, in about 60 countries, live in poverty though they sit atop billions of dollars in oil, gas and minerals. Such abject poverty in the midst of abundance is a call for action. The overwhelming majority of these citizens live in poorly governed countries — those that rate low in corruption control, transparency and accountability. The governance of these resources and the wealth they generate will make or break the development of these nations, and the social, economic, political and security implications will be far and wide.

The future of these resource-rich countries no longer rests mainly on foreign aid but on the extent and effective use of the country’s own resources and how they use them. For that to occur, a focused and concrete approach to improve governance and accountability is critical. Reshaping the fight against corruption into a smarter strategy that integrates the challenge of improving governance and institutions in both the public and private sphere is the way forward.

The Wheels of Corruption


News24

November29, 2012

Corruption is a lethal toxin that kills the spirit of free enterprise and public governance excellence in South Africa. It is a risk and reward game played by ruthless legal-wise people who seduce naïvely ambitious public officials and turn them into criminals.

According to an article published in the Economist in 2011, as much as 20-25% of annual state procurement expenditure in South Africa amounting to around R30 billion is wasted through overpayment and corruption. The auditor-general estimated that R26 billion is wasted or spent “irregularly” in a year. A third of government departments award contracts to officials and close family members, it was reckoned.

Many people in South Africa sacrificed for a free society and the jubilation that came with advent of democracy in 1994. Some of these people benefited handsomely from the fruits of their sacrifices and were rewarded for life, without the aid of corruption.  Some were not so fortunate though. Those who thought that free enterprise would take off without corruption and prejudice made a serious judgemental error. Their sacrifices did not transform into lifetime rewards. They became the first victims of early bouts of the plague of corruption that is now taking its toll in South Africa.

Corruption is the pursuit by dishonest people in devious partnerships and networks with the goal to acquire undue wealth and benefits for members who are prepared to partake in illicit and dodgy behaviour. Corruption is usually taken to mean dishonest or fraudulent conduct by people in positions with influence and power.

Imagine the following scenario from more than a decade ago. A senior black consultant teamed up with a white entrepreneur skilled in program management to start a legitimate program management firm to facilitate the rolling out of much needed municipal services and local economic development in poor communities. Initially the firm succeeds in winning small projects. With repeated successful delivery the scope and value of projects increase to a point where executives in contracting organizations hint that contract benefits must be shared and that firms they hold shares in must also benefit through projects. When one such a senior executive of a public enterprise, which contracted the firm to program manage its market development strategy, stopped payment on a contract to enhance the performance of a municipality, the wheels of corruption revealed itself.

The affected firm lodged a complaint over non-payment with the chief executive of the public enterprise and after an investigation he agreed to institute a process of arbitration. This was when things started to get interesting. It was established that a firm in which the senior public enterprise executive had been given a shareholding was awarded an infrastructure development contract in the same municipality. The project was connected to the scope and budget of the program management contract and payments were made from the budget set aside for the program management firm. It was when this budget ran out that the payments to the program management firm were stopped.

The legal department of the public enterprise engaged a law firm to handle the arbitration process. The arbitration costs would be for the account of the public enterprise. The firm of attorneys engaged by the public enterprise appointed a senior advocate as arbitrator who had previously handled cases for the public enterprise. At the start of the arbitration proceedings the arbitrator offered to withdraw from the case because the public enterprise had been his client in several previous cases. The directors of the aggrieved firm, wary of possible prejudice, accepted his offer. It was agreed that the process would be repeated with a new arbitrator.

The process to appoint a new arbitrator started and after several weeks a new lawyer was appointed as arbitrator by the law firm of the public enterprise. This time the directors of the aggrieved firm were required to foot the bill of the arbitrator and the fees of a lawyer to represent the aggrieved firm as required by Supreme Court rules. These extra costs and the non-payment of contract fees placed the aggrieved firm in financial dire straits.

Several weeks had passed after the hearing when the arbitrator demanded payment from the directors of the aggrieved firm before publishing his ruling. He had to be paid before he would reveal his ruling. When he released his ruling after payment, he had ruled in favour of the public enterprise. After the ruling the distraught directors of the aggrieved firm learnt that the arbitrator had his offices in the same building as the law firm that had appointed him. They then understood the intimate resonance they sensed between the arbitrator and the legal representatives of the public enterprise during the hearings.

The directors of the aggrieved firm felt shattered and decided to close down their firm because of the ruling, the unpredictability of payment by the public sector and the enterprise-unfriendly legal environment.

The set of wheels which moved the corruption to its destructive conclusion comprised of an ineffective procurement leadership structure operating without a policy that prohibits public enterprise officials from taking up shareholding in private firms that deal with the public enterprise; a greedy official with shares in a predatory firm; the owners of the predatory firm who colluded with the official; and a network of legal experts familiar with the arguments, precedent rulings, court rules, contract laws and pressures that are needed to protect the felonious officials of a contracting public enterprise from the claims of cocky entrepreneurs and the victims of corruption.

The appearance of Public Protector Thuli Madonsela who understands the dynamics and networks that drive corruption so well had become the saviour and fountain of hope for entrepreneurs. She has brought closure and redemption to many of those castigated emotionally and financially by corruption. She had become the quiet and gentle enforcer of procurement discipline and public servant ethics. The people salute her and trust that she will continue to be the enemy of corruption and the flame of governance excellence and that she will succeed in removing evil from our society. She has truly become the people’s trusted chucker-out of corruption, fraud, mal-administration and improper enrichment at the expense of the state.

Ethiopian Public Procurement Law applicable only to the private sector


Ethiopian Legal Brief

By Abrham Yohannes

February 16th, 2012

In developing countries like Ethiopia, the provision of services to the citizen is one of the central functions of government. To fully realize it’s in providing services which meet the standard of the best quality, but at the same time with the minimum cost, the government in Ethiopia, uses the best mechanisms available, which may generally be categorized in to two. First, in areas where the private sector is considered to be at an infant stage, the government directly involves itself in the management and operation of the provision of services. The provision of electricity, telecommunication and water for instance, is under the exclusive control of government. Second, in areas which do not require direct involvement of the government, the provision of public services will be realized by involving the private sector for carrying out works and providing goods and services. Even in the second case, the government is not totally out of the picture. Public enterprises and other government business organizations equally participate in this process. Similarly, the direct provision of services by the government, to some extent allows the participation of the private sector. To a certain degree, the private sector plays a role in carrying out public works and providing goods and services in areas under the exclusive control of the government.

Irrespective of the role played and the level of participation of the government or the private sector, the provision of the best quality of services with a minimum cost, requires an efficient and effective system of public procurement. “Public procurement is a central instrument to ensure an efficient management of public resources. Promoting good governance in public acquisition system aims at providing best value to its citizens through processes that are transparent and results-oriented.”

Irrespective of variations in the existing political, economic and legal environment peculiar to a specific country, an efficient and effective system of public procurement is ultimately built upon four basic pillars: procurement laws and regulations, procurement workforce, procurement process and methods, and procurement organizational structure. Ideally, procurement laws and regulations should be clear, consistent, comprehensive, and flexible. (Khi V. Thai, procurement: concepts and practices, in International handbook of public procurement ed. Khi V. Thai p6-9).

Generally speaking, the regulatory framework of public procurement as tool in the formulation and implementation of an effective and efficient system of public procurement should be guide by some internationally accepted basic principles. These principles are: transparency, accountability, objectivity, fairness and non-discrimination.

The principle of transparency helps to attract a greater number of participation, thereby encouraging competitiveness. It also makes the whole procurement process open and fair, thus avoiding the possibility of favoritism and discrimination. Transparency also makes it easy for procuring entities and officials to be accountable. Most importantly, it is an effective tool to curb corruption.

The Ethiopian procurement law is still at an infant stage. In recent years, the Federal government has taken measures to revise the existing law, so as to make it responsive to the growth and expansion of the quantity and quality of provision of public services. Each year, a significant portion of public money is allocated as a result of  award of contracts for the construction of public works, supply of goods and provision of services…Read more.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: