By Mama A. Touray
Director of Procurement Policy and Operations, EbrimaSanyang, and the Director of Gambia Public Procurement Authority, Phoday Jaiteh on Wednesday testified on the Janjanbureh area council’s procurement report.
The joint testimony was held at the ongoing Local Government Commission of Inquiry at Djembe Hotel in Senegambia.
Testifying on the transaction conducted in 2019 at JanjanburehArea Council, Mr. Sanyang said “The procurement review report of the Janjanbureh Area Council revealed that in 2019 Janjanbureh Area Council had 681 transactions Four Million Four Hundred and Sixty-One Thousand, Six Hundred and Ninety-Nine Dalasi Eighty-One Bututs (D4, 461, 699.81).”
The procurement unit of Janjanbureh Area Council has only one staff who was Mariatou Kandeh, a procurement clerk. Some councilors were handling procurement within their ward without presenting procured items (receipts, invoices, etc) and without the involvement of the procurement officer, which is not in line with sections 50 and 51 of the GPPA (Amendment) 2018, he explained to the commission.
Both the director and director general of GPPA said this was against the provision of the GPPA Act and the Regulations when the issue of the councilors was raised.
“Negligence or corruption,” Phoday Jaiteh, Director General of GPPA said.
“Ignorance of the law or negligence,” Ebrima Sanyang of GPPA said.
“This is another form of corrupt practices,” Deputy Lead Counsel Patrick Gomez told the witnesses.
According to their testimony, the Gambia Public Procurement Authority review team further observed that the procurement unit was directly reporting to the Director of Plan and Development of the council and that system was non-compliant with the recommendation of best practices.
He said the reviewers stated that this leads to individualization for personal gains since there is a lack of proper control and supervision on the side of procurement. In such settings, adding that the reviewers said accountability and transparency cannot be assured and causes the use of wrong procedure which can lead to wrong award decisions.
“There is no evidence that the Janjanbureh Area Council has established a Contracts Committee in accordance with GPPA Act and the Regulations.
“The reviewers observed that there is a contracts committee constituted verbally and not formally, which the GPPA reviewers found to be a violation of sections 47 and 49 of the GPPA (Amendment) Act 2018,” he informed the commission.
He continued that the verbally constituted Contracts Committee did not ensure that monthly reports are submitted to the Authority and the Contracts Committee did not ensure that the approved threshold by management is adhered to.
On the implications, Ebrima Sanyang from GPPA said a person can easily avoid responsibility when miss-procurement is detected since no member was formally appointed to carry their responsibility. Adding that accountability and transparency are not assured and members can pull when there is a miss-procurement.
More so, he explained further that “During the review, the reviewers observed that Janjanbureh Area Council has different committees which consist of the councilors only (Finance Committee, Establishment Committee, and Educational Committee). From our interview with the CEO and the Chairman, GPPA realize that all these committees were doing procurement without involving the procurement officer – they were conducting procurement on their own”.
He added that the fuel of the area council was not handled by the Procurement Unit which is a violation of Sections 50 and 51 of the GPPA (Amendment) Act 2018.
Meanwhile, Sanyang testified that Janjanbureh Area Council was trading with non-registered suppliers contrary to the law. However, he said the report only showed four suppliers, amounting to Thirty Thousand Two Hundred and Fifty Dalasi (D30,250).
The Deputy Lead Counsel Patrick Gomez said mentioning only four (4) from the lot is not a fair representation.
GPPA Director Jaiteh responded that “It cannot be a fair representation of the number of suppliers”.
Deputy lead Counsel Gomez added that “It shows you are trying to bury evidence”.
“The consistency in the trend of the violations is not acceptable. This cannot be termed an error. It is beyond errors,” Jaiteh said.
Sanyang said GPPA further found out that Janjanbureh Area Council did not indicate specifications for procurement transactions contrary to section 25 of the GPPA (Amendment) Act 2018.
Specification, according to Sanyang was not generated in all of the Single Source procurement transactions and without specifications the award decision will be based on discretion and quality may be compromised.
He informed the commission that procurement documentation was not completed because there were no Forms of GPPA attached. And there was no delivery receipt to see that the procurement was completed hence it was not attached to the transactions as stipulated in section 35(2) of the GPPA Act.
He said there was no inspection committee to inspect the goods as stipulated in sections 133 to 136 of the GPPR, and no evidence of negotiation.
