Session on Procurement and Contract Administration in BDBL Upon the invitation of Bhutan Development Bank (BDBL), four officials from Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) led by the Commissioner Kezang Jamtsho conducted a session on Public Procurement and Contract Administration on October 17, 2014. Highlighting the importance of understanding corruption and its genesis as the first step in tackling corruption, the Commissioner presented on the Principle and Process of Public Procurement stressing the importance of securing “value for money” in procuring works, goods and services. It was emphasized that the “value for money” must be secured through exercising three fundamental steps of procurement: bench-marking, due diligence and transparency. The participants were also alerted on how collusive practices occur due to failure in exercising due diligence sharing some case studies on corruption and fraud in procurement. During a day’s session, the participants were also sensitized on the National Integrity and Anti-Corruption Strategy (NIACS) 2014-2018 and its implementation accounting the BDBL as the first financial institution to roll out the NIACS implementation. The general feedback from the participants on the session was that the session has equipped them to deal with procurement in better way in the near future. A day’s session was attended by the Chief Executive Officer and 22 other BDBL officials. The following are some of the questions and issues raised during the session: Is it necessary to declare Conflicts of Interest even if someone does not have any conflict? Do not have clear understanding on when and why to declare Conflicts of Interest Is it necessary to follow procurement processes when the goods are being purchased from the government company (eg. Wood Craft Centre and Kuensel)? How realistic it is to depend on Bhutan Schedule Rate (BSR) since most of the agencies still depend on BSR to procure the works? Will the Awarding Committee be liable for the penalty for awarding the contract to wrong firm which was based on the false evaluation report of the Evaluation Committee? What is the rationale of ACC referring the cases to OAG for prosecution instead of ACC directly prosecuting the case?
Posted on: Tue, 21 Oct 2014 09:13:21 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015