Saturday, August 23, 2008 Agencies scored on deals
AT LEAST 136 projects were implemented “without public bidding” in preparation for the 12th Asean Summit in Cebu in 2006.
People at the implementing agency are still trying to explain why, a consolidated audit report shows.
The report, dated July 31, 2008, is signed by Director Amante Liberato of the Commission on Audit (COA) and addressed to Secretary Hermogenes Ebdane of the Road Board, the agency that bankrolled the preparations.
Auditors said there was no reason to skip public biddings when the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) picked contractors for 16 maintenance projects on roads that “do not lead to and from the airport, summit venues and hotels.”
How much did taxpayers pay for these projects? At least P168.32 million. That doesn’t include the P30.33 million spent fixing roads in private properties, the audit report said.
COA also confirmed that the cost of the street lamps, at P54.936 million for 660 units, “was bloated” by as much P35.55 million.
The report consolidates the findings established in the July 19, 2007 audit report signed by Director Adelina Ancajas of COA, with the comments or whatever corrective action has been taken so far.
Ready for it
The DPWH 7 yesterday said the agency will answer all the comments made by COA. Legal Officer Agustinito Hermoso said it is natural for COA examiners to ask about projects if they have doubts or if they don’t know the procedures.
Both audits covered, among others, the contract to buy and install allegedly overpriced decorative lampposts and street lamps the Department of Public Works and
Highways (DPWH) awarded to two Manila-based contractors. This controversy is separately treated in an anti-graft case pending against 21 people before the Sandiganbayan.
The indictment includes the former head of the DPWH in Central Visayas and two city mayors. The Office of the Ombudsman is poised to incorporate the COA findings into the Sandiganbayan charge.
The Liberato report reflects the COA’s suggestion that the “officials concerned” in the implementation of the project be ordered to show why “the projects may not be considered illegal” or in violation of Republic Act 9184, the Government Procurement Act.
The district officials should also be made to show why the contractors of 63 of these projects were authorized to begin work without any prior approved funding, the report said.
Personal
“Otherwise, those who authorized the implementation of the said projects shall be held personally liable,” it said.
The DPWH management, according to the report, justified the transaction by citing time constraints.
It explained that while there were no contracts just yet, the contractors were bound by a memorandum of understanding that all work would be finished in time for the summit, originally scheduled for December 2006. (Bad weather later forced its postponement to January 2007.)
On issues specific to the lamppost scam, the audit report had suggested that the DPWH be made to explain why the contracts to supply and install some 660 decorative street lamps in Cebu and Mandaue cities, none of which were subjected to public bidding, shouldn’t be considered illegal.
“Management did not give any justification to show that the contracts involved may not be considered illegal, being contrary to RA 9184,” the Liberato report said.
The lamppost deal, according to the findings of the Office of the Ombudsman-Visayas, was made possible because of the collusion of local officials, the DPWH and the contractors.
Whose numbers?
It added that the program of works and estimates that DPWH used as basis in drafting the contract to supply and install was prepared by local government officials.
In turn, these local officials allegedly used figures provided by the contractor. This insured that the contractor will eventually win the award.
The report also detailed COA’s recommendation that the DPWH should explain why it disbursed government money to fix private properties like the access road leading to the Portofino Beach Resort in Lapu-Lapu City.
At least 16 other regular maintenance projects were implemented outside the venues of the summit by contractors whose services “were not procured through public bidding.”
“Management explained that the projects were implemented in compliance with orders from higher authorities, these being included in the listing of Asean projects.
Further, foreign delegates came to Cebu also to visit tourist spots and investment areas in the Region,” the consolidated report said.
No merit
“The justification is not meritorious since these projects are not emergency in nature and these roads do not lead to and from the airport, summit venues and hotels,” it added.
The DPWH management, according to the audit report, justified the way it implemented the project simply by saying it was “following instructions from higher authorities.”
According to the 2007 Ancajas report, 136 projects costing P1.52 billion were implemented without public bidding.
Of the projects, 63, costing P766.749 million, were implemented without perfected contracts.
The consolidated report also pointed out that the 2006 summit was supposed to be held in Myanmar. Political pressure on the continuing house arrest of Aung San Suu Kyi compelled Asean to move the summit to the Philippines.
Hermoso said that DPWH can justify why the contractors of 63 projects were allowed to begin working without funding or perfected contracts. (KNR/With EOB)
