Svechla's ministry attempted to illegally link contract with the company VV had engaged in elections

“Framing with anti-Condavid rescue material for MPB staff”. So it's called the tender, which was opened on the 1509,2021s by the MBP procurement office, which has not yet been finalised.

The tender also contains within it masking for ministry officials within the environment, even though if finalised in the meantime, the measure has been removed from the State Ministry.

From last year until now, ministry officials have had no office equipment against COVID, because in this tender, illegal proceedings are under way. Once a winner is declared, once again, the tender is cancelled. In the final initiative, a company that allegedly submitted forged documents, or regular in bidding, was recommended for contracting authorisations of a Chinese company for products it has offered. Now the tender is definitely stuck in the Procuring Organization -- O The EPS, and it can't be accomplished for another time, because this institution has no board of directors to decide on this procurement subject. The ministry is obliged to keep the tender put on hold until the board makes the decision.

How did the violations begin?

In September last year, the procurement of the Ministry of Internal Affairs has opened a valuable medium-sized offer with long-term open procedure, not for a year, as all institutions are supplied with these preparations for the fight of David-19, but for 36 months. As a result, the ministry is learning to contract - three-year-olds for supplies of anti-Condavid extenuating materials.

The projected value of the contract has been 950,000 euros for supply of seven articles as needed.

Seven companies participated in the competition, which have also put their prices for units for seven requested articles:

1. “The KPS, worth a total perforation offering for units 7, 60 euros.
2. “KPS, price for unit 40, 80 euros.
3. “Yobopo” KPS, price for units 5, 42 euros.
4. “Eco Solition” KPS, at the price of units 5, 88 euros.
5. “Graphical Trade Enterprise Blendi OP”, price for units 5, 88 euros.
6. “KPS, price for units 4, 98 euros.
7. Group of economic operators “RSR Kosova L. L. C” & “R SR EOD”, at 8, 80 euros.
8. “KPS, at a price of 3, 64 euros.

As Periscop has seen, from documents published in the KCPP, in 12,12.2021, the ministry's procurement has declared the company a winner “Technika” The KPS, which had the cheapest price and according to the ministry, was in order with documentation.

The ministry's decision has not hired the bidding company “Ardi” KPS. He immediately filed complaints at the ministry, claiming the Law was violated at certain points when the company “Technica” was recommended for contract. The KPS, and that the law was violated when their company was expelled.

The ministry has received the complaint in treatment and has partially approved it. So, the Ministry's procurement has admitted that he committed violations himself. So he has decided to cancel his first announcement, and the tender has turned into re-evaluation.

After re-evaluating the tender, the ministry announced the annulment of the procurement activity with the reasoning that all offers were irresponsible. So it's decided now that the tender is completely canceled.

With the ministry's decision, the bidder “, the Graphical Trade Enterprise Blendi OP”, where it gave its evidence that in the ministry's reasoning at points declared irresponsible, it owned those documents. So he's asked to become a reevaluation of the bids and to require additional clarifications. The ministry has received the request in review, suspending the tender and has decided to turn the tender into re-evaluation. So this time again, the ministry acknowledged that it had prosecuted against law. After the re-evaluation, the winner has declared the complaining company “Bland”, which was twice declared irresponsible, considered to be not owned by a plot of documents, conforming to the tender file from the ministry's research unit. But the ministry had asked for additional clarifications, and according to her had sent the complete documentation.

Again, this decision has not been hired by the next bidding company, which had complained about the first time “Ardi”, and in the legal term has complained to the ministry's procurement. Its claims were that the winning company did not own a set of documents, for the worse, has also offered false testimony, offering forged documents. Also, it has rejected points in which the ministry's procurement is written that it is irresponsible, it itself as a racer.

The ministry has reviewed the complaint and suspended the tender procedure. After reviewing this time, the ministry has decided not to approve any points of complaint and has dismissed it as illegal, ultimately leaving its decision to contract for the company “Blandi” in force.

“The KPS has decided on the deadline to complain and exploit the legal right to complaint in the Procuring Bureau. This body, which is without a board of directors, has authorized its expert, Blerina Huruglica, to sift all claims of the company complaining against the ministry's recent decision, where the company “Blandi” was recommended for contract.

The expert's findings

Experts Blerina Huruglica submitted her report on the 2403.2022.

Periscope has seen this report, which has suggested canceling the ministry's recent decision on contract recommendation and the whole subject becoming re-evaluation, as several violations have been found.

After analyzing and reviewing subject paperwork regarding OE allegations, I consider that this procurement activity should be converted to reassession, recommending The AK that evaluates, examines, and the comparison of offers makes it consistent The LPP and the Globe. Based on the above-mentioned clarifications, the investigative expert proposes to the panel that the complaint of OE complainers be approved as based until the AK decision is annulled and that the subject becomes re-evaluated, it is said at the end of the expertise report.

Among the alleged violations is also the claim of offering forged documents from the company “Bland”. This, as the company “Ardi” is alluding to such a counterfeit.

Several complaints were filed in the report, and in the end for each, the expert has given answers, most of them approved.

In a complaint point “He considers OE “Bland” to be irresponsible because on the 1911.2021, they were addressed to the Chinese company VVenzhou Tiexig Trading Co Ltd, where they wanted to do so, confirms whether or not they issued authorisations for products for OE “Technica” and OE “Blandi”, which authorisations of the 05.10.2021 dates and 07.10.2021, respectively, have introduced as documents in the tender files these two companies during their bidding.

On the day 20,11.2021, we received email from the Chinese company's representative Vvenzhou Tiexiong Trade Co Ltd, which is Tracy who has confirmed that the signatures on authorisations presented by OE “Technica” and OE “Blandi” are not of the official persons of this company, where the same points out textual “sir, where did you get the related documents? It's not our signature. That we made communication with the Chinese company VVenzhou Tiexiong Trade Co Ltd, also testifies to the other email of this company since 19,11.2021, with which this company authorized our company for this tender, confirming the fact that this very company that authorized us”, says the report, in the claim of the document forge.

So, since the Chinese company VVenzhou Tiexig Trading Co Ltd, finds that he did not issue authorisations for OE “Technika” and OE “Bland <xx4>, that means that authorisations introduced by these two OE dates 05102021 and 07.2021 are forged or in some other form are formed by these OE itself and have never been issued by the manufacturer of these products, the Chinese company VVencou Tiexi Trapping Ltd. To prove that VVVenzhou Tiexiong Traded Company Co Ltd, it hasn't issued authorisation for OE “Bland”, we have contacted this Chinese company that has issued authorisation for us and from which the AK can see that it recognizes both the signature and the stamp, where the authorization issued to us is issued by the authorized individuals of this company”, is said to be further in complaint.

According to the complaining company, in addition, authorisation introduced by “Bland” doesn't even contain the physical person's name in the manager's position, which has signed authorisation on behalf of VVenzhou Tiexiong Trade Company. Co Ltd.

This is a fraud from these OE so as OE “Bland”, should be declared irresponsible and eliminated from this procurement activity”.

The complaining company has then written that it has proposed to the ministry to contact the Chinese company VVenzhou Tiexiong Trade Co Ltd. and confirm for yourself whether these two authorisations of 05.10.2021 and 07.10.2021 companies were issued by the Chinese company VVVenzhou Tiexiong Trade Co Ltd. “Okay, ministry this AK proposal has not even considered”.

The investigative expert, Blerina Huruglica, in terms of this complaint company claim, against the recommended contract company, explains that, “related to authorization, if we compare OE complainers' authorization, OE recommended by “Blandi<2> and OE “Tenika” since it's the same manufacturer, we see that there's also a difference, and OE has evidence that is directed to you with the Chinese company, which denies that it has issued such authorisation for “> Despite this, the ministry had addressed the complaining company the first time this company was declared the winner.

Periscope has asked several questions in the MPB concerning this tender, where among them he has asked the ministry whether they asked the Chinese company which companies are authorised to sell their products in Kosovo. The ministry has not answered any questions, nor in those dealing with how to proceed further in this tender, since O The FAA is without a board of directors.

Periscop asked for an answer from the Chinese company on this issue, but we didn't get an answer.

O expert The EP has found some other points of complaint that are based. Full report: (THESE)

The company recommended for the contract also had LVV contract

“Graphical Trade Company Blendi O. P”, as primary activity, has “other publishing targets”, while seconds “Other pressure”. So the ministry had decided to supply products against Covid-19 from a printery.

Periscope has found that this company has a connection with Jhelal Svechla's party.

According to the “list of donations to Political Subjections for 2021” local elections that LVV has handed over a few days ago to the Election Commission, it finds that services were purchased from this company.

“Set authentication material” So it's called the service that Vetevendosje had purchased from NTG “Bland” worth 10, 015.26 euros. Party sponsors and several companies from which campaign services have been bought are on display.

 Required Products

Health institutions in Kosovo have decided several weeks ago that the country will open up more in relation to the struggle against pandemic.

In the tender, which had been opened since last year, which is being learned to be finalised now by the MPB, seven products required for supply are required:1. Deinfectant, in bottles 1,000 ml; 2 disinfectant in bottles 500 ml; 3. Filter masks; 4 pack masks 1/50 pieces; 5 infrared thermometer; 6 gloves, packets 1/100; wall disinfectant device, 1L.

Since the beginning of Kosovo's pandemic in March 2020, institutions have started with the purchase of protective materials, disinfecting spaces in an effort to combat COVID-19. To buy these materials, institutions have largely exploited the negotiated public procurement procedure - without the publication of the contract announcement. Shortly after presenting the first cases with COVID-19, the Public Procubation Regulatory Commission (KRPP) had issued announcements to allow institutions to apply emergency procedures to purchase materials related to pandemic. The decision was abolished by the KCPP in December 2020, and institutions were obliged to make tenders with open procedures.

Some of the contracts have been linked to very high prices, until there have been institutions that have contracted contracts at very low prices - below the market price./ P ERISCOPI/