New O Board The EPS allows signing illegal contracts, dismissed company complaints of 800 tenders

O Board The EPS will not address any of these complaints. He has rejected all of this. It has thus allowed institutions to continue with procurement procedures, as they thought themselves before a complaint was made about a procurement procedure.

That decision, as taught, PeriscopeO Board The DPS got it at the end of last month.

With this, O The DS has denied the parties an elementary right to complaint. So, no more decisions about all company complaints affect the violation of the right to complaint, and allowing contract links contrary to the law.

O The EPS is the only institution in which parties dissatisfied with the decisions of public institutions' procurement offices regarding developments in some procurement activity may complain. It's the only institution that makes the quickest decision about that complaint. So throwing complaints has allowed companies to complain only in court. In reality, very few companies will address the tribunal in these cases because it is known that the courts could make decisions on such cases for years. So, throwing out complaints, the OSHP chose not to monitor public money transparently.

The board has revelations this decision in all complaints that have been filed in O The E.P.

“Orgn Procurement Manager explains that from the date 01. 04. The 2021 has worked without Bord because the preliminary has passed the legal mandate for review under the pre-lawd competencies, and it has therefore not been possible to create review panels for making a final decision, as was envisioned with LPP Article 112 concerning Article 5 of this same law, as well as Article 104 of the Administrative Procedure Law. O Board Members The EPS after reviewing the entire situation on the table and numerous discussions, priorities for review and no review of complaints that have been accepted over the time as the board has been unfunctionable, at the meeting held, the majority of votes concluded that the earlier complaints cannot be considered for the fact that the legal deadlines for review have passed, and the same are out of date for review”, said in O'S clarification. The DPS in complaints.

At least O The EV has also tried to find legal reasoning on this.

The OSHP “Cord, based on Article 104 of the Law for Admitative Procedures, which says: “administrative procedure also ends when the competent public body estimates that the procedure was initiated or its purpose has become impossible or in vain. Based on these legal provisions, the general deadline until the issue of a final decision is 34 days, as well as O The operation could determine the issue as very complicated issues and postpone the deadline for more than 20 days for making his decision, the declaration on his reasons and orders. So the OSHP Board, based on all these legal provisions, the passage of legal deadlines and inefficiency to issue a final decision from the OSHP review panel, always given public interest, estimates that considering these complaints, would be contrary to law”, is said further in the opinion of the OSHP.

Since it has been a relatively long time, there are also contracts signed by contracting authorities, then some contracting authorities that are subject to complaint, they are not in this year's budget plan. The board considers it impossible to make even the pledge of tools that is conditional on signing public contracts.

The board as another circumstance in making this decision has also taken into account significant price hikes.

O decision The DPS to call that law is highly controversial, as O The Monday has brought a decision to drop complaints, saying they've spent 30 days... while the deadline begins to be counted when there is a board and not when there is no.

As long as the OSHP is called into the Administrative Procedure Law, in no provision of the Public Procurement Law, on which this organ should operate, it is not envisioned that O I don't deal with complaints.

In 2021, OSHP filed exactly 881 complaints from companies against decisions by contracting authorities. Since the Board had been given the mandate of March 31st, from January 1st to the expiration of the mandate - for three months, O panel (Bord) The EP has made a decision on only 225 complaints. Official data shows that the panel has approved contracting Authorities' decisions as based on 79 cases, arguing that claims by the complaint parties have not been based on legal arguments to approve their complaints. The review panel has taken the decision to re-evaluate bids in 110 cases, stating that the fair assessment of tender bids has been made by awarding public procurement commissions, thus facing specific violations of the Public Procurement Law and procurement rules. Also, the panel has decided to annul procurement activities (rither) in five cases, given the consistent violations of the Procuration Law provisions, for irregularities in the tender files, unfair bidding assessment, or lack of procurement procedures.

Only if a comparison should be made between throwing out over 800 complaints and finding violations in 115 cases of 255 complaints could it be estimated how many violations could be in the signing of contracts, in tenders not received on the basis of complaints.

O The timeline, under a written complaint by a company against contract reporting, or the announcement of contracting, published by the contracting Authority, has been authorized to review the carrying out of the corresponding procurement activity as well as complaints filed with complaints, as well as the set-up legal terms for the manner of any subject, the object of which is the complaint and procurement activity for which complaints were issued.

But before making a decision, the panel must first have a report of its own expert on the table

The examiner, who is appointed according to the LPP, conducted a review of the activity of relevant procurement, as well as the validity of all claims involved in the complaint. The examiner is obliged to equip the research panel with a written assessment of the procurement activity and the validity of all claims involved in the complaint.

For all complaints rejected there was a preliminary assessment of the expert. So there was a report. As Periscope has seen, research experts in some cases have found major violations of the Public Procure Law in complaints that were dropped. In many cases experts have found companies that are evidently more expensive than cheaper companies who have been responsible for the contract to be awarded contracts. Likewise, experts have found criteria set out in the tender that have been compiled in objections to the law, which are favourable for one company or discrimination for another.

O Board The EPS has started to address complaints that have been made since they received the mandate and the same gather for decisions every working day.

Do not label O Board The timeline has long been affecting the impasse of procurement procedures for important contracts for citizens' health, as well as for various contracts for the interest of the contracting authorities with cʹrast has been directly violated by public interest because contracting authorities are stuck in the supply of drugs and important drugs to those in health institutions.

With all this, as he has seen. Periscope, some institutions have negotiated contracts for the same procurement activity. For example, SKKKUK has been contracting to negotiate activity “Fourncing with medical oxygen”, or MSH has been negotiating contracting for <x0). Both these high value tenders are stuck in O The Sunday because there's been complaints from companies. So, on one side of the tender of this nature are suspended because of the suspicious tender process, on the other hand new contracts have been entered due to the necessity of drugs, and if the new O panel The EP would make a decision in favour of companies and against these two institutions, a new situation would be presented that would have financial consequences.

From March 31st to today most complaints have been filed against the Kosovo Energy Corporation - KEK, about 100.

The second mostly complaints in his direction are the Ministry of Infrastructure, with about 90. After that, Kosovo Police The Ministry of Health, etc. /Periscopi/