Infrastructure Ministry procurement does not question the law, another violation in 38 million tender

The Ministry of Infrastructure, which is being led by Deputy Minister Hysen Durmish, is set to bring its goal to the end for the tender “Country Road Enlargement N25, Pristina-Bessi Podujevo. Except the roads he has chosen to contract for this project are illegal, writes Periscope. Two weeks ago, MMPHI has [...]
Two weeks ago, MMPHI has published the tender results for construction of the Pristina-Podujevo road.
Many companies are expected to file complaints to the Procuring Organisation, as they have no longer agreed to the ministry's decision when it recommended contract to several operators, but also to the excuse for eliminating them. However, the leadership ministry's procurement, based on documents loaded on e-procurement, is determined to sign contracts, without expecting the outcome of complaints. This is a serious violation of the procurement Law.
The total of the bidding recommended for the contract amounts to 34.2m euros.
For tears 0 is recommended The Economic Operator Group: “Pro& Co Group” Spec; “484, 854, 58 euros.
For tears 1, Group Economic Operators “2 A Group” Exp; “Vega” shpk, worth 8, 447, 477.70 euros.
For tears, 2 Economic Operator Group “Buyar Shaban B. I”; “Kosovo Asfalt” shpk '%; “Bagher-1” far; “El-Bau” Shrik, worth 8, 644, 259.75 euros.
For tears 3 Group Economic Operators “Agbes Building” shpk; “Arbotec” Sharp; “Geo Construction” shpk; “Mineral L.L. C”; “MB Group” Short, worth 9, 254, 811. 42 euros.
For tears 5 Group Economic Operators “Beni-Com” Apple; “Saba Belca” -Dega in Kosovo; “Sherif” Exp, worth 1, 443, 784. 50 euros.
The contest has been around 25 subjects, mainly companies in the consortium, among which there have been cheaper bids but have been eliminated from the race for various reasons.
Some of the companies have disagreed with the ministry's procurement decision, when it has declared it irresponsible, even with the decision to recommend contracts for upper companies. Shortly after the decision, in the 5-day legal term, some of them have applied for reexamination (anke) to the ministry's procurement office.
Based on the Public Procure Law, the ministry has suspended its decision on contract recommendation on June 7th (June) to review complaints.
After spending 24 hours on their own, ( Thursday) has reported to economic operators about the outcome of reevaluating complaints. The complaints have been approved for the subject to go to reassession for tears 2 and 5, while for tears of 0, 1, 3 have been rejected. In this case, the ministry has had to wait 10 days to lift the suspension decision, and make another decision.
This is because economic operators have been eligible for 10 days, following the ministry's ( Thursday), June 8th) decision to file complaints with the Procuratory Organisation. The ministry has not expected this, but has charged the decision to contract for three tears, 0, 1 and 3.
This decision conflicts with the Public Procure Law, namely with secondary legislation “Rule No. 001 -2022 for public procurement”.
Article 61 of this regulation speaks of the steps of procuring and back-to-hand action.
“61.1 Presentation of the request for review automatically suspends the procurement procedure, and in this case the Contractive Authority, respectively, must write down all parties regarding the suspension of the procurement procedure in question.
Whenever the suspension mentioned is linked to the AK's decision on contracting, such suspension will not be completed before the end of a period of at least 10 calendar days from the date of the publication of the AK” decision, the regulation is specifically said.

Meanwhile, as seen by documents in charge of E-Prokurim, the ministry has lifted the suspension after four days.


Periscop has also reported that the ministry's procurement has ignored one Public Procurement Regulatory Commission Opinion - KCPP connected to an illegal criteria that he applied to this tender procedure.
Also, from him The findings have proved that the Ministry's procurement has set assessment criteria for contracting that are contrary to the Public Procurement Law../M. B - Periscope.












