IEBC admits error in new election system tender, but denies favouring South Korean firm

The Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) has admitted that its tender for a new elections management system contains an error, with the commission revealing that it mistakenly required bidders to provide performance security equivalent to 20 per cent of the contract price.

IEBC says it has since identified the mistake and is preparing an addendum to correct the requirement, noting that the law caps performance security at 10 per cent of the contract price.

The admission comes as the commission fights a challenge against the tender for the Integrated Elections Management System, which was advertised on August 11.

While admitting to the error, IEBC has defended the rest of the tender, dismissing claims that it is flawed, discriminatory or designed to favour a particular company.

The commission has also defended the Ksh.30 million tender security, saying the procurement is a framework contract and the law allows it to set tender security as an absolute amount rather than a percentage of the tender value.

IEBC has further rejected claims that the tender specifications were tailored to favour South Korean firm Miru Systems Limited, saying the allegations are speculative and that the applicant has not pointed to any specific requirement that gives the company an unfair advantage.

"The tender is strict, it's either you are compliant or not; for the bidder to succeed, it should be hundred percent. With respect to tax, the requirements is that they are tax compliant by whatever instruments they have in their country," argued IEBC.

On local participation, the commission says it has included a requirement for the successful bidder to meet a 40 per cent local content threshold, which it says will promote local participation and skills transfer.

The Public Procurement Administrative Review Board is expected to make its decision on the challenge on Friday next week.

IEBC is asking the Board to dismiss the challenge and lift the suspension on the procurement process, allowing it to proceed with the next stages.

In the case Galadirel Investments Limited argues that the tender is flawed, discriminatory and a violation of Article 227 of the Constitution.

"The Applicant has perused the said tender document and has found the following breaches; There is no value of the tender provided despite the Respondent issuing a tender security value of Ksh.30,000,000 contrary to Section 61 of the PPADA," reads court documents.

Through lawyer Julius Miiri, the applicant further claims that the tender document, having been issued with material omissions, contradictions, undefined requirements and incomplete provisions, does not provide a clear, transparent, objective and uniform basis upon which all prospective tenderers can prepare and submit responsive and comparable tenders.

"The aforesaid omissions, contradictions and ambiguities are material and have the potential to affect competition, responsiveness, evaluation, comparability of tenders and equal treatment of tenderers, thereby rendering the procurement process procedurally defective,” they argue.