Uganda Human Rights Commission ‘homeless’ after public procurement Tribunal cancels tendering process for head office space over negligence

Failure to carefully scrutinise the powers of attorney of a bidder has thrown the Uganda Human Rights Commission (UHRC) into a crisis that has rendered the Commission ‘homeless’- at least for the meantime.

The Public Procurement And Disposal Of Public Assets Appeals Tribunal on 2nd February cancelled the procurement process of a Head Office, just days before its tenancy expiry at Twed Plaza.

The cancellation followed an appeal by Apple Properties Ltd one of the two bidders against a win by Rumee Investments Ltd. Rumee Investments Limited owns Rumee Towers on Lumumba Avenue, in the leafy Nakasero, just a stone-throw away from Twed Plaza.

Apple Properties  Ltd had bid to supply office space to the Commission at UGX85,000,000 per month, translating to UGX 1,020,000,000 per annum whereas Rumee bid UGX123,616,800 monthly and UGX1,483,401,600 per annum. 

UHRC declared Rumee Investments Ltd as the best-evaluated bidder and rejected Apple Properties Ltd’s bid because there was no evidence that the bidder obtained the bid document directly from the Respondent in accordance with regulation 48 (a) of the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets and Instruction to Bidders (ITB) 6.3 of the solicitation document.

During the appeal hearing, while it was determined by the Francis Gimara-led tribunal that indeed Apple Properties Ltd did not obtain the Bidding Document directly from UHRC and therefore UHRC “rightfully rejected” its bid document, the tribunal also discovered that Rumee Investments Ltd’s Powers of Attorney were faulty and therefore they were awarded the tender erroneously. 

“In exercise of its powers as a merits review Tribunal under section 911 of the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act, the Tribunal has decided to remit the procurement back to the Respondent for re-evaluation,” ruled the Tribunal.

“The procurement of Office Space for the Head Office of the Respondent under Procurement Ref No. UHRC/NCONS/22- 23/00005 is remitted back to the Respondent for re-evaluation in a manner not inconsistent with this decision,” ruled the Tribunal on February 2023.

Other members of the Tribunal are Geofrey Nuwagira Kakira, Nelson Nerima, Paul Kalumba and Charity Kyarisiima. 

The Tribunal’s decision means that neither Rumee Investment Ltd’s nor Apple Properties Ltd’s bids in their present form be considered for reevaluation and therefore the whole process has to be done afresh. The problem, however, is that UHRC’s current tenancy agreement with Twed Investments expires today.

“Yes, our tenancy has expired today,” Ms Mariam Fauzat Wangadya, the UHRC Chairperson confirmed to this reporter on phone. 

Asked about the irregularities and termination of the earlier procurement process by the PPDA Tribunal, she declined to respond saying, “I am however not the accounting officer. We have an accounting officer and contracts committee, they are the best-placed to answer that”. 

Ms. Ejang Margaret Lucy, the  Commission Secretary, who is the accounting officer, was not reachable on her known mobile phone number by the time of publishing this story. 

In a public notice issued today, UHRC said it would move its head office to Central Region’s offices in Naguru as the procurement for new office space resumes.  

Faulty and post-dated powers of attorney  

The problem emanated from the Tribunal’s thorough review of both contenders’ bid documents and procurement action file, that unearthed “unexplained discrepancies in the power of attorney and the supporting board resolution”. 

“The Tribunal has examined the bid of Rumee Investments Ltd. The power of attorney and board resolution of Rumee Investments Ltd appointing Kushuboo R. Vadodaria as its lawful attorney are both post-dated October 14, 2022, but apparently registered with Uganda Registration Services Bureau on September 20, 2022,” reads an extract from the Tribunal’s decision of 2nd February.  

“The power of attorney authorises the attorney “To obtain bidding document for the procurement of Non-Consultancy Services of Office Space for UHRC Head Office to Uganda Human Rights Commission under procurement  Reference  Number: UHRC/ NCONS/ 22-23/ 00005. The earliest document on the procurement action file is an internal memo from the Acting Secretary of the Respondent to the Director of Finance and administration to communicate a decision of the Commission to procure new office premises for the head office and to request that the procurement process be initiated. The confirmation of funding and approval to procure (Form 5) was signed by the Acting Secretary on September 22, 2022. The Contracts Committee approved the bid notice, bid document price, amount of bid security, draft solicitation document, procurement method and evaluation committee on October 7, 2022. The bid notice was published in the New Vision newspaper on October 11, 2022,” further observed the Tribunal. 

“The apparent post-dating of the power of attorney; the mention therein of the procurement and its correct procurement reference number; and its purported registration on September 20, 2022, unless satisfactorily explained,  can lead to a suspicion that Rumee Investments Ltd was privy to confidential internal information about the procurement before the publication of the bid notice. If proven, such prior knowledge and ability to access internal information before other bidders would negate the cardinal principles of non-discrimination; transparency, accountability and fairness; maximisation of competition; ensuring value for money; confidentiality; and promotion of Ethics,” the tribunal further said.

Asked how this came about, one Saeed Hernandez, the Project Manager and representative of Rumee Investments Ltd, said that the registration of the power of attorney was handled by their lawyers. 

“Had the evaluation committee carefully scrutinised the power of attorney and supporting board resolution, they would have noticed the discrepancy. The evaluation of the power of attorney was conducted in a perfunctory manner. The evaluation committee failed to conduct proper scrutiny and due diligence on the impugned power of attorney and board resolution. It was their duty to determine whether the bidder actually got knowledge of the procurement in advance; or if the registration date of September 20, 2022, was an innocent error. In the circumstances, having found that the evaluation of the impugned power of attorney was not properly conducted, the Tribunal has determined that the Respondent erred when it declared Rumee Investment Limited as the best-evaluated bidder,” concluded the Tribunal.