Pressure Mounts on Electoral Commission

Posted on: www.dailyguideghana.com

By William Yaw Owusu

Tuesday September 27, 2011
PRESSURE IS mounting on the Electoral Commission (EC) to complete the processes that will lead to the much-talked about biometric registration for the 2012 general elections.

With about 14 months to the elections, political parties, particularly the New Patriotic Party (NPP) and People’s National Convention (PNC) have raised red flags over the process being adopted by the EC for the exercise expressing fears that the program might not materialize after all.

Last month, some parties walked out of a demonstration exercise organized by the EC for shortlisted companies, one of whom was to be selected to undertake the biometric registration.

They cited the pending legal action instituted by another company that felt shortchanged in the short-listing process.

Apart from organizing public education and orientation to staff and all stakeholders on the new technology, the EC is yet to present a proposal to parliament for the amendment of the Public Election Act that allows the commission to conduct the biometric registration exercise.

The EC is also silent on the critical issue of verification of the whole biometric process without which the process will be flawed.

Even though Acting Public Affairs Director of EC, Christian Owusu-Parry has assured that the commission is on course to delivering on the biometric registration, an allegation by the political parties that the EC had kept them in the dark on the implementation process is worrisome.

Amidst the confusion, Intelligent Card Production Systems (ICPS) - the company that instituted the legal action has hit back strongly against accusations that it was responsible for the delay in the implementation of the biometric registration exercise because of its decision to seek redress in court.

A news release issued by ICPS Consortium signed by its Legal Director Joseph Kofi Amoako titled: ‘Re: Procurement of Biometric Voters Registration System,’ said ICPS was correcting “certain factual inaccuracies in the public domain on this issue”
The company said in March 2011, the ICP-led consortium of international companies was “shortlisted and pre-qualified to submit a bid for the Biometric Voter Registration System, after it submitted an expression of interest in the project pursuant to an advertisement in the newspapers in February 2011.”

The statement said “Five (5) entities were initially short-listed and prequalified in order of merit (ICPS consortium was 4th in ranking), but subsequently, the EC increased the number of shortlisted companies and pre-qualified entities to seven (7), which ICPS contends, was in contravention of a mandatory limit of six (6) as set by the Public Procurement Act (Act 663) Section 67.

“In the first week of August 2011, the EC commenced its evaluation of the shortlisted companies including the ICPS led consortium. By a letter dated 11th August 2011, the EC informed ICPS that its bid had been disqualified because it was not responsive.”

The release said the reason advanced was that ICPS failed to submit a Certificate of Incorporation with its tender documents, a decision that ICPS contended was not in consonance with sections 58 & 59 of the Procurement Act (Act 663).

“ICPS considers its disqualification unlawful, unfair and arbitrary, as there was no requirement for the said Certificate to be submitted (as required by law), in the Invitation to Tender (ITT).”

According to the statement, “without responding to ICPS’ protest letter on August 12, the EC on August 15 commenced the second stage of the evaluation process by calling two (2) of the shortlisted companies to demonstrate their Technical Proposal.

“The ICPS consortium was compelled to commence legal proceedings against the EC on the morning of 15th August 2011 when the EC started the demonstrations as scheduled at 11am, without having evaluated the ICPS consortium’s Technical Proposal.”

The release said on the same day, ICPS wrote two letters to the Public Procurement Authority (PPA), complaining about what it viewed as a breach of the law in the EC’s conduct of the bidding process and applied for an administrative review of the wrongful disqualification and exclusion of its bid from the demonstration.

“The EC was served with the application for interlocutory injunction around 11:35am on 15th August 2011 when it had just commenced the demonstration. The EC however proceeded with the said demonstration in spite of service of the court process on it.”

“It was not until the EC was instructed by the PPA to suspend the demonstration for a period of seven (7) days by a letter dated 15th August 2011 that it halted the said demonstration. The suspension of the demonstration, the PPA indicated to ICPS was because the PPA was investigating a case for Administrative Review, as per its mandate under Section 82 of the Public Procurement Act (Act 663). Consequently, ICPS discontinued the suit against the EC on 19th of August 2011, to allow the PPA’s Administrative Review process to proceed in order to save a lengthy court process.”

The release said having ascertained that ICPS had established a prima facie case, “the PPA by a letter dated 22nd August extended the suspension for the entire tender process for a further period of twenty-three (23) working days. On 23rd August 2011, the PPA issued another letter, commencing a full scale investigation into the matter by demanding relevant documents from the EC to enable it conduct an effective Administrative Review.

“Notwithstanding the suspension of the bid process by the PPA, the EC went ahead in contravention of the PPA’s orders for suspension and Administrative Review, and scheduled the morning of 30th August 2011 to resume the demonstration of the technical proposals of the two (2) bidders. On 30th August 2011, the ICPS consortium was therefore compelled to re-institute legal proceedings due to the EC’s disregard of the PPA’s suspension order. Had the EC complied with the suspension order, ICPS would not have returned to the courts and the PPA’s expedited Administrative Review would have concluded and the contract awarded by now.”

The ICPS consortium assured the public that the institution of legal proceedings against the EC “is not an attempt to delay the biometric voter’s registration exercise; neither is ICPS imputing any malicious intent to the EC.”

The statement said the actions taken by ICPS consortium was to ensure that the rule of law prevailed by pointing out what it called “grievous errors of law made by the EC that can and must be corrected expeditiously, and also to exercise its constitutional right to protect its interests in relation to its wrongful exclusion from the bidding process.”