[ad_1]
- A court annulled a contract awarded by SABC for the remodeling of elevators and escalators.
- The contract, awarded in 2015, was worth more than R7 million.
- The SABC requested a review of the contract, which was awarded during the tenure of COO Hlaudi Motsoeneng.
The Johannesburg High Court has reserved a contract awarded by SABC, worth more than 7 million rand, for the refurbishment of elevators and escalators in one of the station’s offices.
The court also ordered the contractor to reimburse the profits made through the contract.
The SABC requested a review of the contract, awarded in 2015 during the mandate of COO Hlaudi Motsoeneng, and which had been destined to be investigated by the Special Investigation Unit (SIU).
The contract, which has been declared illegal and invalid, was awarded by SABC to Mott MacDonald Africa (Pty) Ltd for the replacement and renovation of 36 elevators and six escalators at its Radio Park and TV Block buildings in Auckland Park, Johannesburg.
SIU joined SABC in the Superior Court’s request to review the contract on the basis that the public broadcaster awarded the contract without following any of its prescribed procurement policy processes, SIU spokesman Kaizer said. Kganyago.
READ | A closer look at the crisis at SABC
Instead of awarding the contract on the basis of an open tender, it treated Mott MacDonald as a single service provider, which was contrary to the regulatory rules of the procurement scheme.
“The SIU was empowered to join the proceedings under Presidential Proclamation R29 of 2017, of September 1, 2017, to investigate and take action with respect to contracts entered into by the SABC with various parties,” says Kganyago.
Offer
In his view, Judge Raylene Keightley determined that at the time of the contract award, the SABC had conducted a tender process for the renovation of elevators and escalators at its Auckland Park offices, and for the installation of two additional elevators .
Following this process, it was suggested that a well-known company take over the project. However, this was vetoed by Motsoeneng and the CFO at the time, James Aguma.
Despite the ruling that an independent consultant oversaw the project, it was later the sole responsibility of Aguma, who contacted Mott MacDonald, the court heard.
“In summary, there is simply no evidence that the deviation requirements were followed before Mr. Aguma appointed Mott. In all likelihood, this is because Mr. Aguma did not follow the required procurement process.” Keightley said.
“Instead, it flew alone (albeit apparently with the knowledge of at least some members of the Exco Group) to approach Mott to provide consulting services that effectively involved SABC hiring Mott for SABC’s own procurement function. “.
Keightley added that the irregular award of the contract was just one of many “governance failures” at the parastatal.
“The systemic weakening of the procurement processes was just one part of a much broader pattern of governance failures by SABC under the executive leadership of, among others, Mr. Motsoeneng and Mr. Aguma,” he added.
Despite the invalidity of the consulting contract, the court said Mott MacDonald was entitled to withhold, from payments already made, an amount that reflected his reasonable expenses under the contract. The amount would be determined by experts.
