Monica Juma seeks clearance in Sh3.5bn police insurance probe

Foreign Affairs Cabinet Secretary Monica Juma wants the National Assembly to clear her from wrongdoing in the controversial award of the Sh3.5 billion comprehensive group life insurance cover for police and prison officers.

Facing the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) of the National Assembly on Tuesday, Dr Juma said she was not the accounting officer at the Interior ministry when the contract, whose award has been described by Auditor-General Edward Ouko as irregular, was signed on July 1, 2014.

The contract, which ran for two years from 2014 to 2016, was awarded to Pioneer Assurance Company Limited that quoted Sh1.747 in annual fees, against Britam Insurance Company Limited that quoted Sh629 million.

The firm has continued to provide the cover, which ranges from Sh8 million for lower cadre officers and Sh200 million for high ranking officers.

BLAME APPOINTED

Dr Juma said that only the then Interior Principal Secretary Mutea Iringo could respond to the adverse audit findings as well as questions raised by committee members.

“I was not the PS under whose tenure this contract was signed. This was done under the competent hand of a PS and if there are issues, then he is the best-suited person to answer,” Dr Juma told the committee chaired by Ugunja MP Opiyo Wandayi.

The controversial award is a recurring audit finding from the 2014/15 financial year that saw the House recommend that Dr Juma be reprimanded when it adopted the PAC report in November 2018.

“I have no reason to impute illegality into this contract. The conclusion reached by the committee that I be reprimanded is an apportionment of blame that is erroneous,” she added when questioned on why she went ahead to implement part of the contract upon succeeding Mr Iringo at the ministry on August 20, 2014.

This was despite the auditor’s adverse findings. 

IRINGO'S POSITION

When he appeared before the committee later on Tuesday, Mr Iringo, whose execution of the deal was witnessed by former Inspector General of Police David Kimaiyo and Pioneer Managing Director Moses Kimani, defended it saying it complied with the Public Procurement and Disposal Act. 

Though the committee members wondered why the ministry would award the tender to the highest bidder, Mr Iringo said that Britam had problems with its documents, meaning it could not proceed to the evaluation stage.

“The lowest bidder was unresponsive because it did not comply with the mandatory requirements contrary to the Auditor-General’s report,” he said, but noted that had Britam complained, the tender would have been cancelled and readvertised.

According to Mr Iringo, if a company fails to proceed to the evaluation stage, it means that its bid is invalid and cannot therefore be categorized either as the lowest or highest bidder. 

“In line with the procurement laws, Pioneer qualifies as the lowest bidder because Britam was knocked out,” he told the committee.

The basis for Britam’s disqualification was that its form of tender was not dully completed and that it did not state the capacity of the signatory contrary to procurement laws.

The bid document required that a person signing the form of tender indicate his or her capacity in the organisation, Mr Iringo said.