Laptop tender price was topped up by Sh1.4b, rules review board

More than Sh1.4 billion was added to the laptop tender amount when it was awarded to Indian company Olive Telecommunications PVT, the Public Procurement Administration Review Board says.

The Board says initially Olive had quoted US $ 268,899,669 or Sh24,286,711,335/50, but when the tender was awarded, Education Secretary Prof Jacob Kaimenyi, announced a sum of US $ 284,899,669 representing a price addition of about Sh1.4 billion above the declared best and final offers.

The board says it looked at 10 issues raised by the two parties in the Sh24 billion laptop project before reaching its verdict.

On whether, or not Olive was an original equipment manufacturer and allowing them to participate in the tender process breached the law, the review board found that Olive was not an original equipment manufacturer and therefore did not qualify.

The board also found the firm not only failed to meet the mandatory threshold stipulated in the tender document, but there was also no joint venture between it and any other company.
The lawyers for the Indian company Sunday said they have lined up a number of issues and inconsistencies in the board’s ruling.

The lawyers will be presenting evidence in court on Monday, that the ruling was unfair and that there was a deliberate bid to award the tender to second-placed company, Hewlett Packard Europe -BV.

Hewlett-Packard

“Due diligence will be done to the company that emerged second and will be the one that will be awarded the tender. Why go through the process instead of awarding the tender to Hewlett-Packard Company and save taxpayers money,” said Olive Communications chairman Mr Arun Khanna.

Although it was the third bidder China’s Haier Electricals Appliances Corporation Ltd that asked for review, it would miss out because no due diligence would be done on the company, he said.
Mr Khanna said a decision would be made whether the verdict would be challenged in the High Court.

“We are not happy with the decision but our lawyers will advise on whether we will be appealing it in court,” he said.

However, a source in the Indian company but who requested anonymity, said the issue of appealing the decision in the High Court was almost a forgone conclusion.

One of the issues in contention would be the board’s ruling against Olive communications, on grounds that it would rely on contract manufacturers –Chinese company Century Electronics in the case of Olive- to make laptops for standard one pupils and yet major companies including the three top bidders rely on such companies mostly situated in China.