CS Monica Juma off the hook in Sh3.5bn police insurance probe

MPs have cleared Foreign Affairs minister Monica Juma of wrongdoing in the controversial award of the Sh3.5 billion tender for a comprehensive group life insurance cover for police and prison officers.

The recommendation of the National Assembly Public Accounts Committee (PAC), in its report on the accounts of the national government for financial year 2015/16 which is under consideration in the House, vitiates a previous sanction by the same team.

In the PAC report of 2014/15, that was adopted in November 2018, MPs recommended that Dr Juma be investigated and prosecuted for irregularly awarding the two-year tender to the highest bidder - Pioneer Assurance Company Limited - at Sh1.75 billion.

Britam Insurance Company Limited had quoted Sh629 million.

THE ACCUSATION

Dr Juma had been accused of awarding the tender while serving as Interior Principal Secretary.

The MPs’ arguments were based on the fact that she introduced a new criterion during evaluation and comparison of tenders and proceeded to cancel the tender for the lowest bid, contrary to procurement laws.

However, the committee chaired by Ugunja MP Opiyo Wandayi discovered that the tender covering the 2014-16 period was executed by then Interior PS Mutea Iringo.

“The committee observed that the matter was considered by the House and that the accounting officer in the financial year under review (2014/15) was Mr Mutea Iringo, not ambassador Dr Monica Juma,” the report says.

DEFENCE

Dr Juma had previously argued against her adverse mention in the matter, giving the watchdog committee proof that she was not the accounting officer at the Interior ministry when the contract was awarded.

The contract was later extended and to date, Pioneer has continued to provide the cover, which ranges from Sh8 million for lower cadre officers and Sh200 million for high ranking officers.

“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 had told the committee. 

“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."

This came after CS Juma was questioned on why she effected part of the contract upon succeeding Mr Iringo on August 20, 2014 despite the Auditor-General’s adverse findings. 

IRINGO'S EXPLANATION

Although Mr Iringo explained to the committee why the contract was awarded to Pioneer, it wants thorough and conclusive investigations by relevant agencies, as well as appropriate recommendations within three months of adoption of the report

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

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

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

The basis for Britam’s disqualification was that its form of tender was not duly completed and it did not state the capacity of the signatory as required in procurement laws.

The bid document required that a person signing the form of tender indicate his or her capacity in the organisation, a condition that Mr Iringo said Britam did not meet.