Procurement excuses continue after 20 years

THE EDITOR: Now that the Chief Justice has released to the public his letter to the Attorney General dated June, after refusing to do so on a freedom of information application from our colleague Afra Raymond, the Joint Council for the Construction Industry (JCC) takes note of the following.

It took impending court action for the judiciary to release the said letter. This in itself is an affront to transparency around the spending of public money, which is one of the hallmarks that will be introduced by the operationalisation of the Public Procurement and Public Property Disposal Act.

The JCC expects that since the AG received this letter from the CJ in June and subsequently met with the regulator in July, the technical issues brought up by the CJ would have been addressed by the regulator and the AG.

The JCC remains concerned that the judiciary is stating in 2022 in the said letter to the AG, "The judiciary is mindful of its obligations as a public body with respect to the act and is of the view that its procurement unit, which at present consists of one member of staff and one officer, is not resourced to undertake the requirements of the legislation with regard to its own procurement."

However, in the CJ’s own October 2020 address, in commemoration of the 2020-2021 Law Term, he stated, “We also partnered with the Office of Procurement Regulation to assist in meeting training needs to ensure their effective operationalisation.”

The CJ is now belatedly advising the AG that "the judiciary settled on the design of its unit a little over a year ago after studying its internal processes and developed e-procedures, but its request for procurement unit staff positions has not yet been addressed by the Finance and General Purposes Committee of Cabinet."

Who, if not the CJ, is responsible for following up with the relevant offices and officers to ensure that the judiciary is adequately staffed to comply with an imminent law? The irony is palpable, as one would expect that the third arm of the State would fall in line with government policy, especially one which has the potential to stem systemic corruption in this country. The CJ appears to be suggesting that the judiciary should not be subject to independent oversight in its spending of public money.

The JCC again asks why did the judiciary not bring up all these issues with the Finance Minister, who spearheaded the three amendments to this bill and its passage through both Houses of Parliament over the last two years.

It is highly inappropriate for the public to have to continue to wait for legislation that has the potential to save this country over $4 billion a year, while a plethora of excuses and obfuscation continues after 20 years of efforts to reform public procurement.

FAZIR KHAN

president, JCC