The Member of Parliament (MP) for South Dayi Constituency, in the Volta Region, has filed a writ at the Accra High Court, urging it to compel Adjaye and Associates, a building consultancy company, to refund the $6 million paid to the company by the government of Ghana.
The plaintiff claims that the government breached the Public Procurement Act in
procuring the services of the company to design the 111 regional and district hospitals project, also known as the Agenda 111 project.
Mr Rockson-Nelson Este Kwami Dafeamekpor, the plaintiff, said it was unlawful to award the insurance contract, which was a component under the project to Enterprise Life Insurance Company Limited.
The plaintiff joined the Attorney-General (A-G) and Minister of Justice, the principal legal adviser of the government, as a defendant.
In the statement of claim accompanied by a number of reliefs, counsel for the plaintiff, Nii Kpakpo Samoa Addo, asked the court to order the A-G to charge and prosecute the Minister of Health and all officials involved in the unlawful award of the insurance contract to Enterprise Life Insurance Company, for causing financial loss to the State under Section 179A of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960, Act 29.
It is the case of the plaintiff that Adjaye and Associates is not the only company that provides architectural services, neither does it have the sole prerogative to be awarded such contract.
The plaintiff contended that the Ministry of Works and Housing was the entity responsible for procuring the services of an architect for the building design of the Agenda 111 project, and was mandated by the Public Procurement Act, 2003, Act 663, to do so by competitive tendering process under exceptional circumstances.
The MP averred that the Ministry of Works and Housing was mandated to undergo a two-stage procurement process by sending out invitation documents, calling upon suppliers or contractors to submit, initial tenders which contain the proposals of interested persons but failed to do so.
He said that the manner in which the defendant contracted Adjaye and Associates could not be said to be under the restricted tendering as it did not satisfy the conditions and requirements provided under Section 38 of the Public Procurement Act, 2003 (Act 663).
Mr Dafeamekpor stated that at the time of procurement, contracting for Agenda 111, Adjaye and Associates was not the only available architecture firm in the business of developing building designs, and that the Adjaye and Associates had no exclusive rights in relation to contracts for public building designs in Ghana.
He said that reasonable alternatives existed and such similar architectural companies should have been given the opportunity to bid and submit tenders to work on Agenda 111 to provide competition and value for money.
The stated that at no point was there an open call for bids from other members of the Chartered Institute of Architects despite ‘sending’ announcements for competitive bids.
The plaintiff argued that the need for an architectural firm to design the buildings for Agenda 111 could not be classified as an “urgent need for services” and that could not form basis for sole sourcing.
BY MALIK SULLEMANA
