Pre-shipment inspection tender needs review

A flurry of correspondence and bitter exchanges between officials at the Kenya Bureau of Standards (Kebs) and those from the Public Procurement Oversight Authority (PPOA) over who should be awarded a pre-shipment inspection tender is raising eyebrows.

It is still unclear why Japan Export Vehicle Inspection Centre (Jevic) should have its pre-shipment inspection for used cars contract renewed when it has apparently failed to meet set public procurement procedures.

What is even more intriguing is the fact that Jevic is reportedly partly owned by a former Kebs official.

Could it be that someone is pushing for Jevic to have its contract renewed?

Why would Kebs be pushing for a particular company to perform pre-shipment inspection while it is supposed not to be involved at all, except to protect public interest?

We hold the position that a fresh tender for pre-shipment inspection for used imported cars should be done in a transparent, professional and diligent manner.

Failure to do this could expose this market to unroadworthy vehicles from abroad, endangering public life and safety while public officials responsible line their pockets.

Pre-shipment inspection is an important and reliable quality control method for checking goods’ quality when clients buy them from the suppliers. Thus any interference or intense lobbying on which company should perform this task does not put Kebs in good light.

Vested interest

The standards body should give room for a new pre-shipment inspection firm on used cars, to be selected with undue influence.

It is a well-known fact that buyers of imported cars in this market should be allowed to let a third party control what comes in.

It is in the interest of Kenyan consumers that somebody not connected with the deal in any way verifies the amount and quality.

This way the buyer makes sure what was ordered is what has been delivered and paid for, Kebs’ involvement virtually non-existent.

A fair selection of a pre-shipment firm to oversee importation of cars into the country will ensure that only those vehicles that meet local specifications find their way into this market. But this will not happen when vested interests penetrate Kebs and use it to rubber stamp the dumping of substandard cars here.

The noise coming out of Kebs, the Ministry of Industrialisation and PPOA not only exposes Kenyans to substandard goods, but also exposes the rot, fraud and corruption deals that still exist in the car import business.

It does not help matters when Kebs officials conspire with vested business and political interests to interfere with this lucrative vehicle import business.

Who is trying to take advantage of the fact that Kebs has yet to have a managing director? Similarly, no minister has been appointed to take full charge at the Ministry of Industrialisation.

A vacuum in these two important positions, both at the policy and political level, has created room for all manner of atrocities.

This is why we think Jevic should be disqualified from rendering any pre-shipment services on the grounds that it contravened public procurement laws.

For instance, why would someone who was at one time chairing the tender committee at Kebs and is now acting Managing Director, be allowed to influence the tail-end of a procurement process?

Interestingly, while a firm named QISJ emerged tops leaving out Jevic and Bureau Veritas, the other bidders on the shortlist, it was Jevic that was selected.

QISJ emerged the highest winner with a total score of 78.4375 compared to Jevic with 77.9375.

In contravention

It, therefore, raises issues of credibility when Jevic is the one winning the tender. This is even after questions were raised on why it was canvassing for the tender.

There are accusations that Jevic wrote unsolicited letters to the then Kebs managing director, the procurement department, the minister for Industrialisation and the Embassy of Kenya in Japan.

Such communication, made by this bidder, is considered to be in contravention of section 38(1)(a) of the Public Procurement Act. The most appropriate action is to disqualify Jevic and award this tender to the next bidder.

The other reason why this pre-shipment tender deal should be relooked is that evaluation of the tender proposals took longer (45 days) from March 22 to May 5, 2011, in contravention of Regulation 46.