180 likes | 268 Views
Controls and actions made by Public Procurement Council Hungary. Dr. András Nagy legal advisor Public Procurement Council. Introduction. 1995 – first PP Act New institutional frame
E N D
Controls and actions made byPublic Procurement CouncilHungary Dr. András Nagy legal advisor Public Procurement Council
Introduction • 1995 – first PP Act • New institutional frame • Control & audit bodies: PP Council (Arbitration Committee), State Audit Office, Government Control Office, Competition Board, courts
Role of PP Council • Main activities a) contributing to PP policy b) the publication of tender notices c) legal remedy system d) help-desk function e) international relations f) controling the amendment/execution of contracts
Controls made by PP Council /1 • Publication of tender notices • centralized system (i.e. obligation to send tender notices to PP Council) • legal revisers check them • publish if correct - send back if incorrect • send a massage to the members of PP Council, if the notice hasn’t been corrected • members entitled to launch legal remedy procedure
Controls made by PP Council /2 • Legal remedy system – Arbitration Committee • quasi judicial body • judging in a group of 3 commissioner • starts procedure ex officio or on request • any decision of a CA or the behaviour of a tenderer can be challenged • before and after the contract is signed
Controls made by PP Council /2 • Interim measures • suspending the procedure • prohibiting the signing of the contract • Legal consequences: • nullifying the decision • imposing fine • prohibiting tenderer to take part in pp procedures
Controls made by PP Council /3 • Controling the amendment/execution of contracts • Basis of such controling function: • PP rules on the limited possibility of amending a contract, and certain rules on the execution of the contract (otherwise ciwil law applies) • controling of tender notices (information notice about the amendment/execution of contract) • possibility of ex officio procedure before the Arbitration Committee • possibility to impose fine as a sanction
Controls made by PP Council /3 • fields within the notice: • Is the amendment in connection with evaluation criteria? • What is the content of the amendment? • What was the reason for amending the contract? • Was the execution in line with the contract? • If not, the type/content/reason of breaching the contract • Which party is liable for the breach of the contract?
Other actions • Electronic publication of tender notices, new portal with different search options (since 1 July 2008) • Comprehensive study on the link between corruption and contract awards (by the end of 2008) • Comprehensive database of public procurements (by the end of 2009)
Other actions /2 Comprehensive study on corruption and contract award 3 parts: • synthesis of scientific publications • analysis of press news and articles • analysis of surveys on public opinions Surveys on ‘public’ opinions in 3 groups: • contracting authorities • tenderers • official public procurement consultants
Other actions /2 Comprehensive study on corruption and contract award Methods of surveys: • questionnaire (900 persons) • interview (120 persons) Preliminary remarks: • collusion of contracting authorities and tenderers in order to create preferable conditions (technical specifications, suitability criteria, etc.) • collusion of tenderers to share the market • misuse of exceptionaly available types of procedures (i.e. negotiated procedure), illegal buying under threshold
Other actions /3 Comprehensive database of public procurements Make connection between 3 databases: • tender notices • contracts • review decisions Put all publicly avaliable information of a contract award procedure into 1 folder raising transparency