- Al Ghurair Printing and Publishing LLC was among the 13 firms that did not meet the cut.
- The Dubai-based firm was knocked out for failing to meet the requirement for 40 per cent local content.
Image: COURTESY
The electoral agency has awarded the tender for ballot papers and the voter register for use in the 2022 general election to a Greek firm at about Sh2.8 billion.
Documents obtained by the Star reveal that the commission settled upon Inform Lykos (Hellas) as its provider for the materials in a framework contract for three years.
The Independent Electoral Boundaries Commission, in a notice to one of the bidders, said Inform Lykos was the bid with the lowest evaluated responsive price at 7,172.85 Euros (Sh921,326) for 3,000 ballot papers.
The IEBC in the tender documents said that considering the six elective positions in the general elections, the minimum quantity that shall be required was 117,600,000 ballot papers and a maximum of 180,000,000 ballot papers.
Lykos printed the ballot papers that were used in the Nigerian presidential election in 2019 and is now part of the Austricard Group.
The documents in our possession reveal that at least 14 firms participated in the tender, which has a huge bearing on the management of the upcoming elections.
Al Ghurair Printing and Publishing LLC was among the 13 firms that did not meet the cut for failing to meet the requirement for 40 per cent local content.
The Dubai-based firm’s Sh2.5 billion tender award for ballot papers in 2017 was vehemently opposed by leaders of the defunct National Super Alliance (Nasa).
Among those that failed were United Printing and Publishing LLC, Go Inspire Solutions, Uniprint – a division of Insidedata (South) PTY, Aerovote Security Print and Electoral Supplies, as well as Masar Printing and Publishing.
Tall Security Print Ltd, Ellams Products Limited, Africa Infrastructure Development Company, Seshaasai Business Forms PVT Ltd, and Kwanginsa Co Ltd also did not make the cut.
Go Inspire was left out for failing to submit certified audited accounts for the years 2018, 2019, and 2020 as well as an auditor’s certificate indicating the company’s unqualified report.
Uniprint missed the mark after failing to submit a certified ISO 14298 certificate or its equivalent for security printing from a recognised authority.
The same was the case with Aerovote Security Print and Electoral Supplies.
Masar Printing was locked out for failing to submit certified accounts for three years to 2020, and the opinion of an independent auditor on the financial statements.
“The financial statements provided belong to AL Sayegh Media while the bidder was Masar Printing and Publishing LLC,” the IEBC said.
Tall Security lost the bid for failing to submit the ISO 14298 certificate, the same being the case of Ellams Products Limited, whereas Africa Infrastructure Development Company did not submit duly-filled tender forms.
Seshaasai Business Forms PVT was knocked out of the bid for lack of local content plan, while Kwanginsa Co Ltd did not pay the tender security of Sh20 million.
There is a lot of acrimony following the award and the same could be challenged at the Public Procurement and Administrative Review Board (PPRAB).
IEBC chairman Wafula Chebukati said the process was still within the 14 days standstill period.
"The commission will only be able to authoritatively comment about the contracted firm once the procurement process has been concluded," he told the Star.
This followed claims by a whistleblower that members of the technical evaluation committee lacked the expertise in testing the samples that were provided.
He is questioning how the committee verified security features as well as testing the moisture content as per the required standards.
The whistleblower pointed out in its protest to IEBC that none of the members was qualified as technical paper experts.
There were also concerns about how a 700-page ballot paper would be issued to a polling station, yet polling stations have streams.
Another complaint is that the letters of notification of award were sent to them using the post office instead of the same being mailed.
The whistleblower argued that this was “meant to delay the appeals process and any time allowed as per the procurement laws to countercheck or get clarification.”