The renewal of contract for Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Cheddi Jagan International Airport Corporation (CJIAC) Ramesh Ghir bypassed the board and was instead dealt with by then Minister of Public Works Robeson, a forensic audit into the corporation has revealed.
The audit report, released on Wednesday by the Finance Ministry, said that this was not in compliance with the CJIAC Order No 20 of 2001, Clause 6 (1), which states, “There shall be a Chief Executive Officer appointed by the Board for a period of three (3) years or such shorter period as may be determined by the Board.”
The report noted that Ghir’s contract expired on 30th September, 2014, and prior to that, there was no discussion of renewal of the contract at Board meetings. This was confirmed by the former Chairman of the CJIAC Board Ramesh Dookhoo. Ghir continued to function in his substantive position without a contract for approximately seven months.
The report said Ghir’s contract was not renewed by the CJIAC Board but instead Benn requested its renewal from the Office of the President. The then Head of the Presidential Secretariat Dr Roger Luncheon, via a letter dated April 23rd, 2015, advised that the Office of the President had no objection to the renewal of the contract for a further period of three years with effect from October 1st, 2014.
The report said that a new Agreement, backdated to October 1st, 2014, for the Chief Executive Officer, was signed between the Permanent Secretary acting on behalf of the Ministry of Public Works, and Ghir.
“The New Agreement for the Chief Executive Officer changed his reporting mechanism from the CJIAC’s Board to the Permanent Secretary of Ministry of Works on behalf of the Minister of Public Works (now renamed Ministry of Public Infrastructure). As stated in the contract ‘The person engaged undertakes that he will diligently and faithfully perform the duties of Chief Executive Officer of the CJIAC for the term of engagement and will act in all respects in accordance with the instructions and directions given to him by the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Public Works on behalf of the Minister of Public Works,’” the report said.
It said that the only clause in the contract that links the CEO to the Board under the Schedule attached to the Contract is ‘To serve in an ex-officio capacity on the CJIA Corporation Board.’
In response, the CJIAC management said that at no time did the CEO cease reporting to the Chairman of the Board of Directors and this practice continued until the end of the life of the Board in June, 2015. It added that the contract is currently being reviewed and will be signed by the appropriate authority.
The auditor commented that management failed to explain the reason the oversight was brought to the attention of the Ministry of Public Works and not the CJIAC Board, which was still active until June 30th, 2015. There was at least one Board Meeting on April 16th, 2015, after the oversight of the CEO’s expiration of contract was detected in March, 2015, yet this anomaly was not brought to the attention of the Board, the report observed.
As a result, the report recommended that the contract for the CEO be reviewed by the new Board of the CJIAC.
‘Fixed’
The report also said that during the course of the audit, there was minimal communication between the Auditor and the Manager (Commercial and Administration) Dursatty Doodnauth-Mangru “because of her attitude,” hence clarifications and explanations were not sought from her.
However, the report found that her employment, which was effected without a background check, was not justified. It said that she was dishonest at the interview, she had no previous managerial skills, she was a poor performer at her previous employment and she also failed to inform CJIAC that her previous employment was still in force and accepted the new employment.
Among other things, it highlighted that a perusal of her personnel file uncovered several unsatisfactory features, including no references from her previous employers. It also noted that the evaluation for her interview stated areas of concerns in that she appeared not genuine, had limited Human Resources, Industrial Relations and Commercial Administration knowledge; and her positives according to the evaluation of her interview were not sufficient to guarantee employment.
Further, it said that the interview panel failed to notice from the applicant’s application that she did not have any significant experience at a management level, and the CEO indicated on her application that she was not always truthful.
“The consideration to employ this applicant in such a senior position, knowing that she was being dishonest at the interview and without doing a background check is clear indication that her employment was fixed,” the report said. It also highlighted the background checks done for the audit.
In response, management said that the woman was last employed by the Guyana Sugar Corporation (GuySuCo) and functioned in a senior capacity as the Treasury Accountant and the decision to employ her was agreed by an Interview Panel and sanctioned by the Board.
The auditor commented that prior to her employment at the CJIAC, the woman was not experienced for the position. Her only relevant experience was in Finance for less than two years. Further, it said that no document was produced for audit evidence that the Board sanctioned her employment.
According to the report, the Deputy Manager (Airport Operations), who was the Senior Personnel Officer at the time of the interview, served as one of the panellists. He explained the reason a background check was not done on the applicant was because the former Chairman of the CJIAC Board influenced the decision to employ her.
Among other things, the report recommended that the CEO explain the reason he wrote on the applicant’s CV that she “was not always truthful” and still agreed to offer her employment in a senior position in the Corporation and that a review be done of her achievements.
Contract irregularities
Meanwhile, the report said that several contracts were not in compliance with the 2003 Procurement Act. It pointed out that two contracts awarded by Cabinet in 2009 and 2010, respectively, for a period of one year were still in force in 2015. It also highlighted that there were several extension of contracts for original sums without going back to tender. Further, construction contracts were split and awarded as labour contracts, while materials were supplied by the CJIAC. In addition, there were no bills of quantities and engineer estimated available for small contracts while purchasing of materials were done in piece meal manner and several petty contracts were engaged for maintenance service.
The report highlighted that the CJIAC has been awarding construction contracts to major and minor contractors for labour costs only while supplying materials and equipment for use on the contracts. No approval for this division/splitting of construction contracts was obtained from the National Procurement and Tender Administration Board, it said.
Among other things, the report urged that the new CJIAC Board review the Procurement System of the CJIAC.
It highlighted that during the period January, 2012 to May, 2015, it was observed that several contracts totalling in excess of $125 million were awarded to contractors for labour only. “The materials utilized for these construction works were supplied by the Corporation’s Stores but in the absence of proper records maintained for each contract the total cost of the construction contracts could not be determined. In this regard it is not known if the materials issued out were in conformity with the works done and whether value for money was received,” the report said.
Among other irregularities, the report said that no Bills of Quantities were seen for these major labour contracts. It highlighted that one contractor has been winning the contract for the past five years to paint the runway and he was awarded approximately 93 contracts totaling $31 million for labour works during the period January, 2012 to May, 2015 inclusive of eight contracts for the painting of the Runway and Taxiway in sums totalling $14 million. The sum awarded was for labour charges only since the paint and thinners and the Spray Painting Machine were supplied by the CJIAC.
The audit urged that management review these contracts since this sum for labour charges are exceptionally high. It also said that considering that this contractor is over 65 years, management should look at possibility to train young maintenance staff to use the spray painting machine. This will work out to be more cost effective for the Corporation.
The report also highlighted that one contractor was involved in a fraud at the CJIAC where he impersonated one of his employees and signed a minor contract with the Corporation in September 2012. He received the payment for the contract work from the Finance Department without any form of identification and cashed the cheque at Bank of Guyana, which was endorsed by a former staff of the Corporation. The Bank of Guyana had reported the matter to the police.
Further, the report said that no materials were verified for the minor/petty contracts and no contract register was maintained for minor/petty contracts. The audit also found that at least 80% of the minor/petty contracts awarded were negotiated by the Electrical Engineer (Senior). In addition, for the minor/petty contracts, focus was not placed on the date the contractors signed, no timeline for the work to be completed and in some instances the dates of the request, work completed, certified and payments were all made on the same date.
