Calling for its cancellation, former Auditor General Anand Goolsarran has upped the pressure on the government over a contract for an electronic ID (e-ID) which was hurriedly concluded virtually with a German company via the United Arab Emirates (UAE).
In his April 3rd accountability column in Stabroek News, Goolsarran rejected arguments by Attorney General Anil Nandlall SC in defence of the US$34m e-ID contract in which the role of the UAE remains unclear.
Goolsarran noted that his views on the contract for the production of electronic ID cards provoked quite a stir among government officials who insist that there has been no breach of the Procurement Act. Referring to calls for the matter to be discussed in the National Assembly, Goolsarran observed that the Attorney General stated that he believes that when the issue of funding comes before the Assembly, the matter will be ventilated there.
“This implies that the source of funding for the contract had not been identified at the time it was signed on 10 March 2023, and no advance payment was made to the supplier, which is rather unusual. The Fiscal Management and Accountability (FMA) Act specifically prohibits the award of contracts for goods/services and the execution of works unless there is adequate provision in the approved Estimates, or any annual budget proposal before the Assembly, for payments to be made in relation to such contracts”, Goolsarran asserted.
He said that Section 30(1) of the Act reads as follows:
“No contract or other arrangement providing for the payment of public moneys with respect to any programme for which there is an appropriation or an item included in the annual budget proposal then before the National Assembly to which that payment is to be charged, shall be entered into unless there is a sufficient unencumbered balance available in the appropriation or the proposed budget item, as the case may be, to make that payment.”
Goolsarran said that a review of the Estimates for 2023 indicates that there is no budgetary allocation for the procurement of electronic ID cards nor was there any mention of this in the Minister of Finance’s budget speech. Additionally, there was no annual budgetary proposal before the Assembly at the time the contract was signed to provide for payments to be made under the said contract. In the circumstances, Goolsarran declared that there has been a breach of Section 30(1) of the FMA Act and a lack of parliamentary approval to incur expenditure on the contract. Section 16 prohibits the incurrence of expenditure without an appropriation, except as provided for under Article 217 of the Constitution.
On his `Issues in the News programme on March 28, Nandlall justified government’s sole-sourcing of the US$34 million e-ID project, contending that the sensitivity of the data it would contain requires world class security features from trusted companies and an “open market” opens the floodgates to data being compromised.
Nandlall went on to say that a time will come when issues regarding the card could be heard in the National Assembly. “We have complied with the Procurement Act in respect to those types of services. That is why we are saying the allegation is misplaced,” he said.
“…Someone said we should take the contract to the parliament. The issue will be discussed in the parliament at some point in time because monies will have to come from the parliament to pay. So the matter will reach parliament. But I don’t know that the contract has to be taken to the Parliament. The contract has to be laid in the parliament at some point in time,” he added.
No evidence
Goolsarran in his April 3rd column also pointed out that the National Procurement and Tender Administration Board (NPTAB) had insisted that the Authorities had written to it seeking its approval for the application of the sole source method of procurement for the production of the electronic ID cards and that such approval was given. However, he said that the Board has provided no evidence of this. That apart, NPTAB ought to have been aware of the requirements of the FMA Act before granting such approval and should therefore have declined the request.
“We reiterate out our call for the suspension of the contract, or preferably rescission of the contract, for the production of electronic ID cards until such time that wide public consultations are held to discuss, among others, issues of personal privacy; the apparent overlapping of responsibilities among State agencies; which agency has the legal authority for issuing such cards; and the status of the existing national ID cards. After the views of citizens are taken into account, the proposal should be reformulated, tabled in the Assembly and referred to a Special Select Committee for detailed consideration”, Goolsarran stated..
On March 10, the government hurriedly announced the virtual signing of the deal with the Germany-headquartered Veridos with the UAE acting as an intermediary.
President Irfaan Ali had explained that the Government of Guyana sought the assistance of the UAE in October of 2021. “On an invitation of His Highness Sheik Amah al Maktoum, two internationally recognized industry leaders [a Swiss company] and Veridos presented their national ID system solutions. These solutions were evaluated by a technical team comprising members of the National Data Management Authority and the office of the National ICT Advisor. The evaluation criteria factored technology use, other government clients, as well as biometric security subsystems, and Veridos was the company in the estimation of the evaluators that presented the best solutions for Guyana,” he had explained.
Goolsarran had subsequently weighed in, pointing out that while sole-sourcing is catered for under national emergencies and national security, and the awarding of the contract facilitated by UAE’s Sheikh was for electronic cards and therefore does not qualify.
He further stated that while the sole-sourcing section of the Act was used, the justification is flawed because the project cannot be classified as being one of national security.
“Section 3(2) of the Procurement Act states that the Act does not apply to procurement involving national defence or national security. Additionally, by Section 28 (e), where the procuring entity determines that Section 3(2) is applicable as a result of national security concerns, then it may consider the single-source method as the most appropriate method of procurement. Single-source procurement occurs mainly in relation to the following: a) where the goods or construction are available only from a particular supplier or contractor, or a particular supplier or contractor has exclusive rights with respect to the goods or construction, and no reasonable alternative or substitute exists; b) the services, by reason of their highly complex or specialized nature, are available from only one source; and c) owing to a catastrophic event, there is an urgent need for the goods, services or construction, making it impractical to use other methods of procurement because of the time involved in using those methods.”
“The Act does not define `national security’ and therefore we have to apply the ordinary meaning of the words. National security is defined as ‘the safety of a nation against threats such as terrorism, war, or espionage.’ It is concerned about foreign relations and protection from internal subversion, foreign aggression to terrorism. It can hardly be argued that the production of electronic ID cards is a matter of national security,” he added.
The Alliance For Change and the Guyana Human Rights Association have also called on government to pause the proposed programme and to submit it to Parliament.
