Ankara Metro Tender Should Notify the Minister

ankara metro
ankara metro

KIK member Erkan Demirtaş, who objected to Ankara Metro's vehicle tender, emphasized that subway safety documents were not presented.

Last but not least, the Ankara Metro is on the agenda with a work accident that caused the death of a person on the construction site. The allegations about the 400 million dollar 324 subway vehicle purchase tender, which is one of the most important steps of the Metro project, are controversial. Firms that use the right of appeal related to the tender claimed that the Ministry of Transport had given the tender to the tenderer who did not submit the documents requested by the technical specifications. The Public Procurement Board (JCC) approved the tender in a controversial manner. However, Erkan Demirtaş, one of the most senior members of the board, has appealed the decision. Demirtaş's objections were remarkable. Demirtaş emphasized that the Chinese firm which won the tender and that it did not present the documents in the technical specifications and presented the missing or incomplete offerings, also pointed out that the opening of the envelope and the document control report were not duly regulated. Demirtaş also warned that the tender is against the transparency and the reliability, and he filed an objection against the responsible persons.

General Directorate of Infrastructure Investments, Ministry of Transport, Maritime Affairs and Communication, realized the tender for the Ankara Metro in 14 February 2012 with open tender method. Construcciones Y Auxiliar De Ferrocarriles SA, based in Spain, participated in the tender. Ltd. the company's business problems in the vehicles, especially in the technical specifications of the demands of the firm in the file that took place in the tender and as it is in the Ankara Metro, the security and safety of people's life, arguing before the ministry objected. After that, he moved the matter to the Public Procurement Authority. The institution then evaluated the issue at the board level, then at the expert level. However, the evaluation of the expert of the Public Procurement Authority did not take place in the board decision. In the short decision, the complaint was rejected by majority vote.

However, the 9 member board's 5 member's vote was rejected. Accordingly, the winning company does not include technical information such as brake calculations, reliability plan, energy consumption calculations, collision scenarios included in the technical specifications in the tender dossier. Without information on these issues in the technical specification, the tender was finalized.

'Why don't we cancel this'

Board member Erkan Demirtaş, on the other hand, drew attention to the fact that the board is contradicting itself in the petition of objection he wrote. Demirtaş, who wrote to the petition of objection with examples that previously it was understood that the documents requested in the technical specifications were not included in the tender file, the Public Procurement Authority excluded the relevant company or canceled the tender, and pointed out that the judiciary and the relevant law article confirmed the rule in question. Stating that “it is understood that the information and documents included in the technical specification are qualification criteria that must be submitted with the bid”, Demirtaş drew attention to the fact that the tender commission has not duly drafted the envelope opening and document control minutes. Emphasizing that this situation alone would mean a violation of the law as well as damaging the principles of transparency and reliability, Demirtaş concluded his objection with the statement that “this situation must be reported to the ministry where the contracting administration is affiliated in order to make the necessary examination and evaluation about the responsible”. - Radikal

Armin

sohbet

    Be the first to comment

    Comments