The Public Procurement System turned out to be one of the most problematic areas in terms of compliance with the rules and legal basis for tendering public funds.
Following the Supreme State Audit, which has identified financial abuses through public procurement over the years, the government audit also considers this area problematic. Although over the past year the pandemic somewhat limited the government’s internal control activity, inspections revealed 9,238 violations, deviations and weaknesses in public procurement systems.
During the pandemic year, the government audit found a financial loss of 1.2 billion ALL or about 10 million euros, where 45 percent of the value belongs to the public procurement system.
The main findings in the procurement system were non-argumentation and support with the requirements and needs of the unit in the planning for goods / services, as well as the calculation of the limit fund. Violations of public procurement procedures were found, including technical specifications, tendering procedures, and contract implementation.
Not all legal steps for small value purchases were followed, as well as in some cases favoring the purchases of the same economic operator.
Unsubstantiated limit fund calculations were also found as a basis for initiating procurement procedures.
The government audit found the signing of the contract by changing the criteria set out in the tender documents by which it was declared the winning entity.
Another indicator analyzed is “All contracts were sent on time to the relevant treasury branch”, which determines the number of contracts sent to the treasury branches after three days from the date of their signing against the total number of contracts sent to treasure.
For 2020, this indicator is estimated at an average of 1.8 points out of 4 possible points (or 45%), reflecting a not very satisfactory situation, approximately the same as in 2019.
The government audit notes that all institutions present shortcomings in this area, mainly local self-government units, which are rated on average with 1.6 points.
Meanwhile, the reasons for non-realization of this indicator come mainly due to the lack of availability of persons who sign the contract, causing delays in their delivery. Also, the daily deadline of 3 days for sending contracts to the treasury is practically impossible to be implemented by institutions, which sign and manage a very large number of contracts.
