But the project, called “Supply, Installation and Commissioning of CCTV Cameras and Surveillance” which would cover NAIA terminals 1, 2 and 4 and surrounding areas and cost P486 million, has been delayed amid allegations of anomalies in the bidding for the project.
Thus alleged the Joint Venture of Annex Digital, Inc. and Geutebruck Pty. Ltd., represented by busineswoman Rea Lactao, in a protest on the bidding submitted last July 27 to the Office of the General Manager of the Manila International Airport Authority (MIAA).
Pampanga-based lawyer Enrico Quiambao, legal counsel for the complainant, furnished Punto a 27-page copy of the complaint which alleged that the bidding process is being rigged to favor either of two favored contractors.
The complaint questioned the alleged involvement of a MIAA consultant it identified as Rhizaldy Reblora who “modified the Terms of Reference (ToR) for the project, completely shelving the original one.”
“The prospective bidders were dismayed because the new ToR seemed to favor a particular brand. Add the fact that the new ToR was imprecise, and it was only through several inquiries from the prospective bidders that the specifications contained therein were clarified. Hence, the subsequent bid bulletins,” the complaint said.
Quiambao said that after the ToR was changed, “the annexes of the bid bulletins could not be downloaded by prospective bidders” in an alleged attempt to prevent other bidders from being able to comply with requirements while favoring two contractors identified in the complaint as Advanced Security and Safety Solutions (AS3) and One Commerce Int’l Corp (One Commerce).
The complaint said AS3 did not participate in the initial bidding, while One Commerce had failed to comply with the requirement for a tax clearance certificate and “has no expertise, no capital and no experience in handling the present big CCTV project” as “its goods are intercom and telephone systems.”
Quiambao noted that despite difficulties during the initial bidding last year, the Joint Venture of Annex Digital, Inc. and Geutebruck Pty. Ltd. and another firm identified as Trends & Technologies Inc., were the only ones initially declared eligible.
“As expected, upon post evaluation, Trends & Technologies Inc. was disqualified first and followed by the Joint Venture of Annex Digital, Inc. and Geutebruck Pty. Ltd. The latter moved for reconsideration but the same was denied,” the complaint said. This paved the way for the declaration of failure of bidding.
This year during the submission of another round of bids last Feb. 24, Joint Venture of Annex Digital, Inc. and Geutebruck Pty. Ltd. was again named eligible as second lowest bidder, but this time along with AS3 as lowest bidder, and One Commerce with the third lowest.”
It also noted that the “post-disqualification evaluation was prepared by Mr. Reblora which was concurred with in toto by the Technical Evaluation Committee (TEC) and approved by the Bids and Awards Committee (BAC).”
Quiambao recalled that last May 4, Annex Digital, Inc. “was post-disqualified on account of trivial matters which were satisfactorily addressed in its Motion for Reconsideration dated May 9, 2015,” reportedly based on the evaluation parameters prepared by Reblora.
He cited reports that “Reblora is only a consultant who is a non-organic staff. He should not have had any participation in the preparation of the post-disqualification evaluation.”
“He is not even an electronics and communications engineer. In fact, based on his resume, he has no track record of undertaking this kind of project. His job description as consultant is strictly of an advisory nature. This is outright usurpation of functions. Nevertheless, the BAC sanctioned his acts,” the complaint said.
Quiambao said Reblora’s “summary appointment also did not pass through the regular selection process or competitive bidding for consultancy on special project.”
“It is our feeling that the unethical practices of the consultant were intended to sabotage or derail the bid of Annex Digital, Inc. Actions of the consultant apparently are with the imprimatur of persons who call the shots in the bidding. The consultant is confidently backed up by higher ups as he is so emboldened to block every step of the way to ensure that a third bidding process would be conducted to safeguard the victory of the favored bidder, who was previously disqualified,” the complaint said.
The complaint asked the MIAA Acting General Manager, retired Maj. Gen. Vicente Guerzon “inhibit himself for ethical reason and conflict of interest, and to refer this matter to the MIAA Board of Directors…”
“To dismiss the present protest outright will delay and continue to delay implementation of the CCTV project, which is long overdue, not to mention that persons responsible therefor can be held liable for Violation of Republic Act No. 3019 also known as the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act,” the complaint also warned.
