Lawyer Enrico Quiambao filed the case at the Office of the Ombudsman in behalf of his client Annex Digital, Inc. and Geutebruck Pty. Ltd. joint venture.
Quiambao warned that after delays in the bidding for the project which was initially set on Feb. 21 last year, Honrado is now allegedly using the “tanim-bala” scandal at the NAIA to “justify emergency procedures for the installation of the CCTV system to unqualified but favored contractors.”
“All these tanim-bala scandals would not have happened had the high definition CCTV monitoring systems been installed. But the project had been slowed down by attempts to rig the bidding,” Quimbao noted.
In a recent televised interview, Honrado cited two failed biddings on the project to justify emergency awarding of the project, dubbed officially as “Supply, Installation and Commissioning of CCTV Cameras and Surveillance Project.”
“It’s not true. There was only one bidding held, because the TOR (terms of reference) was changed in the first bidding last year. Under the procurement law, the first bidding should not count precisely because of the change of TOR,” Quiambao said.
Quiambao furnished Punto a copy of the complaint of graft and corruption and violation of the government procurement law against Honrado, members of the bids and awards committee and its technical working group and CCTV project evaluation committee, and project consultant Rizaldy Reblora.
Also named as respondents were officials of the allegedly favored firms Advance Security and Safety Solutions, Inc. (AS3) and One Commerce International Corp. (One Commerce).
The complaint said the Manila International Airport Authority (MIAA) officials and private respondents “should be prosecuted and penalized under Republic Act No. 3019 otherwise known as the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act for conspiring, confederating and abetting one another in their despicable activities” on the bidding for the project that would cover NAIA terminals 1, 2 and 4 and surrounding areas.
The Annex Digital, Inc. and Geutebruck Pty. Ltd. joint venture’s complaint said that after delays in bidding, the MIAA allowed the change in the TOR reportedly crafted by Reblora as new project consultant.
“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 providing such information to AS3 and 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.
But in a post-evaluation of bids prepared by Reblora, the two firms were disqualified and the MIAA bids and awards committee (BAC) declared a failure of bidding.
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.
Quiambao recalled that last May 4, the joint venture Annex Digital, Inc. “was post-disqualified on account of trivial matters which were satisfactorily addressed in its Motion for Reconsideration dated May 9, 2015.” The post disqualification was also allegedly authored by Reblora, the complaint said.
The complaint accused Honrado of coddling Reblora in rigging the bidding.
Quiambao “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,” Quiambao said.
The complaint noted that “It is disheartening that General Manager Jose Angel A. Honrado, the head of the procuring entity, has knowledge of what is going on under his turf and is not doing anything”
“We would not like to believe that what is going on in this bidding process is with his consent because the latter was furnished with all the documents related to this CCTV project. Neither GM Honrado can feign innocence regarding the anomalous and irregular bidding process as his lieutenants appeared to be the ones manipulating to ensure the award of the CCTV project to their favored bidder/s,” the complaint added.
