South Dayi MP Sue Government Over Agenda 111 Project

South Dayi MP, Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor, has sued the government over the Agenda 111 specialised hospital project launched in August, this year.

The legislator, in his writ, accused the government of sole-sourcing the project design to Adjaye and Associates firm, an architect company owned by Ghanaian-British architect, David Adjaye.

He pointed that iRisk Management Limited and Enterprise Insurance were also brought on board as the insurance firms responsible for insuring the health facilities to be built.

According to him, the government bypassed the laid-down processes in law, particularly, the Public Procurement Act, 2003 (Act 663), when it engaged Adjaye as well as iRisk Management Limited and Enterprise Insurance.

Again, the legislator said the government failed to open up the bidding processes to other local firms which have the capacity to undertake the design or the insurance components of the Agenda 111 projects.

“At no point was there an open call for bids from other members of the Chartered Institute of Architects, despite sending out announcements for competitive bids.

“Reasonable alternatives exist and such similar architectural companies should have been given the opportunity to bid and submit tenders to work on Agenda 111 to provide competition and value for money,” as stated by the plaintiff in his writ.

The South Dayi MP insisted that the manner in which the government contracted iRisk Management Limited and Enterprise Insurance could not be said to be under the restricted tendering process as it did not satisfy the conditions and requirements provided under Section 38 of the Public Procurement Act, 2003 (Act 663).

“The Plaintiff says that the need for an insurance brokerage firm and an insurance company to the Agenda 111 project could not be classified as an ‘urgent need for services’ and as such could not form a basis for sole-sourcing.”

“The Plaintiff says that the failure of the Defendant [government] to announce and call for invitations to bid for the insurance brokerage contract and the insurance company constitutes a breach of Article 36(2)(b) of the 1992 constitution,” he added.

Mr Dafeamekpor, therefore wants the court to declare the award of such contracts as null and void, terminate the contracts, and the bidding processes started afresh.

Below are the reliefs:

1. A declaration that the Defendant’s failure to award the contract for the design of the hospitals forming the Agenda 111 by competitive tendering was unlawful and contrary to Section 35 and 36 of the Public Procurement Act,2003 (Act 663).
2. A declaration that the Defendant’s failure to award the contract for the design of the hospitals forming the Agenda 111 by competitive tendering was unlawful and contrary to Section 35 and 36 of the Public Procurement Act,2003 (Act 663).
3. A declaration that the failure of the Defendant to comply with the laid down procedure provided under Section 35 and 36 of the Public Procurement Act, 2003, Act 663 when it awarded the contract to Adjaye and Associates is in contravention of Article 36(2)(c) of the 1992 Constitution.
4. An order directed at the Government of Ghana to terminate the building design contract with Adjaye and Associates.
5. An order directing the Defendant to engage in a competitive two-stage tendering procurement process in order to award the contract as provided under Sections 35 and 36 of the Public Procurement Act, 2003 (Act 663).
6. An order that the Thirty-Six million Ghana Cedis (GHC36,000,000.00) advanced to Adjaye and Associates as payment for consultancy fees for the design, project management and coordination under the building design contract be refunded to the State.
7. A declaration that the Defendant’s failure to award the contract for the insurance brokerage of the Agenda 111 project by competitive tendering was unlawful and contrary to Section 35 and 36 of the Public Procurement Act,2003 (Act 663).
8. A declaration that the failure of the Defendant to comply with the laid down procedure provided under Section 35 and 36 of the Public Procurement Act, 2003, Act 663 when it awarded the insurance brokerage contract to iRisk Management Limited renders the award null, void and of no effect.
9. A declaration that the failure of the Defendant to comply with the laid down procedure provided under Section 35 and 36 of the Public Procurement Act, 2003, Act 663 when it awarded the insurance brokerage contract to iRisk Management Limited is in contravention of Article 36(2)(c) of the 1992 Constitution.
10. An order directed at the Government of Ghana to terminate the insurance brokerage contract with iRisk Management Limited.
11. An order directing the Government of Ghana to engage in a competitive two[1]stage tendering procurement process in order to award the insurance brokerage contract as provided under Sections 35 and 36 of the Public Procurement Act, 2003 (Act 663).
12. An order that all monies advanced to iRisk Management Limited as payment for fees under the insurance brokerage contract be refunded to the State.
13. An order directing the Defendant to charge and prosecute the Minister of Health and all officials involved in the unlawful award of the insurance brokerage contract to iRisk Management Limited for causing financial loss to the State under Section 179A of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960, Act 29.
14. A declaration that the Defendant’s failure to award the insurance contract of the Agenda 111 project by competitive tendering was unlawful and contrary to Section 35 and 36 of the Public Procurement Act,2003 (Act 663).
15. A declaration that the failure of the Defendant to comply with the laid down procedure provided under Section 35 and 36 of the Public Procurement Act, 2003, Act 663 when it awarded the insurance contract to Enterprise life Insurance Company renders the award null, void and of no effect.
16. A declaration that the failure of the Defendant to comply with the laid down procedure provided under Section 35 and 36 of the Public Procurement Act, 2003, Act 663 when it awarded the insurance contract to Enterprise Life Insurance Company is in contravention of Article 36(2)(c) of the 1992 Constitution.
17. An order directed at the Government of Ghana to terminate the insurance contract with Enterprise Life Insurance Company.
18. An order directing the Government of Ghana to engage in a competitive two[1]stage tendering procurement process in order to award the insurance contract as provided under Sections 35 and 36 of the Public Procurement Act, 2003 (Act 663).
19. An order that all moneys advanced to Enterprise Life Insurance Company as payment for fees under the insurance contract be refunded to the State.
20. An order directing the Defendant to charge and prosecute the Minister of Health and all officials involved in the unlawful award of the insurance contract to Enterprise Life Insurance Company for causing financial loss to the State under Section 179A of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960, Act 29.