Correct your flawed report – GNPC bares teeth at Auditor-General
National Oil Company, the Ghana National Petroleum Corporation (GNPC), has reacted to statements by the Auditor-General in its 2020 audit report accusing it [GNPC] of breaching Public Procurement Laws by entering into five significant international business contracts totalling $34,165,235.15 and £464,963.13 without parliamentary approval and contrary to the provisions of Article 181 of the 1992 Constitution.
According to the Auditor-General’s report, GNPC in signing the five international business contracts between 2015 and 2018, used the Restricted Tendering method without seeking the necessary Parliamentary approvals.
The report further notes that, contrary to Section 42 (1b) of the Public Procurement Act, 2003 (Act 663) as amended, the GNPC used the Request For Quotation (RFQ) method in procurements of goods with contract values that exceeded the threshold for RFQ.
In view of that, the Auditor-General in his report, recommended that the Management of GNPC should be sanctioned in accordance with Section 92 of the Public Procurement Act, 2003 (Act 663) as amended for breaching the Public Procurement Law, further urging the management of GNPC to observe the tenets of Public Procurement Law.
“We advised Management to retrieve the document involved and forward them for our audit review. Failure of which, sanctions should be invoked against Management in accordance with Section 98 of the PFM Act 2016, for financial indiscipline,” warned the Auditor-General.
But Management in a rejoinder to the assertion by the Auditor-General states that, the Auditor-Generals’ findings of Public Procurement Law breaches by the GNPC is flawed and entirely wrong as it has no factual or legal basis.
Read This: T-bills auction target of Ghs 1.1 billion surpassed by Ghs 154 million
According to management of the GNPC, the Auditor-General made these flawed findings because his officers failed to apprise themselves accurately with the legal framework governing GNPC’s affairs, stataing that Article 181 (5) of the 1992 Constitution pertaining to Parliamentary approvals for international business
transactions strictly relates to “Government” business and not generally to statutory corporations set up for commercial purposes.
“..in our view, “Government” in the context of Article 181(5) should mean, ordinarily, the central government and not operationally autonomous agencies of government. Where an agency has a separate legal personality distinct from central government, it usually comes under sectoral ministerial supervision. The Board of the corporation and the appropriate Ministry should then exercise oversight over its international business or economic agreements. That oversight should be exercised within the context of the procurement laws of this country,” noted the GNPC in its rejoinder.
The NOC further argued that the requirement to seek parliamentary approval for the five transactions referred to in the report does not apply to GNPC and that it [GNPC] requests that the Auditor General corrects his findings and conclusions as soon as possible.
“We urge the Auditor-General and his staff to cultivate extreme diligence in their duties to avoid embarrassing themselves and the state entities they audit,” concluded the GNPC.
Read below details of rejoinder:
0001 REJOINDER – GNPC Breached Public Procurement Law – Auditor General Final by Fuaad Dodoo on Scribd
