Is Biman beyond accountability?
Despite critical scrutiny following reports on safety violations, irregularities and a host of scandals involving exams and recruitments in Biman, the latter just can't seem to stay above board. Most recently, as per the findings of the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General of Bangladesh (CAG), the national airline has violated procurement rules to hire a vendor for its online ticket sales and reservation services, which will cause it to lose over Tk 1,000 crore in 10 years.
After the previous service provider notified in October 2019 that it would discontinue its services, Biman invited proposals from firms interested in providing a passenger service system (PSS), a departure control system (DCS), e-commerce and other related services. The CAG found that Biman granted the contract to a firm despite there being only three bidders, which violates the Public Procurement Rules 2008 that states that there must be at least four. Moreover, cost estimates presented by Sabre GLBL Inc – the firm awarded the contract – against its offered services were "under-represented" in the financial evaluation report. The audit also found that Biman's contract with Sabre has many elements that were not mentioned in the proposal. Additionally, many of the clauses of the deal that allowed Sabre to demand compensation are questionable.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel. 
For some reason, all the proposed costs were estimated taking into account the minimum number of passengers. Since the company is charging Biman for services either per passenger or as a percentage of total passengers boarded, these costs ballooned when the system went live. During negotiation meetings held in July 2021, the tender evaluation committee had flagged the issue of taking the minimum number of passengers instead of the actual estimated number of passengers who would use the service when it came to pricing. Yet, instead of clarifying this matter, the contract was signed with the minimum threshold number.
It seems that from Biman's side, the contract was signed despite knowing – one would hope Biman officials were not incompetent enough to not know – about these issues, and in a way that could potentially keep financial evaluators in the dark. This clearly indicates that there was foul play involved, which would unduly benefit the contracted firm and Biman colluders at the expense of taxpayers. This is totally unacceptable. We urge the government to investigate these anomalies and hold those involved in them responsible.
Comments