Search results

One of the basic principles of the Public Procurement Law, regulated in Article 17(2), provides that "The contract is awarded to the contractor selected in accordance with the provisions of the Act". However, this does not mean that it cannot be changed after the signing of a public procurement contract. Frequently, the contractor, for reasons beyond his control, is not able to complete the subject of the public procurement on time. In addition, it may also be necessary to perform additional activities and even change the contractor. However, it should be remembered that in the case of making changes to the content of the public procurement contract, the content of Articles 454–455 of the Public Procurement Law should be considered. The purpose of this article is to analyse the provisions of law, doctrine and jurisprudence regarding the admissibility of making changes to the public procurement contract. The Author will try to answer the following questions: 1) "What changes to the public procurement contract can be considered significant?" and 2) "In which cases is it permissible to make changes to the public procurement contract?" The article was prepared using non-reactive research methods, dogmatic-legal and legal-comparative.

Implementation of State public procurement law has been one of the task assignments on project execution in Lagos State. However, little or no emphasis has been placed on the extent of its compliance. This study attempted to investigate the extent to which State public procurement law using Lagos State. It showed that the policy objective of efficiency, probity, and openness among the various procuring entities has to a large extent being achieved, though with various challenges undermining the implementation of public procurement policy, which needs prompt consideration. It employed both quantitative and qualitative data. In respect to quantitative data, a study population of 1, 401 comprised staff members on GL. 07-17 in the following Ministries: Housing, Finance as well as Works and Infrastructures. A sample size of 15% representing 210 respondents was used to represent the study universe. On the other hand, the qualitative data were drawn from the interview analysis. Conclusively, there is statistically significant relationship between compliance with Lagos State Public Procurement Law variant (openness and efficiency) and procuring entities.

Abstract GPA had a main objective from its very beginning: confronting discrimination between bidders on national or geographical grounds and opening the system up to greater competence between private actors. The World has experienced a gradual liberalization of public national markets that was almost perceived as a natural process. But this other time thought never-ending process is experiencing serious difficulties. The global political panorama seems to be moving again towards the once forgotten nationalist ideologies; a fact that has brought back again the old host of economic protectionism to the front line of international public markets regulation. The present paper analyses the existing situation from a critical approach. Firstly, it carries out a study of the mechanisms and motives that lie behind populisms and its relationship with international law legitimacy and traditional procurement bias. Secondly, it signals the central role of GPA as the main international instrument to face neo-protectionism, and focuses on the subtle nature of most procurement barriers and how current review mechanism fail to both efficiently tackle potential infringements and to guarantee states' autonomy. Finally, a proposal for reform is made as to the functioning of the GPA review mechanisms through the creation of a mixed review system.

GPA had a main objective from its very beginning: confronting discrimination between bidders on national or geographical grounds and opening the system up to greater competence between private actors. The World has experienced a gradual liberalization of public national markets that was almost perceived as a natural process. But this other time thought never-ending process is experiencing serious difficulties. The global political panorama seems to be moving again towards the once forgotten nationalist ideologies; a fact that has brought back again the old host of economic protectionism to the front line of international public markets regulation. The present paper analyses the existing situation from a critical approach. Firstly, it carries out a study of the mechanisms and motives that lie behind populisms and its relationship with international law legitimacy and traditional procurement bias. Secondly, it signals the central role of GPA as the main international instrument to face neo-protectionism, and focuses on the subtle nature of most procurement barriers and how current review mechanism fail to both efficiently tackle potential infringements and to guarantee states' autonomy. Finally, a proposal for reform is made as to the functioning of the GPA review mechanisms through the creation of a mixed review system.

GPA had a main objective from its very beginning: confronting discrimination between bidders on national or geographical grounds and opening the system up to greater competence between private actors. The World has experienced a gradual liberalization of public national markets that was almost perceived as a natural process. But this other time thought never-ending process is experiencing serious difficulties. The global political panorama seems to be moving again towards the once forgotten nationalist ideologies; a fact that has brought back again the old host of economic protectionism to the front line of international public markets regulation. The present paper analyses the existing situation from a critical approach. Firstly, it carries out a study of the mechanisms and motives that lie behind populisms and its relationship with international law legitimacy and traditional procurement bias. Secondly, it signals the central role of GPA as the main international instrument to face neo-protectionism, and focuses on the subtle nature of most procurement barriers and how current review mechanism fail to both efficiently tackle potential infringements and to guarantee states' autonomy. Finally, a proposal for reform is made as to the functioning of the GPA review mechanisms through the creation of a mixed review system.

The aim of this book is to make recommendations concerning the improvement of public procurement law in Indonesia. The author identifies five fundamental problems commonly arising in the pre-contractual phase in Indonesia: the procurement document may be prepared in a way that favours certain bidders, but it is questionable whether legal procedure to review the procurement document is available; corruption may occur within procuring entities which may, in turn, lead to distrust towards the entities regarding its impartiality in relation to the handling of the administrative appeal; the reasons for awarding the contract may not be transparent; the procedures for seeking redress are erratic; finally, the availability of remedies is uncertain. The author adopts two methods for the pursuit of his research. First, three principles of good governance are discussed (equality, transparency and accountability), and five principles of good public procurement are identified. These five principles are outlined as: equal opportunity, equal treatment, transparency including its limitations to protect commercially sensitive information, clarity about the forum for redress, and the availability of effective remedies. Second, a comparative methodology is undertaken, examining the law relating to public procurement procedures in the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. From these approaches, the author draws out recommendations for the legislature, the administration and the judiciary in Indonesia. Although this book concentrates on the case of Indonesia, ideas brought forth in the discussion may be applicable and useful to other countries sharing similar issues.