/Which municipalities and hospitals did the CCP announce to the state audit commission
Which municipalities and hospitals did the CCP announce to the state audit commission

Which municipalities and hospitals did the CCP announce to the state audit commission

The inspections revealed purchases outside the legislation on public procurement and corruption risks


Notify me of updates to :


The Commission for the Prevention of Corruption (KPK) announced on Thursday that it is monitoring the procurement of protective equipment in 14 selected hospitals and 23 municipalities found that these often did not guarantee the basic principles of public procurement. It identified corruption risks in connection with transparency, traceability of procedures and unequal treatment of bidders, which led to the issuance of recommendations. The CCP itself initiated misdemeanor proceedings against some of them, and also reported some to the State Audit Commission.

Initially, they do not disclose Initially, the CCP did not disclose in which health care institutions and municipalities they suspected suspicions of violations of public procurement legislation (PPL) and other irregularities. In the case of two hospitals alone, there were orders in the amount of more than 3.2 million euros on the basis of the exception under the Public Procurement Act. Under certain conditions, in the context of an declared epidemic, this exemption allows contracting authorities to choose suppliers of goods beyond public procurement procedures, but two hospitals found that the CCP exceeded the permitted volume of contracts under this exception. National Audit Commission .

What they say on KPK

When asked why their report is without names and who they reported to the state audit commission, KPK answered that it is a hospital of the University Medical Center Ljubljana and SB Slovenj Gradec and municipality of Zagorje ob Savi , the Municipality of Koper and ) the municipality of Nova Gorica . At the same time, they pointed out, “that these are perceived violations only in those entities that have been the subject of our control, and this is a smaller sample.” They did not check all public health institutions and municipalities in the country, where “potential violations of the Integrity and Prevention of Corruption Act” could potentially be established. For the CCP, it was essential to detect potential corruption risks and issue recommendations to address them. To this end, we also informed all three associations of municipalities and the Ministry of Public Administration and the Ministry of Health about the report. ”

What else was found in the inspections Among other things, the CCP also found: that 14 purchase orders and one contract worth a total of 1.8 million euros did not contain anti-corruption clauses; that in 48 cases in the amount of EUR 4.5 million, the contracting authorities did not obtain a statement of ownership structure from the tenderers before concluding the contracts; that in 13 cases protective means were supplied to municipalities and the health institution by entities that were not registered to perform this activity; in 61 cases it was business between a municipality and a legal entity, which was subject to business restrictions from the first paragraph of Article 35 of the ZIntPK; in one case, the municipality awarded the record order to a supplier whose legal representative is a personal acquaintance of the mayor of the municipality, and both were signatories to the contract for the supply of protective equipment…

Introduced 29 misdemeanor proceedings

In addition to the already mentioned reports to the State Audit Commission, KPK has so far initiated 29 misdemeanor proceedings, 17 against officials on suspicion of non-reporting of entities subject to business restrictions under the Integrity and Prevention of Corruption Act, eight misdemeanor proceedings against responsible and legal persons. suspicion of non-inclusion of the anti-corruption clause in the content of purchase orders or concluded contracts and four misdemeanor proceedings against responsible and legal persons due to suspicion of failure to obtain a statement of ownership structure from the selected bidder. Names on the CCP were not disclosed. Among the good practices, they pointed out the fact that “quite a few public contracting authorities included the content of the anti-corruption clause in the procurement forms, although given the contract value this was not necessary, which is commendable.” The CCP report is available at this link.
Read More