| « Growing Muslim Activism and the Ethiopian State: Accommodation or Repression? | Ethiopia: The Pitfalls of TPLF and EPLF leadership: A Retrospective Analysis » |

Ed's Note: The following is the full statement received by nazret.com from Ethiopian Commodity Exchange regarding an article published on this site by Mr. Wondwossen Mezlekia.
Statement by ECX Regarding an Article “The Case of Alleged Fraud and corruption at the Ethiopia Commodity Exchange” posted by Wondwossen Mezlekia
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Ali Suleiman
External Relations Manager
Ethiopia Commodity Exchange (ECX)
Mr. Wondwossen Mezlekia is an Ethiopian-born resident of Seattle, Washington, working as a process owner at Symetra Financial, a retirement, insurance, and financial services company. He is also a self-professed coffee blogger and activist who, in his view, is helping to improve the lives of coffee farmers in Ethiopia. Over the past three years, with the understanding that Mr. Wondwossen’s interest in improving the lives of coffee farmers in Ethiopia is aligned with the vision and mission of the Ethiopia Commodity Exchange, ECX has regularly engaged in open dialogue and frank conversation via telephone and email with Mr. Wondwossen on any concerns he has wished to raise, as is done with all interested parties.
In January 2012, on a visit to Seattle, the CEO of ECX held a two and one half hour conversation with Mr. Wondwossen regarding the functioning of the Exchange and its impact on coffee farmers. During this conversation, Mr. Wondwossen raised the issue of an IT procurement of software, citing a complaint raised by a bidder based in South Africa. In response, the CEO gave a thorough explanation to Mr. Wondwossen on this matter, to the effect that the bid had been cancelled by the World Bank in early December 2010 after confirmation of a technical error made by the bid evaluation committee in the counting of the days of validity of the bid bond security following a bidder’s complaint. The CEO explained to Mr. Wondwossen that the bid approval procedure involved four layers of controls with an extensive review period over nearly six months. The bid evaluation report submitted by the ECX technical committee was thoroughly evaluated and approved by the procurement unit of the World Bank country office in Addis Ababa, then approved by the World Bank project leader in Addis Ababa, then submitted for extensive review by the World Bank IT procurement office in Washington. Over the period between July and end November 2010, over 30 technical queries were raised by the World Bank procurement evaluation team composed of some five World Bank experts in both Washington and Addis Ababa engaged in the review of this bid, on all aspects of the procurement process, including approving adjustments of several bid amounts for total costs omitted in the posted bid price. It is unfortunate that, due to the extension of the bid submission date by one month at the request of the bidders, the fact that the bid security validity period of one of the bidders had not been extended by the requisite additional 30 days was overlooked during this process.
This was a minor technicality in comparison to the complex parameters evaluated in great scope throughout this very detailed and careful process. Nonetheless, upon discovery of the oversight, the World Bank immediately canceled the award because no other bidder was considered responsive by its standards. As also informed to Mr. Wondwossen, while the bid in question was canceled, the World Bank project has continued and ECX is now successfully nearing the completion of the disbursement of funds for IT procurements under this project, intended to upgrade and extend the functionality of ECX’s trading system in the coming years.
As explained to Mr. Wondwossen, while the CEO was not at liberty to comment directly on investigations being conducted by other organizations, the fact that both the World Bank and the Prime Minister’s Office had conducted full investigations in 2011 is well known. Suffice to say that the Ethiopia Commodity Exchange submitted more than 1,500 pages of material in the form of documents, correspondence, emails, and other evidence to the Investigation Committee over a period of four months.
Furthermore, as also explained to Mr. Wondwossen, the Ethiopia Commodity Exchange took the initiative to approach the Federal Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission in early 2011 to engage its expertise in helping to address concerns by market actors about rising corruption by those in the market who were engaged in offering bribes to ECX employees in the sampling and grading of commodities in warehouse sites around the country. This collaborative engagement between the Commission and ECX is what gave rise to the report on its activities submitted by the Commission.
It is unfortunate that Mr. Wondwossen Mezlekia, in his zeal to help Ethiopian coffee farmers, has overstepped the boundaries of factual and honest commentary in his recent posting on this matter. It is also important to note that while he reveals those who did not provide comment on this matter, he omits to provide the truth of the extensive and open dialogue held with the Ethiopia Commodity Exchange itself. This conduct cannot be seen as particularly helpful to anyone, least of all the farmers themselves.
In 2009, the International Development Association (IDA) approved the government's request to funnel part of the money it borrowed for the purpose of financing the Rural Capacity Building project to ECX, and the latter floated an international Invitation for Bids (IFNumber ECX/ICB/02/2009/01 for the supply, installation, and maintenance of a commodity exchange software. After a lengthy and messy process, ECX eventually awarded the contract to a Sri Lanka based company called Millennium IT. Before the signing of the contract, however, the World Bank rejected the contract award proposal and cancelled the loan due to alleged fraud and corruption during the bidding process.
According to the World Bank's Guidelines, a proposal for award will be rejected when the Bank determines that the recommended bidder has "engaged in corrupt, fraudulent, collusive, coercive or obstructive practices in competing for the contract in question". When the Bank determines that the representatives of the Borrower of the loan were engaged in similar corrupt practices during the procurement of the contract, however, the Bank will entirely cancel the portion of the loan allocated to that contract.
It may be difficult to know exactly which bidder should have won the contract without a thorough and complete investigation of the bid evaluation, but it is quite apparent from the dossier that the proclaimed winner, Millennium IT, could not have won the award had it not been for an act or omission “that knowingly or recklessly misleads, or attempts to mislead, a party to obtain a financial or other benefit or to avoid an obligation." [3]
The World Bank's Guidelines, which ECX was supposed to observe throughout the tender, states that "the Borrower shall award the contract, within the period of the validity of bids, to the bidder who meets the appropriate standards of capability and resources and whose bid has been determined (i) to be substantially responsive to the bidding documents and (ii) to offer the lowest evaluated cost." [4]
By this standard, Millennium IT's bid was neither "substantially responsive" nor did it "offer the lowest evaluated cost". First, Millennium IT's bid was not "substantially responsive" as defined in the bid document in that the bid security expiry date was shorter than required. According to sections ITB 17.1 and ITB 18.1 of the bid document, bids need to be secured by a bid security of ETB 400,000, or the equivalent in a freely convertible currency. The document also stipulates that "a bid security that expires ahead of the 148 days after the date of bid opening shall be rejected as non-responsive." In other words, since the bid opening date was July 12, 2010, the bid security guarantee should be valid through December 7, 2010. Millennium IT's bid security was due to expire a month earlier on October 9, 2010, but it somehow emerged out as the declared winner any way. Second, Millennium IT's bid price was the highest at USD 3,585,105 at opening. At the conclusion of the evaluation, ECX further bumped up the price to USD 4,855,800 – a mysterious increase of USD 1,270,695.
Comments are closed for this post.