TALLINN, 26 September 2002 - The State Audit Office used the example of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the three offices within the administration area of thereof – Border Guard Administration, Police Board and Rescue Board – to analyze how public procurement is being organized. The audit results show that in most cases the violation of Public Procurement Act arise from poor planning of procurement operations.

The State Audit Office’s Audit Manager Mr. Olav Lüüs said that in several cases procurement procedures were organized as urgent only because the institutions had not been able to estimate their real needs in time. The preparations for procurement were only started after the goods or services were already needed and therefore there was no time to organize open tendering procedures.

"Negotiated tendering procedure without prior publication of a tender notice are meant only for unanticipated situations. If procedures meant to be exceptional become the synonym for public procurement something must be really wrong. This means unequal treatment of potential sellers accompanied by larger expenditures for the state – the circle of tenderers to be chosen shall be considerably smaller. The institutions investigated chose the tendering procedures without prior publications too often and with no reason," added Mr. Lüüs.

For the same reason it only became apparent at the end of the year that some items had been bought over a year for an amount that would have called for the organization of a public procurement.

Procurement can be influenced by the planning process implemented by the institutions superior to that needing the goods or services – for example, in case the institution which needs the procurement only formalizes the respective procurement while any principal decisions, above all concerning the value and financing, are made by a superior institution or even an institution superior to thereof. In case the procurement needs to be completed fast but the respective institutions delay with their decision-making process it is rather difficult for the institution to organize the procurement in line with all the requirements.

In addition the State Audit Office also detected several omissions of organizational character: formalization and keeping of documentation reflecting public procurement procedures; there were some cases where the Public Procurement Office did not obtain correct data about the value or volume of the goods, the data was often sent with delay. There were some cases of misunderstanding arising from the distribution of tasks and responsibilities of the officials organizing procurement.

The State Audit Office hereby states that the correct organization of public procurement could be obtained through the implementation of planning process. Although the audit referred to the administration area of the Ministry of Internal Affairs the existence of similar problems in other ministries can be expected.


Sven Soiver
Press Representative of State Audit Office
Telephone: (372) 640 0787
GSM: (372) 53 414464
E-mail: [email protected]

• Posted: 9/26/2002 12:00 AM
• Last Update: 10/15/2015 9:50 AM
• Last Review: 10/15/2015 9:50 AM