In all this mess - UNDP wouldn't stay away. How could UNDP ? We are there to "support our client" as Kemal Dervis always say.
Therefore now we will be looking at a fantastic way to dispose money to friends in a messy situation.
Today's Submission is : ACP-RBAP/07/0004
Total Amount: $ 915,636.00
Status: Approved from Akiko Yuge
(FROM INNERCITY PRESS) Even in Pakistan, a country beset by electoral disputes as well as terrorism, the UN Development Program bends its own rules, on issues as important as the provision of technical assistance to elections, as shown by an internal waiver of competition memo obtained by Inner City Press and placed online here.
Earlier this year, after General Pervez Musharraf announced elections, UNDP according to the memo decided it would "engage a recuritment [sic] agency to undertake hiring and provision of training coordinators for organizing training of polling officials workshops under Support to National Election Project (SNEP)." One part of the amorphous mandate claimed by UNDP is to preach transparency including in procurement: the solicitation and weighing of competitive bids before funds are spent. But in this case, on a project involving national elections, UNDP decided internally to waive its procurement rules, and award the $916,000 contract directly to Anjum Asim Shahid Associates (AASA). The scope of the contract, set forth in the memo, filled with typographical errors, includes
- Development of Recruitment [sic] plan and identification of coordinators [sic] through placing advertisement in the newspapers;
- - Short listing of candidates and development of selection cirteria [sic]
- - Conducting interviws [sic] in the field at major towns;
- - Final selection and contract signing (between the firm and the sucessful [sic] candidates).
But why this ? Why spend all this money to train - those who have already broken the rule and unconstitutionally have changed the laws and protected an unconstitutional President ?
Well we think this award has nothing to do with Pakistan. This is a one time payment from UNDP to the Regime of Musharraf to accept back the outgoing Hafiz Pasha. UNDP can no longer continue to keep him around, specially with the latest failures on North Korea, Burma, Indonesia and Nepal.
But in a move that is typical only on hostile take-overs in private sector, the High Priests at UNDP have decided that Pasha should go, and at whatever price. Therefore let's give this money to whomever the Pakistani Government want to. Let the Pakistani's come out with the scheme, and UNDP would disburse on-time so Pasha's departure is secure.
Well yest again the Highest priests have forgotten that the UNDP's money is not their money. Is our money - is public tax-payers money. They have no right to dispose what millions of tax-payers have bestowed on us to invest on the poor - not in dictators.
UNDP money is not a slash fund where the High Priests put their hands whenever they need.
Kemal Dervis your leadership is destroying what is left to UNDP. Your decisions and those who surround you, are destroying our credibility in the world.
Stop it now !!!
p.s.: we would like to thank Innercity Press for their investigatory work on the above. We used portion of thier work. To read more on InnercityPress - please go at (http://innercitypress.com/)
3 comments:
Not surprising:( is it just coincidence that some of these countries are over =represented at the UN and its organs and there no tenders for procurement)
Cameroon - 79%
Cambodia - 72%
Albania - 71%
Kosovo - 67%
FYR Macedonia - 44%
Pakistan - 44%
Nigeria - 40%
Senegal - 38%
Romania - 33%
Philippines - 32%
Percentage of people who paid a bribe in the past 12 months (Source: Transparency International)
Reading the waiver document, I am appalled at the pathetic quality of writing. Its nothing but typos and errors. Is the professionalism and value for services that we should expect from UNDP?
It looks like they powers-that-be had decided the matter in advance and this document was a belated attempt to take care of the paperwork.
It is also notable that for a procurement close to a million dollars, only administrative staff [Assistants and Associates] were part of the review panel. Doesn't the Chief of the Governance Unit, His Excellency Farhan Sabih, feel responsible to participate in this activity or is the amount in question chump change or small peanuts for him?
UNDP Pakistan has posted the evaluation report of the Supporting Democratic Electoral Processes in Pakistan II project: http://www.undp.org.pk/images/documents/SDEPP%20II%20Evaluation%20report.pdf
Doesn't really indicate that the Governance Unit was adequately providing support, oversight, and assistance to the work of the project or that the project really accomplished much of what it was supposed to. What says the Governance Unit Chief?
Post a Comment