KAA defends duty-free shops tender process

Kenya Airports Authority (KAA) has denied allegations by a Dubai-based firm that it re-tendered irregularly the lucrative contract to set up and manage duty-free shops at the Jomo Kenyatta International Airport.

KAA on Friday asked the High Court to dismiss allegations that it had failed to comply with regulations set by the Public Procurement Administrative and Review Board (PPARB) to make the procurement process more inclusive to bidders.

Suzan General, based in Dubai, has accused KAA of supplying the same technical evaluation documents in the re-tendering as it had when it first procured for operators of the duty-free shops in November last year. The November process saw nine firms knocked out on technical grounds, and the review board ruled that the process needed to be less stringent.

READ: Dubai firm contests new tender rules for duty-free shops

Hoggers Limited won the re-tendering in June this year, just months after the review board had cancelled Switzerland’s Nuance AG’s victory following the initial process.

READ: Watchdog dismisses petition against JKIA fast food tender

KAA, through lawyer Ken Ogeto, told the court that the review board had given the deal a clean bill of health when Suzan General applied for a review of the process, and found that the authority had not flouted any rules in the re-tendering.

Mr Ogeto said the Dubai firm’s suit was a clever attempt to have the court award it the tender, which he insists Hoggers rightfully won.

“This is an appeal that has been clothed in false garments of judicial review and should be dismissed. Even as an appeal, there is absolutely no merit in the issues raised and as such, Suzan General is not entitled to any of the reliefs sought,” said Mr Ogeto.

Suzan General had argued that it was also denied some points it had earned in the technical evaluation stage, an issue that KAA argued had been dealt with by the review board. Mr Ogeto added that Suzan General’s allegations of being denied documents from the initial tendering process were baseless, as KAA had informed it that it had already handed over the said documents to the PPARB.

“The re-evaluation report received by Suzan General contained sufficient information. It clearly stated the criteria used in both the technical and financial evaluation. KAA was not in a position to provide the additional information requested by the applicant, noting that the documents were not in its possession,” the lawyer said.