Watchdog clears Sh116m Judiciary security tender

Chief Justice, Martha Koome. FILE PHOTO | JEFF ANGOTE | NMG

The procurement watchdog has dismissed a petition by Pelt Security Services Limited seeking to stop the award of a Sh116 million tender by the Judiciary for the provision of security services across its offices in Kenya.

Pelt Security Services, which lost the bid had sought a review of the award of the tender to rival firms Gyto Success Company Limited, Catch Security Link Limited and Tofada Security Services Limited.

The Public Procurement Administrative Review Board (PPARB) has now rejected its prayers, saying the three firms won the tender competitively.

“The applicant's request for review dated December 20, 2022, be and is hereby declared dismissed for lack of merit. Each party shall bear its own costs in the request for review,” the board said in a ruling.

The feud arose from the Judiciary’s invitation in October 2022 of bids to be offered security services by reputable firms in the sector across its offices in the country.

The open national tender attracted 29 bidders whose proposals were opened on November 8, 2022. At the preliminary evaluation stage, 17 tenders were found to be non-responsive and were eliminated from further evaluation.

However, 15 tenders which included bids submitted by Pelt Security Services Limited, Gyto Success Company Limited, Catch Security Link Limited and Tofada Security Services Limited were responsive and proceeded for technical evaluation.

After technical and financial evaluations, the tender committee then recommended that the contract be awarded to Gyto Success Company Limited, Catch Security Link Limited and Tofada Security Services Limited at a sum of Sh116 million.

Pelt Security Services Limited, however, filed a suit on December 20, 2022, at PPARB to challenge the award of the tender to rival three security firms that had won the bid.

“It is therefore our considered opinion that the applicant's tender did not fully satisfy this criterion to be awarded 10 marks. For the avoidance of doubt, the applicant, in our considered opinion was entitled to only 4 marks which is what it was awarded in this criterion,” said PPARB.

PAYE Tax Calculator

Note: The results are not exact but very close to the actual.