Contracting Out Of the Government Procurement System Was Detected In the Football for Everyone Program
<p style="line-height: 20.8px;"><span style="line-height: 1.6em;">Last week we published the first installment of the report that caused a great debate in the College of Auditors and that eventually was archived. But there is still more purchases through exception mechanisms, as usual without any justification. The "exclusivity of the campus journalists" and "the lack of suitable substitutes" were some of the justifications put forward.</span></p> <div> </div>
The report conducted by the General Audit Office (AGN, for its acronym in Spanish) on the Football for Everyone Program (PFPT, or its acronym in Spanish) specifies that "the $207 million (pesos) that suppliers and service providers were disbursed, 189 were performed under an exceptional mode without any justification.”
The payment was for legitimate fertilizer mechanism used when a provider "was not hired under the regime that is prescribed by law." In such cases, "the provider submits the bill for the service provided and, subject to an opinion from the legal department, payment is enabled through the decision of the competent authority" in the PFPT case, the Cabinet of Ministers.
The auditors said they "can understand the use of this procedure to start the program, because since August 21, 2009, which was the first televised game, until August 23, there aired nine games, launching in three days a complex television system," but "continuing this way the following days cannot be justified."
Continuing with the exception conventions, the report was done in 2012. That year it was recruited directly to the company Farolito Entertainment International SA. for nearly $15 million for general and artistic production, the journalistic direction, the rapporteurs, commentators and camera directors for the tournament in the first division and the Copa America. The foundation wielded by the Program for not making a public tender was "exclusivity for campus journalists" and "the lack of suitable substitutes".
However, the audit team reported that "it was not proven if that team is the only one in the middle, with an irreplaceable capacity and professionalism to do the transmissions."