*Stakeholders insist on open, competitive bidding
*Point at ignoble record, no objection granted to Swiss tech coy
Stakeholders in the manufacturing and financial sectors have called on the Nigerian government to re-examine its decision to engage the services of a swiss value-based security ink company (names withheld) for the purpose of collecting taxes through a process called “track-and-trace” on manufacturing and consumer goods.
The stakeholders equally kicked against a reported “no objection” certification granted the proposed preferred company, by the Infrastructure Concession Regulatory Commission (ICRC), as the sole company to deploy the technology.
A Swiss company that provides Security printing-security inks for currencies and sensitive documents, including identity documents, passports, transport and lottery tickets is said to be reserved to carry out the project.
Recall that the federal government, in order to shore up national revenue against sourcing for external loans, is planning to introduce value-based track-and-trace stamping of consumer and industrial products manufactured in Nigeria.
The process, a very important revenue generation process, is however, embroiled in controversy before it’s take off.
The sanctioning of the “preferred company” was for acknowledged “organisational deficiencies” between 2008 and 2023.
Stakeholders are consequently raising the red flags over the procedure allegedly being adopted by both the Federal Givernment and ICRC for the selection of the company for the implementation.
Specifically, the disagreement revolve around picking the company without any competitive bidding.Firstly, those against the process are relying on a memo from the Federal Prosecutor’s Office, Switzerland, dated 27th April, 2023, which fined the suspected company of $90.6 million, “due to organisational deficiencies,” and bribery of foreign nationals where they executed contracts.
Investigations have revealed that several months ago, the said company officials have been in Nigeria, “fraternising with top bureaucratic and political leaders, on their expertise and experiences”, but, the company, has sever image and reputation issues.
Findings by our correspondent have shown that the company was indicted in similar activities (stamp duty contracts) in its home country, Switzerland of fraudulently bribing government agents in countries where it carried out business and subsequently fined.
Findings from the Communications Service at the Office of the Attorney-General of Switzerland (OAG) shows that the company was slammed “with a penalty order issued in accordance with Art. 102 para. 2 SCC in conjunction with Art.322septies SCC”.
“The OAG has accordingly ordered the company to pay a fine of CHF 1 million and imposed an equivalent claim for compensation amounting to CHF 80 million under Art. 71 para. 1 SCC,” it stated.
The said manager of the company was sentenced to a conditional prison term of 170 days.
“The order states that he paid bribes to high-ranking officials in the Colombian and Venezuelan markets between 2009 and 2011,” the sources added.
In addition, it was reported that the Federal Prosecutor in Switzerland, had initiated criminal proceedings against SICPA, which specialises in security inks for currencies and documents, in 2015 following a request for legal assistance.
Investigations have revealed that the company is known to have offered bribes in Brazil, Venezuela and Colombia and currently is undergoing probe include Egypt, Philippines, India, Kazakhstan, Pakistan, Senegal, Vietnam, and Ukraine, Zambia and Malawi.
It was also gathered that the Kenyan Parliament had summoned the Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) over a tender for the supply of excise stamps following reports that the same company had been slammed with Shl 2.5 billion for bribing foreign public officials in the conduct of business.
Despite all these, the company had allegedly been awarded a track-and-trace contract by the federal government of Nigeria amidst the firm’s reputation which is tainted by allegations of systemic illegal practices, and investigations in several countries”.
Questions also Center on how the company allegedly obtained a “No Objection” certification from the ICRC.
NewsdeskAfrica called officials of ICRC for comment, but they chose not to react to the issues.