Requesting Entity: Bureau of Fire Protection (BFP) – National Headquarters

Issues Concern: Blacklisting

Details

1. Whether the present BAC is bound by the determination made by the former BAC that the blacklisting complaint is sufficient in form and substance.

RA 9184 and its revised IRR are silent as to the effect of changes in the BAC composition. Although the former BFP-BAC has determined that the Complaint for blacklisting filed against a bidder was sufficient in form and substance, the present BAC, comprising of totally new membership, may or may not rely on the findings and determination made by the former BAC as it has the discretion under its quasi-judicial authority, to adopt in toto the findings of the former BFP-BAC, or to verify, validate, ascertain, confirm and/or investigate anew the existence of the grounds for blacklisting. x x x In order for the present BAC to make the proper recommendation to the Head of the Procuring Entity (HOPE), it should be familiar with all the facets of the case particularly the Complaint that triggered the blacklisting procedure, and more importantly it must have carefully and judiciously examined the evidence presented, documentary or otherwise, to arrive at a reasonable, fair and just conclusion that grounds exist to validly blacklist a bidder.

2. Is blacklisting possible when the subject procurement has already been concluded?

[B]lacklisting is possible even during contract implementation, when an award has already been made, or the subject procurement has been concluded. However, in case the ground for blacklisting was committed during the competitive bidding stage and is pursued during contract implementation, the PE should refer to the Guidelines on Termination of Contracts particularly on Termination for Unlawful Acts.