A whistle-blower has accused Airports Company South Africa (ACSA) of colluding with French firm IDEMIA on a controversial R115 million tender.
Speaking exclusively to IOL, the whistle-blower claims the two parties drafted the scope for the project one year before ACSA put it out to tender — with IDEMIA then clinching the contract.
“A Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was signed between ACSA and IDEMIA for a similar scope of what was to be issued on tender and this was signed a year before that tender was issued,” said the whistle-blower.
“Despite the denial by ACSA that the service provider had no influence on the tender specification or statement of work, it is clear that the MoU gave IDEMIA a clear advantage over all the other respondents.”
To back up the claims, IOL was handed documents which show correspondence and edited source files between alleged senior staff at IDEMIA and ACSA.
Their names are reflected on their edits on the documents. A source file tracks changes on a word document without the name of the person making the edits being visible. A simple hovering over the edits then reveals the name.
Those named — seen by IOL, appear to be senior employees of IDEMIA based in its offices in Germany and France, although it is their local, South African office which secured the ACSA tender.
The whistle-blower goes on to point out — and through alleged proof in the documents handed to IOL, how the ACSA tender a year later was overwhelmingly similar to the edited documents between the IDEMIA and ACSA.
“What is clear is that a senior individual from ACSA would have received this source document and used it on an ACSA tender template to create the Statement of Work document that formed part of the tender documentation,” added the whistle-blower who has now handed the matter over to the Office of the Auditor General and will be doing the same with the Special Investigations Unit (SIU).
ACSA recently suspended its Chief Information Officer (CIO) amid allegations of wrongdoing in the project's procurement process.
The whistle-blower has also cited this as further proof of alleged collusion between ACSA and IDEMIA, adding, “The MoU was interestingly signed by ACSA'S CIO and not the CEO who would ordinarily have the delegation of authority to sign such agreements.”
Following the CIO's suspension the Department of Transport called on the Office of the State Auditor General (AG) to audit that tender process.
Responding to IOL, the AG'S office said it had not found any material breach in the process itself during its 2023/2024 audit but new information relating to this audit will form part of its 2024-25 regularity audit.
In its response IDEMIA on the matter, replied as follows:
“IDEMIA was selected through a highly competitive tender process, reflecting the global reputation of its cutting-edge passenger facilitation and border control technologies.
“These state-of-the-art solutions are widely recognised and deployed worldwide. It is common practice for government customers to familiarise themselves with such advanced technologies before drafting and issuing an RFP, ensuring they select solutions aligned with the project’s objectives,” it said.
“The contract with ACSA was terminated for convenience, a standard contractual provision that allows either party to conclude the agreement without fault or dispute. IDEMIA is currently working closely with ACSA on the close-out activities related to this termination. Our priority remains ensuring a smooth, transparent, and professional conclusion to this partnership.”
However, according to earlier reports by IOL, the withdrawal of the contract was in fact prompted by a complaint from Johannesburg based firm INFOVERGE, the local BEE partner on the contract.
INFOVERGE claimed it was excluded from the project by IDEMIA once the contract was secured and called on ACSA to cancel it. It is now suing IDEMIA for R39 million in damages due to the loss suffered.
ACSA confirmed it was still investigating the matter. On the contract cancellation it said: "Infoverge has withdrawn the case initiated against ACSA and IDEMIA to challenge the contract awarded to IDEMIA, which had already been terminated for convenience by ACSA."
IOL