Project Name
Country
Prohibited Practice(s)
Nationality
Year
Type
Duration
Fraudulent Practices: The Sanctions Committee found that the preponderance of evidence indicated that the legal representative of two firms that integrated a consortium had engaged in a fraudulent practice by misrepresenting information in the consortium’s offer, in order to fulfill the technical requirements of the bidding process, and obtain a financial benefit derived from the award of the contract.
The Respondent was the legal representative of two firms that were part of a consortium, which intended to execute works within the Strategic Public Transportation Systems Program (the “Program").
The Office of Institutional Integrity (“OII”) submitted a Statement of Charges and Evidence against the Respondent for allegedly engaging in fraudulent practices related to the Program. OII’s specific allegations were that the Respondent had engaged in fraudulent practices by misrepresenting information concerning the key personnel proposed to carry out the contract, to fulfill the technical requirements of the bidding process and obtain the award of the contract.
Consequently, and in accordance with the Sanctions Procedures, the Sanctions Officer issued a Notice of Administrative Action (“Notice”) to the Respondent. In the Response to the Notice, the Respondent denied the allegations presented by OII. Following the issuance of the Notice and reviewing the Respondent’s Response, the Sanctions Officer issued a Determination finding that the Respondent had engaged in fraudulent practices, and imposed a debarment against the Respondent. In accordance with the Sanctions Procedures, the Respondent appealed the Sanctions Officer’s Determination before the Sanctions Committee (the “Committee”). The Respondent argued that he had no participation in providing the resumes that were included in the offer; that he didn’t have fraudulent intention and that there was no indication that the documents were false when the offer was submitted.
Following a de novo review of the written record (including the Statement of Charges, the Notice, the Respondent’s Response, the Sanctions Officer’s Determination, the Respondent’s Appeal and the OII’s Reply), the Committee concluded that it was more likely than not that the Respondent engaged in fraudulent practices. The Committee imposed a three (3) year-debarment period in which the Respondent will be ineligible to participate or be awarded contracts for projects or activities financed by the Bank. The Committee did not consider any aggravating or mitigating factors.