2005-03-01

NPM 017-2005

Requesting Entity: Philippine Health Insurance Corporation

Issues Concern: Application of Republic Act 9184 (R.A. 9184) and its Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR-A)

 

Details

Whether or not failure to have a document entitled “sworn statement” notarized is classified under “patently insufficient” submission, as provided for under Section 24.12 of IRR-A of R.A. 9184.

The IRR-A provides that the determination of eligibility shall be through an examination of the completeness of each consultant’s eligibility requirements or statements against a checklist of requirements using a non-discretionary “pass/fail” criteria, as stated in the Invitation to Apply for Eligibility and to Bid and the Instruction to Bidders, and shall be determined as either “eligible” or ineligible.” If a consultant submits the specific eligibility document required, he shall be rated “passed” for that particular requirement; or in the event of an incomplete or patently insufficient submission, shall be considered failed for the particular eligibility requirement concerned. If a consultant is rated “failed” in any of the eligibility requirements, he shall be considered ineligible to participate in a bidding, and the BAC shall mark the set of eligibility documents of the consultant concerned as “ineligible.” (Section 26.1, IRR-A)

Prescinding from the foregoing, failure of the prospective bidder to submit the two eligibility documents notarized despite clear instructions from the procuring entity for its submission is tantamount to an incomplete and/or insufficient submission and shall be considered failed for the particular eligibility requirement. Accordingly he shall be determined as ineligible.

The bidder’s subsequent and belated submission of the required documents will not cure the defect in view of the pass/fail criteria used in determining the eligibility of bidders. Consideration of the documents practically allows an exercise of discretion among the BAC members and amounts to a modification of bid, contrary to the express prohibition under R.A. 9184. The submission of the required documents at the time of the motion for reconsideration does not in any way constitute compliance of the requirement.