UKM Failed To Follow Procedures In Three Procurement Tenders Worth RM66.64 Mln

Barnama

7 days ago

KUALA LUMPUR, July 21 (Bernama) -- Three out of the seven procurement tenders by Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) totalling RM66.64 million were found to not comply with the stipulated procurement procedures, according to the Auditor-General's Report (LKAN) 2/2025 tabled in the Dewan Rakyat today.
The report revealed that the UKM Tender Procurement Committee had selected companies that were not recommended by the Technical Evaluation Committee, Financial Evaluation Committee and Pre-Tender Committee.
"There were serious irregularities and weaknesses in the tender procurement process and procurement management governance at UKM. The Tender Procurement Committee's decisions were made collectively by all members.
"This includes the Pre-Tender Committee, which endorsed a company that had failed at the Tender Evaluation Committee level for the project involving the upgrading and replacement of 16 elevator units,' it added.
The report also stated that the Vice-Chancellor, as the Procurement Committee chairman, is responsible for ensuring the university's operations and procurement governance are carried out properly, in line with subsection 12(3) of the UKM Constitution and the principle of duty of care.
According to the report, UKM also failed to appoint a representative from the Ministry of Finance (MoF) as a member of the Procurement Committee, while the appointed representative from the Ministry of Higher Education (KPT) did not attend meetings regarding the three tenders.
Among the non-compliances identified were the selection of a supplier for Linear Accelerator (LINAC) equipment that did not meet integration specifications with the existing system (ARIA), and taking a company that had failed at the technical level for food catering services to the final tender stage.
The report also revealed that a tender was awarded to a company listed as an ailing project for elevator replacement works, in addition to disregarding the recommendations of three key evaluation committees.
This decision resulted in the tender being awarded to a company not capable of fulfilling the contract within the stipulated period.