Complaint no. JOG/50/1/2024

Following its investigation procedure, the Authority filed a complaint against unknown person for the suspicion of agreement in restraint of competition in public procurement and concession procedures.

(publication date: 13 June 2024)

On 12 June 2024, following its investigation procedure conducted in accordance with Act XXVII of 2022, the Integrity Authority filed a complaint with the Budapest Police Headquarters against unknown person for the criminal offence of agreement in restraint of competition in public procurement and concession procedures.

The subject of the investigation procedure conducted by the Authority was suspected irregularities concerning two, EU-funded public procurement procedures launched by an organisation exercising public functions.

The contracting authority launched conditional public procurement procedures using funds from the Recovery and Resilience Facility to conclude open framework agreements reaching the EU threshold. During the investigation of these procedures, the Authority identified ties and ways of conduct amongst a significant number of winning tenderers which, according to the Authority’s assessment, supported the suspicion of agreement in restraint of competition in public procurement and concession procedures and which, in this context, contributed to the conclusion of a forbidden agreement outlined in section 11(1) of Act LVII of 1996 on the Prohibition of Unfair and Restrictive Market Practices (“Competition Act”).

With regard to the criminal complaint lodged by the Authority, the longstanding ties amongst the businesses, the overlaps amongst their members and officials, and the similarities amongst their headquarters and actual work location are relevant investigative findings from amongst those mentioned above.

While examining the tenders of businesses and relevant documentation in public procurement procedures and reviewing the emails exchanged amongst certain company representatives during an on-site inspection carried out as part of an administrative audit, the Authority uncovered circumstances that ­­– in its view – likewise indicated agreements restricting competition; aimed to fix prices, costs, and other contractual terms or to divide the market in a bid to manipulate the outcome of the public procurement procedures in question; and had the capacity to restrict economic competition.

The case is still pending.