Motion for revision no. JOG/101/2023

In its decision no. 29022/798-26/2023.bü., the Anti-Corruption Department of the Economic Crimes Division of the National Bureau of Investigation of the Rapid Response and Special Police Service rejected the complaint filed for the suspicion of misappropriation of funds and agreement in restraint of competition in public procurement and concession procedures committed by the conclusion of an agreement or by taking part in other concerted practices due to the lack of suspicion of a criminal act

The Integrity Authority has submitted a motion for revision against the decision of the investigating authority that had rejected the complaint, and proposed that the decision of the investigating authority be abrogated and the investigation be ordered.

According to the complaint in the case, amongst other things, a tender issued by a public company and won by a company of interest to a private individual for the procurement of vehicle rental and fleet management services was investigated with the help of a public procurement expert in an article published on an online portal. In the tender, the winner offered a short delivery deadline (15 days) which the other major market participants could not compete with (their delivery deadline was 180 days), despite offering significantly lower prices.

According to the expert, speed was more important than price for the contracting authority. Furthermore, the circumstances suggested that the state companies issuing the public procurement had not launched the procurement procedures in time, despite being aware of the expiry date of their existing contracts, and the fact that this conduct could have harmed the budget by paying a higher price for the vehicles in exchange for speed. Another point raised in the article questions how it is possible that the winning company had at its disposal, at such a short notice, the number of vehicles with the special equipment that was required by the tender.

According to the Authority’s motion for revision submitted on 18 December 2023, the decision that rejected the complaint and the published anonymised file register show that the investigating authority did not carry out any detailed investigative action in the case but merely limited itself to investigating the allegations made in the complaint and the information contained in the cited online article, during which it merely carried out open-source intelligence (document acquisition) in relation to the cases of public procurement.

According to the Authority, it is necessary to order an investigation and delegate an expert in the case to find out whether there is a suspicion of misappropriation of funds, while paying particular attention to the fact that the tender price of the second ranked tenderer was HUF 43,900,000 lower than the tender price of the winning tenderer, which represented a price difference of 43% in this case.

In its decision, the Prosecution Office of Budapest District IX. has admitted the motion for revision after having deemed it well-founded, abrogated the above decision of the investigating authority that had rejected the complaint, and ordered an investigation on the suspicion of misappropriation of funds resulting in substantial financial loss.

The case is still pending.