The Independent Review Panel in Mauritius has rejected a protest by Knight Trading Agency Co. Ltd against the awarding of a contract to supply 26,000 pairs of shoes to the police. The contract, valued at Rs 21,450,000, was awarded to Banker Shoes Ltd on August 12, 2026. Knight Trading had contested the decision, citing several issues with Banker Shoes' bid, including the material used for the shoe soles and the lack of a sample display.
The dispute began on May 22, 2026, when the police commissioner's office issued a call for bids to supply Derby shoes for police officers and sergeants. Three companies responded, but Knight Trading's bid was not selected. Knight Trading argued that Banker Shoes' soles were made of PVC, not rubber as required by the specifications, citing a document listing the raw materials used by the manufacturer. However, Banker Shoes provided a certificate from an independent laboratory confirming that the soles were made of rubber.
The Independent Review Panel also addressed Knight Trading's complaint that no sample shoes were displayed for inspection before the bids were submitted. According to the panel, an addendum to the bid documents, dated June 11, 2026, clearly stated that no samples would be displayed. Bidders were required to rely on the written specifications, which were used to evaluate the samples. The panel found that the police had followed the proper procedures in evaluating the bids.
The main reason for rejecting Knight Trading's bid was the absence of a required inscription on the sole of the sample shoe. The specifications required that each shoe bear the month and year of manufacture, engraved on the side of the sole. Knight Trading argued that this was a production requirement, not an evaluation criterion. However, the panel found that the requirement was clear and applied at the time of evaluation, as there was no mention of a postponement.
The Independent Review Panel's decision was based on a thorough review of the bid documents, the law, and the submissions made by the evaluators. The panel noted that its role was not to re-evaluate the bids technically but to verify that the decision contested could be supported by the bid documents, the law, and the elements submitted to the evaluator. The panel also relied on a 2015 Supreme Court decision, which established that it was not the role of a review body to substitute its judgment for that of the evaluator.
As a result of the panel's decision, Knight Trading will lose half of its deposit, which amounts to 50% of the amount paid. The other half will be refunded. The awarding of the contract to Banker Shoes has been upheld, and the company is expected to supply the required shoes to the police.
The controversy highlights the complexities and challenges involved in public procurement processes. The Independent Review Panel's decision demonstrates the importance of careful evaluation and adherence to specifications in the bidding process. The police department's procurement process has been deemed fair and transparent, and the contract is expected to be fulfilled according to the agreed terms.
Key points
- The Independent Review Panel upheld the Rs 21.4 million contract awarded to Banker Shoes.
- Knight Trading's protest was rejected due to non-compliance with specifications.
- The police department's procurement process was deemed fair and transparent.
