The bidding process for the State Administration's agency services has been provisionally suspended
The Central Administrative Court for Contract Appeals (TACRC) has agreed to provisionally suspend the procurement process for travel agency services for the General State Administration (AGE), following an appeal filed by GEBTA and other entities against the bidding specifications, which the association is also seeking to have annulled.
The suspension of the proceedings was one of the measures requested by GEBTA in its appeal, along with the annulment of the bidding documents.
This measure effectively means that the current managers of the lots will remain in place, at least until the Court rules on the appeal.
GEBTA requested that the Court both suspend the proceedings and annul the bidding documents, as it considers that the tender documentation prepared by the General Directorate for the Rationalization and Centralization of Procurement contains various regulatory violations.
Three Categories
The legal analysis on which GEBTA?s appeal is based identifies three major categories of possible violations.
The first, of an economic nature, focuses on the lack of justification for the cost structure. According to GEBTA, this aspect is particularly relevant because it affects the potential participation in the bidding process by agencies that do not currently manage AGE services.
In this same category, the appeal challenges the requirement for across-the-board discounts on airfares, the provision of travel insurance upgrades at no cost, and, in general, those clauses that, according to GEBTA, would force agencies to submit bids with prices that do not cover actual costs or eliminate the profit margin.
The Association considers that these conditions violate, among other provisions, Articles 102.3 and 2 of the Public Sector Contracts Law (LCSP).
The second section concerns certain services included in the Technical Specifications (PPT) which, according to the appeal, would be operationally impossible to fulfill, either due to existing practices in the transportation market or because they would exceed the functions inherent to a travel intermediary. GEBTA also points out that some of these obligations carry penalties in the event of noncompliance.
The third section includes the clauses that, according to the Association, could violate regulations in areas other than public procurement, including data protection regulations, legislation governing the insurance market, and the regulations of the International Air Transport Association (IATA).
Possible annulment
GEBTA considers that the arguments set forth in the appeal should lead to the annulment of the bidding process.
In that case, the Court?s ruling would determine which aspects of the bidding documents would need to be modified to bring them into compliance with the legal framework. The eventual annulment would entail, according to the Association, the drafting of new bidding documents and the launch of a new bidding process for the lots.