Dott Services, the construction company that was blacklisted by a commission of inquiry that looked at the malaise within the Uganda National Roads Authority, has had its name cleared.
Court has nullified the findings and the recommendations of Unra probe report against Dott Services Limited, giving the company a new lease of life at a time when government had erased the company from the list of those it intended to do business with.
The 2016 Unra probe, led by Justice Catherine Bamugemereire, accused Dott Services of poor planning, leading to late commencement of works, which caused financial loss to the government.
According to the report by the commission of inquiry into the mismanagement, abuse of office and corruption practices in Unra, Dott Services did not have adequate capacity in terms of numbers of key personnel as well as adequate equipment to execute various contracts it signed with government.
However, High court judge Stephen Musota ruled that the report was an error of fact and law for the commission to condemn Dott Services for the monies paid to them and for the mistakes of the Unra staff.
“It was an error of fact and law for the commission to treat the applicants as public officials who had to help the government save money amidst irregularity in the management of Unra. The applicants (Dott Services) had Unra as a client and are in the business of making money,” court stated.
The judge observed that Dott Services made a claim of Shs 17.7bn for losses incurred on account of their contract being prolonged. However, Unra approved only Shs 11.5bn.
“This means that whenever Unra staff felt the money was excessive, they would reduce it to an amount that was agreeable. I, therefore, find that it was an error of fact and law for the commission to condemn the applicants for the monies paid to them and for the mistakes of the Unra staff,” he said.
While resolving issues in regard to delayed works and prolongation costs, the judge said that there was no evidence to prove bribery, connivance or collusion.
“All that was before the commission was mere suspicion and no hard evidence to show that the applicants influenced the decision-making processes in Unra. What is clear from the report is the fact that Unra was disorganised administratively and procedures/rules were not followed in the day-to-day running of their activities,” Justice Musota ruled.
The judge also noted that Dott Services dealt with such a client who did not respect PPDA laws and many times did not follow terms of the contract.
“The commission recommendations as against Dott Services were speculative, in error and, therefore, irrational. Had the commission allowed the applicants’ representatives to effectively explain in fairness all the alleged roles they played in the alleged losses, some of which have been explained in the affidavit of Mr Rao, then maybe the commission would have had access to the information disclosed by the applicants in this application,” he stated.
He then concluded: “I, therefore, for those reasons, find that the recommendations of the commission and findings against the applicants were as a result of a procedurally-improper hearing and in flagrant violation of the applicant’s right to a fair hearing.
CONTRACTS
Dott Services was implicated for contracts it executed, which included Jinja–Kamuli, Tororo-Mbale, Mbale-Soroti and Tirinyi–Mbale roads. All the projects were supervised by a consultant under a Unra contract manager.
The court decision resulted from a case in which Dott Services and General Nile Company for Roads and Bridges sued the attorney general to quash the report’s findings.
azabigaba@gmail.com
