Agreement Of Mutual Recognition Of Debarments

This document sets out the terms of the agreement between the African Development Bank Group, the Asian Development Bank, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the Inter-American Development Bank Group and the World Bank Group on Mutual Recognition and Implementation of the participating institution`s longshore mechanisms and decisions. No no. Recognition of an adversity decision prevents a sanctioned company from awarding a bank-financed contract. The lockout is the recognition of the unlocking decisions by the signatories of the agreement on mutual enforcement of longshore decisions on the same terms as the original decision. Therefore, a decision of one of the signatories, a company or a person who has committed a fault is referred to as “sanctioning practices” sanctioned by others. Signatories are referred to as “participating institutions.” The participating institution that makes a first decision to unlock is the institution of sanctions. It is called the African Development Bank, the Asian Development Bank, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the Inter-American Group of the Development Bank and the World Bank Group. The effective date is the date on which the Bank recognizes the decision of a sanctioning institute taken under the same conditions as the original sanction. In some cases, the effective date may be slightly different from the date of the original sanction. This may be due to administrative reasons, including delay in receiving notification of the sanction decision and internal review of legal and institutional grounds. In any case, the bank will make the decision available to the public on its website on the reference date. No no.

A contract is not considered null and void since it was awarded between the decision of the sanctioning body and the entry into force. No no. The cross lock only applies after the effective date and existing contracts are not affected. However, the bank will generally not approve any changes that will increase the value of existing contracts with sanctioned companies. An investigation by the Bank`s Office of Integrity and Anti-Corruption showed that ETEP was engaged in a large number of fraudulent practices, while it was ending, as part of the Bank-funded road development and traffic facilitation project, for work contracts on the Bamako Zantiebougou-San Pedro corridor in Mali and in the Reconstruction project of the Border Road Reconstruction in Coyah-Sierra. It was found that the company falsified its annual accounts, an employee`s experience and certificates of qualification when executing similar contracts.

Posted in Uncategorized
Back to top