Magistrates of the Court of Auditors accused Mansour Faye and his DAGE of purchasing rice at market price without taking into account a seven-year-old decree that had become irrelevant. However, the Ministry of Community Development had the ARMP and the law on its side. The auditors, against all evidence, insisted on incriminating them. This raises the question of whether human factors clouded the technical nature of this case.
Can Mansour Faye and his former Dage, Aliou Sow, really trust in the benevolence of those in power to thoroughly review what the Court of Auditors has accused them of in the management of funds related to the fight against Covid? This report was produced at a time when Amadou Mansour Faye was at the head of the enormous Ministry of Community Development, Social and Territorial Equity, responsible in particular for the distribution of foodstuffs. The magistrates of the Court of Auditors, who audited the management and distribution of these foodstuffs, found against Mr. Aliou Sow, the Dage, « an overcharge on the price of rice, amounting to 2 billion 749 million 927 thousand 498 CFA francs. »
The report states that the accused had, at the time, specified to the auditors that « the prices are set by the sellers who responded to the order notice. (…) However, the Minister of Community Development and Social and Territorial Equity had given to the president of the Procurement Commission a table produced by the Minister responsible for Trade which listed the prices of the commodities for the commission to use as a working document. (…) In this table, the price of a ton of unscented broken rice is displayed at 275,000 CFA francs and all the companies selected for the purchase of rice had offered the same price. »
The auditors rejected these arguments based on decrees of 22 May 2013, « administering the prices of oil in barrels and in pods, granulated sugar and unscented broken rice », and they added that « the aforementioned decree No. 007111 sets the price per tonne at the wholesaler at 245,000 CFA francs; the handling costs are set at 5,001 CFA francs per tonne by the Ministry of Commerce, i.e. an overall price of 250,001 CFA francs. However, it was set by the Mdcest at 275,000 CFA francs per tonne, i.e. a loss of earnings of 24,999 CFA francs per tonne ».
Obsolete order
Even to this day, observers believe that the Court’s work was either biased or particularly lax in this regard.
Indeed, how can one, in the context of Covid-19, where the supply chain was particularly turning away from Africa, causing a surge in the prices of all foodstuffs and a scarcity of other products, such as those related to health, want to impose prices set seven years earlier, at a time when the country was experiencing at most only a degree of price speculation?
Furthermore, the 2013 decrees relied on by the Court of Auditors judges refer to Law 94-63 of 22 August 1994 on prices, competition and economic litigation. The said law underlines that « the prices of goods, products and services are determined by the free play of competition », although in its Articles 42 and 43, it sets out clear exceptions which specify that « temporary measures against excessive price increases, motivated by a situation of calamity or crisis, by exceptional circumstances or by a manifestly abnormal market situation in a given sector, may be taken by order of the Minister responsible for Commerce and whose duration of application may not exceed 2 months, renewable once. » In clear terms, the 2013 order to which the Court of Auditors attached itself was no longer valid in 2000.
Furthermore, notwithstanding this legal provision, Mansour Faye’s ministry was keen to consulting the Public Procurement Regulatory Authority (ARMP, now Arcop), before issuing a call for tenders, to which it was not legally bound due to Decree 2020-781 of March 18, 2020, which exempted all orders made in the context of the fight against Covid-19 from public procurement. It was after the ARMP’s approval that the contracts were launched.
In his response to the auditors, Aliou Sow points out that « in the final report of the Court of Auditors, the observation concerning granulated sugar has disappeared while the 2013 decree concerns both unscented broken rice and granulated sugar. Which… gives me the firm conviction that maintaining the observation on rice is clearly an error on the part of the auditors… They cannot introduce the notion of overcharging, since a call for competition was organized and, better still, the offers accepted are in accordance with the price table of the Ministry of Commerce. »
Human Factor
Traders note that in 2013, the price of rice, including port handling, was 250,000 francs per ton, or 250 francs per kilo. Seven years later, in 2020, in an even more difficult global context, the price per ton was 275,000 CFA francs, or 275 francs per kilo. In seven years, the price of a kilo of rice has increased by only 25 CFA francs, despite the increase in maritime freight, the global slowdown in production, and exchange rate volatility.
In June 2024, the price of rice rose by decree to 375 CFA francs per kilo, an increase of 100 CFA francs in four years. This shows that while the government has made efforts to maintain the availability of rice at a good price, traders have also made enormous sacrifices. Did the auditors at the Court of Auditors, who refused to take the exceptional circumstances into account, have ulterior motives?
Observers are also calling for questions to be asked about « human dynamics, intersecting paths, old antagonisms or latent resentments which can sometimes alter the neutrality expected in the examination of a case », particularly one as sensitive as this one.
By Mohamed GUEYE / mgueye@lequotidien.sn
- Translation by Ndey T. SOSSEH
