NIGCOMSAT Fires Back: No Manipulation in NIGCOMSAT-2A, 2B Deal

….Satellite firm challenges bid-rigging claims, says BPP rules guided multi-billion-naira procurement

The Nigerian Communications Satellite Limited (NIGCOMSAT) has thrown out allegations of manipulation in the procurement of the NIGCOMSAT-2A and NIGCOMSAT-2B satellites, declaring that the multi-billion-naira exercise was subjected to uniform technical, financial, security and compliance scrutiny in line with public procurement rules.

The satellite operator, in a detailed response to a September 18 report by Daily Post, rejected suggestions that the procurement was structured to favour particular bidders, describing the publication as a combination of “unverified assertions and selective accounts” that could give a false impression of a compromised process.

NIGCOMSAT’s defence comes amid scrutiny of the procurement of the two satellites, which the company described as a critical component of Nigeria’s digital infrastructure and communications security architecture.

The company insisted that no bidder was given preferential treatment, stressing that every participant was assessed against the same requirements under applicable procurement laws, guidelines and procedures of the Bureau of Public Procurement (BPP).

It said the successful bidders were not selected on the basis of a single technical or financial criterion but emerged from an overall assessment covering technical responsiveness, financial compliance, delivery capacity, project risks, security considerations and long-term value to the Federal Government.

“The successful bidders emerged from that overall assessment, not from the preference or influence of any individual or interest group,” NIGCOMSAT said.

The company also rejected an apparent argument that a bidder’s previous contractual relationship with NIGCOMSAT or performance under an earlier contract should have translated into an automatic advantage in the new competition.

According to the satellite firm, previous participation in government contracts does not confer an entitlement to future awards, adding that failure to win a fresh competitive procurement could not, on its own, constitute evidence of manipulation.

NIGCOMSAT maintained that each procurement exercise must be judged on its own evaluation criteria and the evidence presented by competing bidders.

The company said interpreting the non-selection of a previous contractor as proof of wrongdoing would undermine the principle of competitive procurement.

It further pushed back against issues raised about the administration of the organisation, revealing that its current management inherited a salary structure that had remained unchanged for 17 years.

NIGCOMSAT said it had initiated steps to review the structure through the relevant government approval channels.

It also disclosed that management was working to resolve outstanding obligations associated with official assignments while tightening internal procedures governing authorisation and reimbursement.

A significant part of NIGCOMSAT’s response centred on the selection of Hughes Network Systems’ JUPITER platform, with the company rejecting what it called speculative conclusions drawn from reported Chapter 11 proceedings involving Hughes Satellite Systems.

NIGCOMSAT said the report did not demonstrate that the proceedings had impaired Hughes Network Systems’ technical capacity, contractual obligations or ability to deliver the ground infrastructure required under the satellite programme.

It argued that the financial or corporate circumstances of a related entity could not automatically be transferred to the specific company involved in the procurement without evidence establishing an impact on its ability to perform the contract.

“A reported corporate or financial development involving a related entity does not, on its own, establish that NIGCOMSAT’s procurement decision was defective,” the company said.

NIGCOMSAT said any assessment of the deal should instead be based on technical evaluation, contractual due diligence and verified evidence.

The satellite company challenged any bidder or interested party with substantive objections to the procurement to invoke the statutory mechanisms provided for procurement reviews.

Rather than using media reports to challenge the outcome, it urged parties with legitimate grievances to pursue the formal channels established under the procurement framework.

NIGCOMSAT, however, acknowledged the media’s role in scrutinising public institutions and government expenditure, saying such scrutiny remained important in a democracy.

But it insisted that reporting on sensitive public procurements should be grounded in accuracy, balance and a proper understanding of the processes involved.

Beyond the controversy, NIGCOMSAT said the NIGCOMSAT-2A and NIGCOMSAT-2B programme was designed to strengthen Nigeria’s strategic communications infrastructure.

The company said the satellites would help improve communications resilience and extend broadband services to underserved communities while supporting national security, education, healthcare, broadcasting and other sectors of the economy.

Given the strategic and financial implications of the project, NIGCOMSAT said it had incorporated technical, financial, legal and project-continuity safeguards into the procurement and implementation framework.

The company consequently stood by both the integrity of the procurement process and its outcome, declaring that external pressure and commercial interests would not be allowed to compromise the project.

Its response effectively shifts the focus of the controversy from allegations of procurement manipulation to the documentary evidence underpinning the evaluation, award and due-diligence processes for a satellite programme expected to play a significant role in Nigeria’s digital and communications infrastructure.