Witness: Lamin L.M Marri – Director of Planning and Development at the Mansakonko Area Council
The witness said the 2024 budget estimates for the Mansakonko Area Council are still not concluded. He added that his involvement in the budgeting process concerns the recurrent budget. He testified that most of the ward development committees’ budgets have not been scrutinised yet.
He was asked by Chairperson Jainba Bah why the Area was filled with dirt. The witness said they do not have the required manpower to do the cleansing exercise, adding that this is why they sometimes hire people to do the cleansing work.
On the borehole projects, the witness said they used to give the contractors a bill of quantity for the projects. He was given some contract documents which he identified as bills of quantities for three (3) contracts. The documents were tendered and admitted into the record of the Commission.
Commissioner Alagie Sillah informed the witness that the documents were not bills of quantity, but invoices and payment vouchers.
“What we have seen before us is payment vouchers and invoices put together,” Commissioner Sillah said.
“Yes,” the witness answered.
“There is no bill quantity,” Commissioner Sillah said.
“Yes,” the witness answered.
“It is your job to provide the contractors with the bill of quantity. You are the chief technical adviser to the council,” Commissioner Sillah said.
“Yes,” the witness answered.
“If the project fails it will be your responsibility because you were support to guide the contractors as to what they need to do,” Commissioner Sillah said.
“Yes, true,” the witness answered.
The witness said it was his duty to furnish the Council with the specifications for the contracts or projects since he is the technical adviser. However, he said the procurement unit was doing. The witness admitted that it was a failure in his duty since he was not doing that.
“It was a shortfall on my part,” the witness said.
“It means you are responsible,” Commissioner Oreme E. Joiner asked.
“Yes,” the witness answered.
Chairperson Jainaba asked the witness what his base was for always mentioning that they do not have funds. The Chairperson referred the witness to the bank statements of the Mansakonko Area Council. She cited the 2020 statement of account which detailed that the Gambia Government transferred over 6.7 Million Dalasi as subvention and car park fees in 2020 only. She gave a breakdown of the transfers – D1,000,000 as subvention on 24 June 2020, D1,872,934 as car park fees in August 2020, D1,416,784 as subvention on 29 September 2020 and D2,459,118 as subvention on 13 November 2020. The witness said he has no knowledge about the transfers from the central government saying they never discussed the details of the Government’s transfers to the Council.
“This is news to me,” the witness said.
The witness reiterated that they don’t discuss the subvention and car park fees from the Government during their management meetings.
On the Jamisa Borehole Project, the witness said the council agreed with the contract to drill a borehole based on the specifications in the signed agreement. He testified that, as the Chief Technical Adviser to the Council, he did not provide those specifications to the council. He said the council took the specifications from the file of a previous contract and embedded them in the agreement. He added that he was not the one who provided the council with the list of materials needed for the project and he was not the one who provided the cost for the project.
Under a proper system, it was the responsibility of the technical adviser to do all these things but he said he did not do it. The witness, Mr Marri, admitted that part of his responsibilities was to provide technical advice to the council.
The witness informed the Commission that the Strategic Plan of the Council has expired and they have not developed a new one yet. The witness was asked by the Commission to provide the development plan of the Mansakonko Area Council from 2018 to date.
For the Six Hundred Thousand Dalasi (D600,000) Darsilami Borehole Project, the witness said they faced problems which resulted in the closure of the borehole this year. He said the water that comes out is reddish in colour and not fit for human consumption. He explained that the contract was contracted to use PVC pipes but the contractor used galvanised pipes. He said the Department of Water Resources was not involved in the project until the end. He added the water was tested by the Department of Water Resources and they informed the council that the water was not fit for human consumption.
“The water was visibly dirty. We advised the villagers not to drink the water and to use it only for their animals,” the witness said.
He said this happened this year (2023) and as a consequence, the Council engaged the contractor who told them that he tried to address the problem but he could not. He added that the Mansakonko Area Council spent Three Hundred Thousand Dalasi (D300,000) again to drill another borehole in September of this year for the same community.
He testified that the Council was not aware of the problem because the villagers were reporting to the contractor directly without informing the council about the problem. He said at the time the Council came to know about it the “Defect Liability Period” had already elapsed.
For the Minnah Borehole Project, the witness said after 3 months, they started having problems with the pumps and the contractor was recalled to address it. He informed the Commission that the “Defect Liability Period” is 6 months and for any problems that happen during this period the contractor will be obliged to come back and address them. He added that after this the Council is responsible for repairing it.
He was referred to the audit report by the National Audit Office (NAO) on the Mansakonko Area Council indicating that the boreholes were all having problems accessing water and the pumps were also having issues. The witness said he had never seen or read the audit report.
“You don’t care about whether the work you gave to the contractor was duly executed or not,” Counsel Patrick Gomez said.
The witness admitted that he did not fully execute his duties and did not do the necessary follow-ups. However, he stated that he used to supervise the borehole projects.
“Where is the evidence that you supervised,” Counsel Gomez asked.
The witness said he has no report to show that he visited the
The witness admitted that his job also included supervision and inspection of the projects, which he did not rightly do.
