Witness: VLT terminals were procured under approved plans but never put into use at State Lottery JSC
Witness says the purchase followed approved plans and procedures, but the terminals remain in warehouses and were never put into operation.
At the trial linked to the State Lottery procurement case, a witness testified that VLT gaming terminals were purchased following adopted plans and procedures, but were never activated and remain in the company’s warehouses.
Aleksandar Andonov, who said he served on the five-member commission that ran the public procurement and is currently the director of the Sector for Prevention of Money Laundering and Financing of Terrorism at State Lottery JSC, told the court that the purchase was foreseen in the procurement plan and implemented on the basis of prior management decisions.
Commission followed established decisions, witness says
“We as a commission acted on decisions already adopted earlier. The same was to be and was foreseen in the public procurement plan,” Andonov told the court, describing the internal routing of the procurement documents. He explained the procurement plan is adopted by the Management Board, while the financial plan is approved first by the Supervisory Board and then sent to the Government as the sole shareholder.
Andonov recounted that before launching the procurement, a preliminary procedure examined the legality and justification for buying the VLT terminals. The commission ran the tender through the Electronic Public Procurement System; three bids were received, the formal-legal and technical requirements were checked, and the most favourable bidders were selected. Framework agreements were signed and the procurement later underwent administrative review by the Bureau of Public Procurement.
On the specific fate of the devices, Andonov said the terminals were never put into operation and remain in State Lottery warehouses. “They were never put into use for the needs of the State Lottery. Requests were submitted by the responsible sector to the Public Revenue Office and the Ministry of Finance, but since the devices are still in the warehouses, I cannot say in which part we received positive or negative decisions for putting them into use,” he said.
The witness told the defence for Perparim Bajrami that he could not recall exactly whether the full documentation had been obtained, but noted that the procedure concluded with a contract. He also said he could not explain why the terminals were not activated as those decisions are made by the competent institutions.
Andonov rejected a suggestion that the financial plan is fixed for the year without changes: “I do not agree, because during the year amendments to the financial plan are made, and those amendments are already in line with the manner, goals and policy of the governing bodies in the State Lottery,” he said. He added that the commission’s role had been limited to reviewing bids and that he was not familiar with whether legal opinions or feasibility studies were obtained in preparation of the procurement: “I am not familiar with that because we as a commission only reviewed the bids.”
The indictment in the case names several defendants — Artan Grubi and Perparim Bajrami among them — along with Bashkim Avdi, Metodija Dimovski, Skender Mehmeti, Bojan Janev, Fatmir Ramadanovski and Aleksandar Dimitrioski. Prosecutors allege that by exceeding official authorities they caused damage to State Lottery JSC amounting to 596,125,511 denars; all accused have pleaded not guilty.
The trial is scheduled to continue on October 20.
Photo: Printskrin
