Public procurement has always occupied a sensitive place in Ghana’s governance architecture. It shapes how public funds are spent and determines the quality of national development. Yet, one aspect continues to stir controversy—sole-sourcing.
The old proverb “What is good for the goose is equally good for the gander” provides a timely reminder that procurement rules must be applied fairly and consistently, regardless of which government is in power.
Sole-Sourcing and the Law
Ghana’s Public Procurement Act, 2003 (Act 663), as amended by Act 914, permits single-source procurement under specific conditions, including when only one supplier exists, during emergencies, for compatibility reasons, or when it is in the public interest (Section 40).
These provisions were never intended for political convenience. Yet, over the years, successive administrations have been accused of stretching this flexibility beyond its original intent.
A Question of Fairness
The goose-and-gander principle means that what is justified for one must be justified for all under the same circumstances. If one ministry defends sole-sourcing as necessary, others must receive the same treatment when similar conditions arise.
As Kofi Annan wisely stated, “If leaders are to regain the trust of their people, they must show that the rules apply equally to all.”
Unfortunately, Ghana’s political landscape often tells a different story.
The Cost of Double Standards
When sole-sourcing is applied selectively, several problems emerge:
Public mistrust grows as political actors appear to operate with two sets of rules.
Corruption risks increase, as non-competitive contracts can inflate prices and reward cronies.
Value for money is undermined, leading to substandard or abandoned projects.
Procurement becomes politicised, condemned by one administration and defended by another.
Transparency International has repeatedly warned that public procurement remains one of the sectors most vulnerable to corruption.
Why Consistency Matters
Fair and uniform application of procurement laws safeguards national resources and strengthens the rule of law. John Locke’s reminder is relevant here: “Where law ends, tyranny begins.”
Consistency ensures:
A level playing field for suppliers
Reduced political interference
Better public confidence in government
Effective use of public resources
The Way Forward
For sole-sourcing to serve the public interest rather than political interests:
Act 663 must be enforced strictly—exceptions should remain exceptions.
PPA approvals must be published to enhance transparency.
Oversight bodies must remain vigilant, including Parliament, the Auditor-General, the media, and CSOs.
Procurement officers must receive continuous training to apply the law without fear or favour.
Governments must avoid hypocrisy—as Barack Obama cautioned, “You cannot have one set of rules for those in power and another for the rest.”
Conclusion
Sole-sourcing is not inherently wrong—but it must be applied fairly, transparently, and consistently. Anything less undermines public trust and opens the door to the misuse of state resources.
Indeed, what is good for the goose must be good for the gander. Ghana’s progress demands that procurement rules be respected by all, regardless of political colour.
References
Public Procurement Act, 2003 (Act 663).
Public Procurement (Amendment) Act, 2016 (Act 914).
Transparency International (2023). Corruption in Public Procurement.
World Bank (2019). Public Procurement and Value for Money.
Annan, Kofi. (1999). UN Address on Governance.
Obama, Barack. (2016). Speech on Equal Justice.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!