The appeal impugning ideal as a means for settling disputes during the selection process By: Omar J. Candia Aguilar.
Contents: 1. Prolegomena. 2. Concept. 3. Subjective elements. 3.1. Competent administrative bodies. 3.2. Persons authorized. 4. Objective factors. 4.1. Actionable measures. 4.2. Acts not challenged. 5. Opportunity and loss of the right of appeal. 6. Effects of the filing of the appeal. 7. Review of admissibility and procedurability. 7.1. Consideration of admissibility. 7.2. Procedurability Review. 8. Warranty. 9. Procedural structure. 9.1. Procedural structure of the appeal filed with the Company. 9.2. Structure of the appeal proceedings before the Court. 10. Withdrawn. 11. Constructive denial. 12. Exhaustion of administrative remedies. 13. Was binding precedent.
1. Prolegomena.
The doctrine of law has established the institution of the appeal proceedings as a tool by which the parties or third persons claim that the most senior body conduct a review of the procedural or the whole process, to annul or revoke all or part of it, for contain a defect or error. The
remedies as required by the majority of writers, are classified as medicines and resources. Regarding the first, is well known the action for annulment, in relation to the latter, we can mention the motion for review, appeal and review. It is worth mentioning that the remedies are regulated according to the laws of each country and procedural expertise.
Regarding the systematic position of the appeal in the State Contracting Law, D. Leg. No. 1017, note that is regulated under Part V, Dispute Resolution and Appeals, Article 53. Furthermore, the Regulations of the State Contracting Law, Supreme Decree No. 184-2008-EF, has placed the appeal, Title II, Selection Processes, Chapter XII, Dispute Settlement During the Selection Process, articles 104 et seq
2. Concept.
As explained in the preliminaries above, we can assert that the appeal belongs to the genus of such objections, by which it is intended that a higher court review, modify, replace or amend in accordance with law, the decision of a subordinate body .
in administrative law is also known as a resource to appeal of appeal or appeals. In the state administration, there is an organizational structure, a Regulation on Organization and Functions (ROF), a Manual of Organization and Functions (MOF), among others, the same, which establish the governing bodies, management bodies, advisory Inline, supporting, among others, which, are hierarchically ordered and systematized. That means, as our object of study, that the decision of the hiring manager or the Special Committee, as appropriate, may be considered by the superior or by whom the law provides.
In this regard, Dr. John Carlos Morón indicates that the appeal is the appeal in order that the hierarchically superior body of the issuer of the contested decision review and modify the decision of the subordinate. As looking to get a second legal opinion of the Directors on the same facts and evidence, does not require new evidence, since it is essentially a comprehensive review of the procedure from a fundamental perspective of pure law.
Another aspect that seems important is that the scope of review or examination which is hierarchically superior body is limited to that specifically requested by the complainants bidders. It is possible that a decision or administrative act is not completely favorable to either party, so that if only one of the bidders to appeal a decision, the court reviewing the case can not prejudice the appellant's situation and issue a new resolution that is most detrimental (non reformatio in peius).
It is necessary to specify that the appeal is a mandatory appeal to the exhaustion of administrative review and therefore can not be resorted to court without previously being challenged through appeal, events administrative cause offense.
3. Subjective elements.
3.1. Competent administrative bodies.
administrative resources raised before and resolved by the Administration, as corresponds to its own nature. As a general rule, the resolution of these corresponds to either the body itself that conducted the contested decision (appeal), or the superior court which issued the decision under appeal (An appeal) or to specialized administrative bodies in this single task and released by the law of any other management activities (administrative financial claims).
a) Competition for quantitative .- Being the ultimate appeal an appellate remedy is clear that the legislature had to model the process contested to be resolved by a distinct higher authority who committed the fault or error, or failing that, to be resolved by a special administrative body.
Consistent with the latter assertion, the State Contracting Law, D. Leg. No. 1017 (hereinafter Act) and Regulation of the Law on Government Procurement, DS N ° 184-2008-EF (hereinafter Regulation) have pointed out that in those processes of selection reference value does not exceed six hundred ( 600) Tax Units (ITU), the appeal shall be filed with the entity that convened the selection process that is challenged, and will be heard and resolved by the Contractor of the entity. In the event that the reference value of the selection process is equal to or greater than previously stated, the appeals will be presented, known and resolved by the Court of State Contracting.
regard, it is necessary to mention that the TUO of the Law on State Procurement, DS 083-2004-PCM and Regulation of the Law on State Procurement, DS 084-2004-PCM, established originally encompassed the competent body to hear the decision of the appeals was the Head of the Institution. This decision raises serious practice arbitrariness by Entities under, they were the Committees Who solved special administrative measures that generated wrong, usually in the awards of the Good Pro-and were the owners of the entities who solved the appeals by bidders and subsequently exhausted the administrative authority.
With vocation amendment, understand it, by Law No. 28,911 dated December 3, 2006, consistent with the Supreme Decree No. 028-2007-EF dated March 3, 2007, amending articles of the Law and Regulations relating to the appeal, established that the appeal is filed with and resolved by the Court of Contracting and Procurement. While this decision gives greater assurance to the challenger, to enable it to be a neutral body, the Court of the State Procurement, which resolved the appeal filed, generated at the same time, problems in access to justice, because the Tribunal's Chambers were centralized in the city of Lima, becoming an obstacle to the time of oral argument, request verification and / or review of the record, to even address the marking of the procedure for bidders in the cities far from the capital.
The new rules state contracts, we return to the previous system, with another variable, returning to the holders of Supreme power resolve such objections on appeal under the six hundred (600) Tax Units (UIT), ie, minor processes, direct awards, public contests, and much of public tenders. Perhaps the alternative would have been decentralized to create rooms in the main cities, remain vested in the Court of State Contracting know those appeals which come in larger processes to direct awards, and the lower amount, which is Besides, where there is more burden-are known by the holders of the Entities, but took the decision and the legislature, and hopefully Supervisory Body Government Procurement (hereinafter OSCE), perform efficiently monitoring public procurement.
b) Competition for qualitative regulatory .- The legislature chose to deliver the solution of certain disputes to the Court of State Contracting solely and exclusively, in a sort of improper appeal. So, that regardless of the referential value of the selection process, stated in the preceding paragraph, "all acts issued by the Head of the entity that officially declared void or cancel the process, should be submitted, processed and brought before the Court referred. In this regard, it is difficult to understand reasonably, the reason why the legislator responsible for this kind of competition the Tribunal, excluding other types of conflicts or disputes that because the amount of the reference value are known by the owner of the entity, when applicable. Seem-to-guess how the regulatory legislator questions the adequacy of the bank in the resolution of disputes through appeal process, so that dispute settlement charge higher degree of difficulty, the Tribunal.
Similarly, and under the provisions of the Thirteenth and final supplementary provision of the Act, "was entrusted to the Court jurisdiction to hear and resolve disputes arising the selection process of recruitment that are under the scope of international treaties or agreements which make commitments on public procurement. That is, the legislature gives them the necessary guarantees to suppliers from countries with which Peru had a treaty or international engagement, probably violating the constitutional principle of equality, so under that domestic suppliers and foreign (not that their countries have the signing of a treaty or international engagement) are governed by competition contained in the preceding paragraphs, however, countries with international treaties enjoy a jurisdictional regime solution differential dispute.
3.2. Persons authorized.
a) Right of action .- It is inherent to the nature of the resource that is raised by the citizen and not an administrative body to counter because it is necessary to support the decision results in harm to the person concerned. This is why the locus standi the aggrieved bidders have the decision of the Special Committee or body responsible for procurement, as appropriate.
That is, a particular bidder which is not in the process or lost such status for the disqualification of its economic and technical proposal or withdraw from the process, or you are under the mandate normativo impedido para participar en el proceso, carecerá de la legitimación suficiente para poder interponer recurso impugnativo de apelación.
b) Legitimación pasiva.- Es evidente que la legitimación pasiva la tiene la Entidad, específicamente el Comité Especial o el órgano encargado de las contrataciones. Es necesario tener presente, que en el caso que la decisión del órgano a cargo de la resolución de la apelación afectase derechos e intereses de otros postores, se pone en conocimiento o se corre traslado de la apelación, para que en el plazo previsto se puedan presentar los respectivos descargos.
4. Elementos objetivos.
4.1. Actos impugnables.- El objeto de los recursos administrative claim is seeking the repeal or reform of the administrative act contested. It is therefore important to examine what are the acts which repeal or reform can be claimed in this way. In this regard Article 105 of the acts challenged regulation states the following:
a) The acts dictated by the Special Committee or the body responsible for procurement, as appropriate, during the selection process .- Many are the acts that can be mentioned, including the evaluation of technical and economic proposals, awarding the bid, the administrative act that declares void the process, among others.
b) The acts issued after he was granted the Award and before the conclusion of the contract .- Among them we can mention the administrative act of the entity under which expresses the refusal of signing the contract, either by budget cuts, by express provision or because the need has recruited, and at the administrative act that materializes the loss of good pro, by the refusal to the signing of the contract, within the period specified in the rules.
c) The acts issued by the Head of the institution that affect the continuation of the selection process, other than those that resolve appeals, such as automatically void and cancellation .- Regarding the former, the Act in its Articles 10 and 56 specifically refer to grounds for revocation of trade, the same way, Article 34 of the Act and Regulation 79 of the grounds provided for cancellation of the selection process.
4.2. Acts not challenged .- The Regulation is responsible for determining the facts which are not subject to appeal through questioning, being among them, the following:
a) The actions and acts preparatory to the convening entity, designed to organize selection processes carried out in ITER .- procurement process, we can observe three stages or phases different, we refer to preparatory acts, acts of selection, and contract execution. The Regulation does not specify, what acts or preparatory acts are not actionable, we must try to interpret that absolutely all acts performed before the call, including: (i) the requirement of the user area, (ii) the determination of technical specifications of services, goods or works to hire, (iii) the request for quotations, (iv) determining the reference value, (v) the separation of application and budget, (vi) approval of the tender dossier ( vi) the establishment of the special committee, and others that we to be ignoring.
b) The basis of the selection process and / or integration .- Both the Law and the Regulation have been responsible for conducting and determining the content of the bases, as can be seen in Article 26 of the Act, reaching homogenized end Bases with Directive which will establish the basis Standardized compulsory. It is therefore not take place to question the basis of the selection process, but when there is doubt about the contents of the databases, or the content of the bases is contrary to law, bidders can move your questions and formulating their observations (the bases).
Similarly, the database integration is the stage where Once acquitted all inquiries and / or observations, the bases are integrated as final rules, with no possibility of being questioned, as mandated by Article 59 of the Regulation.
c) The material proceedings relating to the programming of the selection process in the SEACE and those concerning the registration of participants .- The updating and entering information in the SEACE and the actual registration of participants, are actions of the Management mere formality. However, in more than one occasion we have witnessed conflicts over the registration of participants, and the animus, of certain entities, to restrict the participation of as many of bidders, thus violating the principle of free competition.
d) Acts approving the waiver of the selection process .- The defenses of the selection process are exceptional and extraordinary events that require to be covered in some of the procedures laid down in Article 20 of the Act, must comply under responsibility for certain formalities for approval as a Resolution of the Head of the Association Agreements, the Board, Regional or Municipal Council, which by rule of statutory rule can not be challenged through appeal.
5. Opportunity and loss of the right of appeal.
The march orderly process makes it imperative that the law is a term point for bringing proceedings, whatever the nature of the Orders of the administrative body. In relation to this, the rules under review provides the opportunity to lodge an appeal after the grant is the Good Pro In that respect, the Regulation in Article 27 specifies that the appeal against the declaration of the Good Pro or against acts adopted prior to it must be filed within eight (8) working days from being awarded the Good Pro For Direct Awards and Awards of Small Claims, the term shall be five (5) days business. The
Similarly, the standard referred to in the preceding paragraph, states that the appeal against the earlier acts and different to the granting of the bid must be filed within eight (8) working days of having taken cognizance of the act you want to challenge , stating further that in the case of direct awards and awards of Small Claims, the term shall be five (5) working days.
Thus, it is clear that there are different deadlines for filing the appeal, a first term that applies to the tenders and tender, which is eight (8) days, either, since the granting of have good pro or taken cognizance of the act that wants to contest, and a second term, short for direct awards and the Small Claims Adjudication, whose time for filing an appeal is five (5) business days, after which, it preclude the right, ie, if submitted on appeal, an injunction shall be declared inadmissible.
In comparison with the last pass legislation, Supreme Decree 028-2007-EF, which amends Supreme Decree 084-2004-PCM, Article 152, we note that in relation to direct award-public or selective - Awards and Small Claims, the deadline for appeal appeal is reduced to eight (8) to five (5) working days. We believe that this reduction is reasonable, considering that within five (5) working days is sufficient to document, prepare and submit the appeal.
6. Effects of the filing of the appeal.
The filing of the appeal has the main effect of suspending the selection process until the administrative body competent to rule on the fact or material administrative act of questioning. It should therefore be clear that if what is at issue is an item, stage, lot, parcel, tract or another, the suspension only affects and exclusively to the item, stage, lot, parcel or section questioned. Therefore, any act that contradicts the Bank's mandate suspension of the process is void of pure law, and although the Act and Regulations do not specifically provide, he or officials and / or servers that ignore the terms of suspension the process, are liable to administrative responsibility as established in subparagraph d, of Article 28 of the Basic Law of the Civil Service and Public Sector Wages, D. Leg. No. 276.
At the same time, the load regulation in the task to the Bank or the Court, as appropriate, to report on the tab of the selection process contained in the case filing SEACE appeal of the day was presented by parts table.
7. Review of admissibility and procedurability.
71. Review of eligibility .- The eligibility review is to establish if the appeal is admissible. That is, the administrative body responsible to check whether the resource has all the requirements of form, of course, no extrinsic eligible (Rule 109) the responsible body should be declared inadmissible the appeal, and consequently give a period not exceeding two (2) days for remedying the appeal, or exceptionally, refuse the application for injunction apelación, si se trata del incumplimiento del numeral 8 del artículo 109 (la firma del impugnante o de su representante) del referido Reglamento.
7.2. Examen de procedibilidad.- El examen de procedibilidad supone verificar si el recurso de apelación contiene todos los requisitos de fondo; por lo que, corresponde al órgano administrativo responsable, comprobar en forma manifiesta el cumplimiento de los requisitos establecidos números clausus en el artículo 111 del Reglamento ; caso contrario, declarara de plano improcedente el recurso presentado, debiendo expresar los fundamentos de su resolución y devolviendo los anexos respectivos.
8. La garantía.
La garantía por interposición del appeal shall be granted, as appropriate, for the OSCE or the Bank. According to the new rules, the guarantee is equivalent to three percent (3%) of the reference value of the selection process or item that chooses to contest. Pointing out that the guarantee may not be less than fifty percent (50%) of one (1) ITU.
This new legal provision, significantly increases the guarantee that supports the filing of the remedy of appeal, from one percent (1%) to three percent (3%) the reference value of the selection process or item to be decided challenge, also provides that the minimum ceiling of the security will increase from five percent (25%) fifty percent (50%) of one (1) ITU.
believe in principle that this provision creates tort law the Constitution specifically Article 139 paragraphs 3 and 14, also violates a binding precedent gone to the Judgement of the Constitutional Court, File 3741-2004-AA/TC, which lays down a substantial in its ground literal B 50) that "any bill that has been established within an administrative proceeding as a condition or prerequisite to challenging an act of the government itself, is contrary to the constitutional rights to due process , request and access to judicial protection and therefore the rules that allow it are invalid and can not be claimed from the publication of this sentence. " Similarly, consider the arguments weak issued in the Resolution No. 149-2007-TC-SU (Procurement Tribunal of the State) in their bases 3 and following, which inter alia states that "one must distinguish the Warranty is a charge for handling fee, or that payment which extinguishes a preexisting obligation between creditor and debtor, but a legal instrument intended as a condition of eligibility (...) "(...) it looks for bidders interposed their appeal to fundamentals do support the view that they have the right, thereby decreasing challenges dilatory purposes (...). "
The truth is, that the requirement of payment of the guarantee as a condition of eligibility, coupled with the power to have the heads of the agencies to resolve appeals may contribute to the arbitrary exercise by civil servants and public animus often with little transparency in the conduct of the procurement processes of the state.
It should be noted that the Regulations, Article 112, refers to the guarantee must have a minimum term twenty days (20) calendar, to appear before the Court, the security must have a minimum term of thirty (30) calendar days, must be renewed, in either case until it is exhausted the administrative , being an obligation of the impugned conduct such renewals in a timely manner, otherwise the application will be considered not submitted.
Also, the regulation mentions two kinds of security by bringing an appeal, the same shall be subject to election by the challenger, see:
a) Guarantees issued by financial institutions .- This Warranty must be unconditional, supportive, irrevocable and automatically in the country for the sole request of the Company or the OSCE, as appropriate, under the responsibility of companies that issue them, the same shall be within the scope of supervision of the Superintendency of Banking, Insurance and Private Pension Funds or be considered in the final list of first-class foreign banks which periodically publishes the Central Bank of Peru.
Regarding this, it is necessary to refer to the new regulatory framework for procurement of the State, in its purpose of safeguarding public administration, overloads the presentation of guarantees, so, the bidder must submit, as appropriate, a bid security of supply at the moment to present their technical and economic proposals, too, will be presented, where appropriate, a performance bond for contract signing and finally, a warranty, if the situation warrants, by filing of an appeal.
b) The securities on deposit .- This type of guarantee may be a deposit in the bank account of the Company or the OSCE, as appropriate. To this end, the Bank, as the OSCE should be available to bidders the number account and the name of the bank where they can make the deposit.
The problem with this type of guarantee is the return of the same, when the appeal is declared admissible, especially if the deposit is made on behalf of any entity other than the OSCE, that because of that Public Service resource management go through a set of administrative procedures, which by their desire of safeguarding the transparency and good management of the treasury, end up creating red tape.
9.
procedural structure 9.1. Procedural structure of the appeal filed with the Company. As it
legislature has established the regulatory, resolution of the appeal may be delegated, it is necessary to save the following formula: (i) must necessarily be a decision of delegation of authority, and (ii) the delegation can not rest on any member of the Special Committee or body responsible for the procurement of the Bank, if it has under its responsibility to carry forward the process of government contracting.
The appeal must register with the SEACE the same day it was filed. If brought two (2) or more appeals regarding the same process or item, the Bank may accumulate in order to solve them together, provided they keep connection. The deadline for resolution of such resources will be accumulated within the last appeal or cured.
The Bank will notify the appeal to the bidders that might be affected by the determination of the appeal, within two (2) working days from the filing of the application or the correction of the omissions apparent in the presentation of same, as appropriate. The bidder or bidders placed may acquit the transfer of the appeal within a period not exceeding three (3) business days. The Bank shall decide the acquittal the transfer or not. By filing the appeal or to acquit him, the challenger or the bidder may request the use of the word, which must be made within three (3) working days after completion of the deadline for the acquittal of the transfer of the appeal.
The Bank shall decide the appeal and notify its decision through SEACE, within a period not exceeding twelve (12) working days from the filing of an appeal or from the correction of any omissions or defects observed in the presentation thereof. In order to resolve the appeal, the Head of the Institution, or to whom it has delegated that authority must have a legal technical report on the challenge issued by the corresponding areas of the institution. This report may not be issued by the Special Committee or the body responsible for the procurement of the Company, as applicable.
The challenger must assume that his appeal was dismissed, operating the constructive denial, when the corporation does not resolve and notify his decision within a period of twelve (12) days following the presentation or remedy of appeal to purpose of bringing the action under administrative.
9.2. Structure of the appeal proceedings before the Court.
The regulation requires a distinct process for those processes that come before the Court, which by its very nature and by the actors and institutions involved tend to be more complex.
is thus referred to in regulation that, if brought two (2) or more appeals regarding the same process or item, regardless of the contested decision, the Court will be joined in order to solve them together, unless substantiated reasons decides otherwise.
admitted the appeal the Court shall transfer, within a period not exceeding two (2) working days after the entity that issued the contested decision, requiring them to refer the full tender dossier. The Bank shall notify the decree admitting the appeal process to the bidder and / or bidders than the challenger that could be affected by the decision of the Court.
Within three (3) business days, the Bank is obliged to refer to the Tribunal the full tender dossier for the selection process, which should include proposals from all bidders, including also the same as a precaution A technical report on the legal challenge, which expressly stated the position of the Bank on the grounds of appeal filed. Simultaneously, the institution must submit documentation attesting to the notice of the decree that declared admissible on appeal to the bidder and / or bidders other than objecting that could be affected by the decision of the Court. The breach of these obligations by the Authority shall be notified to the Authority Institutional Control of this and / or the Comptroller General of the Republic and generate accountability in the Head of the Institution.
refer the case to the relevant Chamber of the Tribunal, whether or not the acquittal of the bidder or bidders will be affected, it has a term of five (5) working days evaluate the documentation on the record and, if necessary, to declare that it is ready to resolve. The Court deemed relevant may, for once, request additional information from the Bank, the third and objecting to raise the necessary documentation for adjudication, it being extended the assessment period referred to in the preceding paragraph for the term needs, which may not exceed fifteen (15) days. Should have been granted, ex officio or upon request, the use of the word for oral argument, the request for additional information may be made after the relevant public hearing.
The Court shall decide and notify through SEACE resolution within five (5) working days from the date of issuance of the decree declaring that the file is ready to resolve. When the appeal so requires, for purposes of its decision, the Court may make requests for information to entities or natural or juridical persons it deems necessary, whether or not parties have questioned. We
clear-as-imperative that organizations and individuals or legal entities that have been required to provide information, must do so within the stipulated timeframe and under the responsibility. No However, we believe there is an absurdity of the regulatory legislature, to presume or infer that failure to provide or provide the required information (to the winner of the Award), this behavior will be appreciated by the Court at the time resolve, ie the Court, or the entity or any governmental authority, can make a presumption against any managed; contrario, and as understood doctrine, due process under the Constitution can not be understood field reduced to the strict prosecution criminal conduct, but must also be understood that underlies the adoption of any administrative and legal decision .
10. Withdrawn.
The waiver is the manifestation of will made by the challenger, by which he expresses his desire not to continue with the appeal he filed, the same is pending. The withdrawal in the contested appellate process is not presumed, so much so that the legislature has established as regulatory requirements as follows: (i) the notice of withdrawal must contain signature legalized by the notary, the Secretary of the Tribunal affidavit of the entity, or Magistrate, as appropriate, and (ii) the time to show or express the will of the withdrawal of the appeal, before pleading preclude that the file is ready to resolve. Similarly, the substantive requirement is that the act of questioning concerning the public interest does not compromise, otherwise, the court or agency may not grant the waiver requested.
The withdrawal should be accepted by resolution, terminate the administrative proceeding, establishing himself as a kind of penalty, the execution of one hundred percent (100%) of the warranty.
11. Constructive denial.
Retaining the same articles of the law repealed, the Government Procurement Act has established that in the event that the Company or where the Court of Government Procurement, as appropriate, not resolve and report its resolutions within the deadline fixed by regulation, stakeholders consider their appeals denied, may file the administrative action against constructive denial within relevant legal. In these cases, the Supreme Court or the State Contracting return the warranty provided, annexed to the appeal.
12. Exhaustion of administrative remedies.
The decision of the Court or the Authority, as required, to resolve the appeal or constructive denial, not to issue and notify its decision within the periods given by exhausting administrative remedies. In fact, the omission notice and resolve the appeal within the prescribed period generates functional responsibility of the Chamber of the Court or the Head of the institution and official who had been delegated the function to solve, being necessary to the appropriate disciplinary procedure.
13. Was binding precedent.
The law establishes that, through resolutions adopted in plenary session set was binding precedent. That is, not the State Contracts Tribunal, which issued resolutions as a matter of binding precedent, but agreements are Plenary, which eventually may clarify certain solutions to problems, has set precedents reaching compulsory enforcement.
believe that a valid argument and reason or sustainable to establish the precedent of mandatory compliance is the need for some certainty and uniformity in the courts to issue rulings on Government Procurement and now Holders of the Bank, in cases or similar facts. This will allow a sort of unity in the interpretation of applicable law and the assertion of legal certainty as a value to be protected by the relevant administrative agencies.
Now, the search for uniformity, certainty, predictability, among others, should not be in contradiction with the natural legal innovation and constant change to which we submitted a globalized world and its own public morals so by law or by agreements Plenary possible and / or necessary to make changes was binding precedent, always and when, it sustains and justifies its reasons.
For its part, the regulation provides as imperative that all entities and the Boards are required to hear appeals pursuant to know the precedent of existing compulsory.