August 26 subsidiary, chairman-linked firm ousted from N$200m tender

Two companies linked through the business interests of August 26 Holding Company board chair Brigadier General Fillimon Shafashike were disqualified from a health ministry construction tender worth nearly N$200 million after procurement authorities found that their commercial relationship made them ineligible to compete against each other.

The disqualification affected August 26 Construction, a subsidiary of August 26 Holding Company, and Blueberg Trading Enterprise, a private company in which Shafashike is a shareholder and director.

The matter came under public scrutiny after Affirmative Repositioning (AR) leader Job Amupanda questioned whether a conflict of interest existed after the two entities submitted bids for the same tender.

In response to the allegations, Shafashike told Namibian Sun he only became aware that August 26 Construction had entered the bidding process after both companies had already been disqualified because of their commercial link.

"I was, however, not aware that August 26 Construction had bid for the same tender. This only came to my attention after the disqualification," he said.

Shafashike confirmed that he serves as chairperson of August 26 Holding Company while also being a shareholder and director of Blueberg Trading Enterprise.

He said Blueberg's board had authorised its managing director to submit a bid as part of the company's normal business operations.

No involvement

Shafashike said August 26 Construction operates under its own independent board of directors, which took the decision to participate in the tender without his knowledge or involvement.

"That decision was taken at the subsidiary level, was not brought to my attention, and I played no part in it," he said.

Shafashike rejected suggestions that the situation reflected a conflict of interest, saying his business interests have always been disclosed to August 26 Holding Company and that he has consistently sought to ensure Blueberg does not compete directly with the holding company.

He argued that the overlap occurred because the bid was submitted by a subsidiary rather than the holding company itself.

"The overlap in this instance arose at the subsidiary level, without my knowledge, and no decision concerning this tender ever came before me at August 26, from which recusal would have been required," he explained.

"Had such a matter been tabled before me, I would have declared my interest and recused myself, consistent with good corporate governance."

Shafashike described the outcome as unfortunate but said he respected the integrity of the procurement process, which resulted in both companies being excluded from the tender.

- [email protected]