Pursuant to Sanctions Board Decision No. 134 issued in Sanctions Case No. 620, the Sanctions Board imposes sanctions of debarment with conditional release after a minimum period of ineligibility of six (6) years on two respondents: TPF Getinsa Euroestudios S.L. (¡°Respondent Firm 1¡±) and Getinsa Ingenier¨ªa Vietnam Co. Ltd. (¡°Respondent Firm 2¡±)
Respondent Firm 1 is sanctioned for fraudulent and obstructive practices as defined in Paragraph 1.23 of the World Bank¡¯s Guidelines: Selection and Employment of Consultants Under IBRD Loans and IDA Credits & Grants by World Bank Borrowers (January 2011). In order to be released from debarment after the minimum period, Respondent Firm 1 must demonstrate adoption and implementation of a specific integrity compliance program, and appropriate disciplinary action for employees who were involved in fraudulent or obstructive practices.
Respondent Firm 2 is sanctioned for fraudulent practices as defined in Paragraph 1.23 of the World Bank¡¯s Guidelines: Selection and Employment of Consultants Under IBRD Loans and IDA Credits & Grants by World Bank Borrowers (January 2011). In order to be released from debarment after the minimum period, Respondent Firm 2 must demonstrate adoption and implementation of a specific integrity compliance program, and ensure that both the preparation of bids/proposals and the execution of contracts complies fully with the current requirements of bids financed by the World Bank Group.
Capsule Summary of Findings:
The Respondents were found liable for engaging in fraudulent and obstructive actions in relation to projects financed by the World Bank in Vietnam. Specifically, Respondent Firm 1 was found liable for fraudulent actions in competing for Bank-financed contracts and for obstructive actions in relation to the Bank¡¯s subsequent efforts to audit the company¡¯s records. Respondent Firm 2 was found liable for fraudulent actions taken during the same selection processes, in which Respondent Firm 2 functioned as a representative and/or future sub-consultant of Respondent Firm 1. In selecting the appropriate sanction for each of the Respondents, the Sanctions Board took into account all relevant aggravating and mitigating factors. Full discussion of the facts, allegations, and the Sanctions Board¡¯s analysis can be found in the published decision.