At the time Western Scientific placed the bid it was not debarred

Dear Editor,

I refer to a Kaieteur News (KN) article dated March 22, 2021, both in print and in the digital form, captioned `Controversial T&T Company gets $365M health contract’.

As its President, I write on behalf of Western Scientific Company Limited.

It is with great alarm and some amount of disappointment that I read the said article. The article is rife with inaccuracies and most importantly, it is deliberately contrived to seek to taint Western Scientific’s reputation, obviously with the hope of having the said company brought into disrepute, barred from bidding for public tenders, which will ultimately prevent the said company from being awarded contracts, albeit the entire process was based on a fair and just procurement system of open public tender for which the said company submitted a bid.

The said KN article is also flagrantly against Guyana’s National Procurement Laws, more specifically, the fair and just award of a contract by public tender.

Permit me to highlight the inaccuracies and deceptiveness in this article, Western Scientific Company Limited is not in receipt of any formal award of contract from the Georgetown Public Hospital Corporation (GPHC) or any other entity. What the article could have accurately reported, is that Western Scientific Com-pany Limited submitted a bid based on the specifications of the bid document, met such specifications at the lowest cost and is expected to be awarded the said contract.

Secondly, the said KN article seems to impute some degree of impropriety by the National Procurement and Tender Administration Board (NPTAB). As far as I am aware, the public tender was placed by Georgetown Public Hospital Corpora-tion. It was opened by the NPTAB and independently evaluated by a team of evaluators.

Thirdly, in the said KN article, it is erroneously stated that the debarment from bidding for IDB contracts in Guyana was only lifted in October, 15 2020. Prudence, ethics and decency would have caused a trainee journalist to check with the IDB’s office to determine when the

debarment was actually lifted. It was approximately 2 years before the KN’s erroneously published date that Western Scientific Limited and its officers, Edwin Mackoon and Mario Dell, complied with the requirements of the IDB and as such the factors barring the said company and its officers, were removed.

I wish to remind you that at one time Guyana too was blacklisted with an international organization for not having all of its documentation in order. At the time of Guyana’s compliance and removal from that blacklisting, would you then consider Guyana “controversial”. Should Guyanese have to bear the brunt of such a “blacklist” when now doing financial transactions simply because of a previous infraction which has since been resolved? KN’s article somehow alludes to this absurdity.

So, for clarity, I state for the record, at the time Western Scientific Company Limited bid for the contract to supply Laboratory and Pathology Supplies, it was not barred from the IDB, Government of Guyana or any of its agencies or any other International agencies from bidding for any contract in Guyana or any other country and or for being awarded the said contract, provided that it “wins” the Tender.

I wish to expressly place on record, Western Scientific Company Ltd has an impressive track record of delivering exceptional service throughout the region for over 36 years. In addition to exemplary service,  Western Scientific Limited has always been and shall continue to render support and or contribution to worthy causes as its social responsibility to our society.

What the KN article seeks to do in its clumsy attempt, is to tarnish the reputation of the Tender Board of Guyana and preempts the fair award of the contract to an eligible candidate. Western Scientific Company Limited has the capacity to bid for such contracts and was able to meet all of the specifications required by the bidding document, at the lowest price for value. Accordingly, should the company be awarded the contract through a fair procurement process, no issues ought to be raised.

An objective, fair minded person would justifiably see mischief afoot on the part of the author, publisher and/or the intellectual architects of this article. Further, one is left to reasonably conclude that mal-intent is the only issue that exists in and by the said KN publication, thereby attempting to discredit a fair tender process.

I take this opportunity to remind Kaieteur News that prudence and responsible journalism dictates that all publications be dispensed in a factual manner.

Yours faithfully,

Edwin Mackoon,


Western Scientific Company