* Admissibility date reflects the date the case was officially registered. All other dates pertain to the date in which a stage was completed.
Case Description
On 15 November 2012, OLAF sent to EIB Inspectorate General a transmission of information regarding this project. They sent to EIB the complainant letter and they informed us, as Financers of the project that they have dismissed the case at stake on the grounds that there is insufficient information to open an investigation.
The complaint letter explained that on the basis of citizens' signals, they have established that 8 months after the start of the works, the reconstruction of the road progressed very slowly. The allegations raised were a poor quality of works, a not proper implementation of the works and excessive delays.
The EIB-CM performed a desk review of the documents available at the time of the inquiry, and liaised with the EIB services in charge of the project for informations’ exchanges regarding the case at stake.
Following its inquiry, EIB-CM considers that the complainant had pointed out real issues concerning additional delays within the implementation of the project and especially the completion of the rewarding lot 17. After analyse of all the events, it is clear that the delays observed are based on factual works issues. Unfortunately some of these issues could not have been detected at preliminary stage of the projects and have created delays and redesign of some elements. Others have been accurately pointed out, and the decisions taken were logically and qualitatively accurate.
According to the monitoring reports of the project, it appears that the works are ongoing and will be finalised by September 2014 due to the Bulgarian state budget constraints. It is to be noted that concerning this specific issue, in accordance with the EIB Complaints Mechanism principles, the EIB-CM is not competent to investigate complaints concerning national, regional or local authorities and is limited to investigate the EIB due diligence process regarding its operational services’ review and follow up of the project.
As a result of its investigation regarding this complaint, the EIB-CM sees no reason for the EIB to have acted differently. Moreover it appear that the EIB competent services have reacted and monitored closely this project in view to ensure the better fulfilment of the contractual and regulatory obligations, whenever possible, inside the present circumstances (state budget restrictions, administrative constraints between two different ministry (cable railway)).
Consequently, in the opinion of the EIB-CM, the EIB did not commit any maladministration in its due diligence process of follow up of the project at stake.