Proactive Follow-up: On Infrastructure Projects!

Recent information that the contract for the construc­ tion of the 70 km Ngaoundéré- Paro bridge stretch of road in the Adamawa Region has been cancelled cer­ tainly left keen Cameroonians, and even citizens of countries where development projects are taken se­ riously, perplexed. Almost six years after being awarded the contract, China State Construction Engineering Corporation could only execute barely 35.7 per cent of the entire work. Field reports say at cancellation, the contractor had already done notably the sub- base, estimated at 20.57 km, and installed 47 of the 51 culverts to ease drainage among other preparatory works. Going even by mathematical evaluation, this perfor­ mance is largely below average; mediocre, to say the least. With contractual deadline already passed, the field work was even allegedly to be on hold since May 2026. Meanwhile, it is said that the defiant contractor had already received all the payment. This makes the situation difficult and inconceivable in­ deed! The resultant effect is that the beneficiary population continue to brave the bad roads, hoping that change could come one day. The joy they nursed when the contract was awarded six years ago and field work effectively began hit the rocks and from every indica­ tion, their suffering should even be more now than be­ fore. Obviously so because it is more burdensome plying a road under construction than a simply degraded one. Automobiles and people have to brave the mud and or dust brought by the passage of heavy-duty equipment and the obstacles created by construction materials as they go about their daily activities of transporting themselves and goods from one end to the other. Too bad for a people who hoped, trusted in their government and actually saw change that is re­ grettably refusing to come their way. What remains however a fact is that the population would have to show proof of patience again to see their current sorry situation change for the better. For, time is needed to award the contract to a new firm because the public contract procedure should, in principle, be followed. This begins with the call for tender wherein aspiring contractors will submit their bids after which the tenders board would have to be convened to scrutinise and pick the best from the pack. Hoping the contracting authority will be serious enough to scrupulously examine and honestly choose the one with a competitive bid in terms of technical, logistical and even financial capabilities susceptible to righting the wrongs that stalled the project imple­ mentation with the former contractor. Anything short of this would just be putting new wine in old jars! There is therefore absolute need for stakeholders in the road project to sit up so as not to completely shatter the dreams of the beneficiary population who are simply wishing to move and transport their goods in all tranquillity. A road is an undeniable vector of sustained growth and the importance of the Ngaoun­ déré- Paro road, especially to a dominantly agro- pastoral population, is more than the likely shabby behaviour that delayed its execution. While waiting, hopefully for things to be done diffe­ rently so that the problems that plagued the former contractor are not transferred for the same effects to be produced in years to come, hair-scratching questions however beg for answers. How did the defiant company win the contract? What criteria did the Tenders’ Board use to award such a contract to the particular contrac­ tor? Did the contractor show proof of technical, logistics and financial ability to live up to expectation? If yes, what happened along the line? If no, on what basis was the contract awarded them in the first place? Was there any “influence from above” and for what or whose benefit? Where was the control firm that the Minister of Public Works, Government’s Civil Engineer, would only discover six years after that a contract du...