+44-7897-074717The paper explored the difficulties being confronted with in the Lagos State Public Procurement law implementation. Both primary and secondary sources of data were used in this work; information was gathered by sending questionnaires to the designated respondents. There were 1398 employees in the study population who worked for the chosen ministries, agencies, contractors, and civil society organizations. A proportionate random selection procedure was employed to pick 210 respondents, or 15% of the research population, for the sample size. Secondary data were gathered from books, scholarly journals, LSPPA official documents, and the internet. The acquired data were analyzed using the mean, frequency, and percentage. The study's conclusion showed that, of the ten acknowledged challenges, the Lagos State Public Procurement Agency's (LSPPA) challenges related to the state's public procurement law implementation were largely insignificant. These challenges included poor ethical standards (58.9%, x?=2.5), a lack of manpower (72.2%), and delays in the adjudication of contract malpractices (65.8%, x?=2.1).
However, the report also demonstrated the difficulties that the LSPPA faced in putting the state's public procurement statute into effect; such as: interference from political office holders (67.4, x?=2.9), ineffective oversight function posed as a challenge (63.9%, x?=2.6), delay in the release of appropriated budget (57.4%, x?=2.7), political will and commitment to prosecute offenders (54.5, x?=2.7), sharp practices in the award of contract (65.8%, x?=2.8), politicised civil society organisation (78.2%, x?=3.0), and submission of procurement plan (60.9%, x?=2.8) substantially hampers LSPPA in the quest to achieve efficiency, probity, openness, value for money, accountability, and fair pricing amongst others. As a result, the study comes to the conclusion that the Lagos State Public Procurement Agency, or LSPPA, faces significant obstacles in implementing state procurement legislation, which slows down the state's procurement law's policy objectives. It was further demonstrated by the confirmation of seven claims as opposed to three claims that, in turn, refuted it.
Share this article