Enlarge image
Soldiers with the G36, the previous standard weapon of the Bundeswehr (archive image)
Photo:
Patrick Seeger / dpa
The award of the major order for new assault rifles to the comparatively unknown Thuringian arms company Haenel came as a surprise to many.
In the meantime, the Ministry of Defense has announced that it will withdraw the contract, the company wants to file a lawsuit against it - but there are obviously good reasons not to hold on to the previous award.
The Federal Armed Forces procurement office is said to have made a serious mistake in the award procedure. This is reported by the dpa news agency, citing a decision by the Federal Cartel Office. Accordingly, the Koblenz procurement authority had contacted the bidders after the last possible offer and allowed the actually defeated bidder Haenel to change his offer - and thereby bypass the competitor Heckler & Koch. This was "inadmissible", the judges of the public procurement tribunal located at the Cartel Office are quoted as saying.
The prestigious order involves 120,000 weapons that are intended to replace the German armed forces' previous standard rifle, the G36 from Heckler & Koch. The contract award should have been made long ago, there were considerable delays - the contract could not be awarded until the end of the year at the earliest.
After Haenel was initially awarded the contract last September, Heckler & Koch took legal action against the decision in favor of Haenel.
In March 2021, the Federal Ministry of Defense and the Federal Armed Forces Procurement Office, which is subordinate to it, changed course: Haenel was excluded from the award procedure - and Heckler & Koch was to be awarded the contract.
This was justified with "patent infringements" - here Heckler & Koch accuses Haenel of using a patent that is important for quick shooting ability after wading through water.
In the meantime, separate proceedings are pending before the Düsseldorf Regional Court regarding this patent dispute.
Haenel is said to have been able to "specify" the price at a later date
Haenel, based in Suhl, took action against the exclusion and wanted to take part in the award procedure again. In mid-June, however, the Federal Cartel Office's procurement chamber rejected a corresponding application. In the meantime the decision has apparently been published. According to the dpa, it gives a remarkable insight into the otherwise secretive world of award procedures.
As can be read in the decision, the procurement office contacted the two bidders at a time when changes to their offers were no longer possible according to procurement law. In the case of Haenel, the officials apparently asked whether the price information for a certain accessory was meant per part or per pack of three. In the published decision, the name of the accessory is omitted, according to the report. It should have been about "Stanag rails", reports dpa, citing inside information - that is, rails that are attached to the rifle in order to attach telescopic sights or laser light modules.
According to the dpa, Heckler & Koch stuck to its offer - knowing that changes would no longer be valid anyway. Haenel, which belongs to an Arab armaments company, in turn changed its offer and price. The "concretization" of the price led to Haenel "submitting a more economical offer," dpa quoted from the decision. "Here the measure inadmissibly led to a change in the ranking order."
From the point of view of the procurement lawyer Jan Byok from the law firm Bird & Bird, the procurement office made a “gross mistake”. "Allowing a price change like this is an inexplicable rookie mistake," said Byok. It is by no means an isolated case, rather it is part of a long chain of errors made by the procurement office in armaments awards. "Whether frigates, transport helicopters, combat training centers or protective vests - there are delays in practically every major project by the procurement office, which are also based on errors in procurement law." That is bad for the Bundeswehr - "the troops are suffering from the situation."
Sharp criticism also came from the Bundestag. There are clear criteria for the procurement of material, said the FDP MP Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann. The fact that the procurement office and all its lawyers have allowed improvements to be made in the course of the proceedings is "one of the many grotesques" that one has seen for years. "Out of ignorance or because you wanted to please a provider?" Asked the Liberal. The office urgently needs to be reformed. Tobias Lindner from the Greens spoke of a "gross mistake" that had been made. "The necessary trust that the responsible budget committee must have in the award decision has been seriously damaged."
The "Federal Office for Equipment, Information Technology and Use of the Bundeswehr" (BAAINBw) has its seat in Koblenz, it is responsible for the procurement of all armaments and other things for the Bundeswehr.
Including subordinate authorities, the office says it has 10,500 offices.
Neither the procurement office nor the Federal Ministry of Defense have commented on the issue so far.
apr / dpa
