The Court of Accounts detected tender violations and deficiencies in resource use in its audit report to BRSA
Quick Look
- The Court of Accounts determined that BRSA's car rental tender was followed by a bargaining procedure contrary to the public tender law, that the required hardware features in the vehicles were unnecessary, and that the lights in the service building remained on 24 hours a day.
- It was also stated that some managerial appointments were accepted as 'A' level without performance evaluation.
AI-generated summary
Why It Matters
The Court of Accounts is the supreme audit body that audits the financial and administrative transactions of public institutions. BRSA is the independent institution that regulates and supervises the banking and insurance sectors in Turkey.
The Court of Accounts' audit report to BRSA included remarkable findings. During the audit, it was determined that the "negotiated method" tender method was used in the car rental service procurement tender made by the institution, contrary to the basic principles specified in the Public Procurement Law. The Court of Accounts evaluated that "The institution must carry out the car rental service procurement tender in line with and observing the principles of transparency, competition, equal treatment and effective, economic and efficient use of public resources stipulated in the legislation."
'SUNROOF, AMBIANCE LIGHTING'
The Court of Accounts' report also included the determination that savings measures were partially not complied with in the supply of service vehicles rented by BRSA through tender and in the electrical energy consumption of the rented service building. In the review made regarding the purchase of car rental services; It was determined that "the technical specifications for the institution's car rental service procurement tender include regulations stating that the model year of the vehicles must be 2025 and 0 km, and that the vehicles must have hardware features such as keyless start, automatically opening sunroof, ambient lighting and foldable heated mirrors." In its response, BRSA made the following defense:
"The equipment features included in the technical specifications ensure driving safety and ease of use, and the desired features for the vehicles to be used in the service are mostly included in the standard equipment in the current vehicle packages, therefore they do not create an additional cost for the administration, the vehicle rental fees resulting from the tender do not exceed 2 percent per month of the vehicle insurance value stipulated in the relevant legislation for each vehicle, care is taken to ensure that the domestic content rate in the vehicles procured within the scope of service procurement is over 50 percent, on the other hand, in the circular numbered 2024/7, new The use of model vehicles is not absolutely prohibited...”
LIGHTS ON 24 HOURS!
The Court of Accounts also made the following assessment regarding the investigation regarding the lighting of the service building:
"It has been stated by those in charge that there is no manual on/off button for the service building lights in the institution and that the automation system has not yet been activated by the building management, and it has been determined that the lights cannot be turned off at the end of the working day and are kept on 24 hours a day."
The Court of Accounts requested that the institution show the necessary sensitivity in complying with the savings measures in order to use public resources in accordance with its intended purpose, effectively and efficiently.
'PERFORMANCE' WAS NOT CONSIDERED IN APPOINTMENTS
During the audit, it was also determined that the appointments to be made to some department head and group head positions in the institution were made by assuming that the performance levels of the relevant people were directly at the "A" level or its equivalent level, without performing a performance evaluation, which is one of the appointment conditions.
Open Questions
- Who is the company that won the tender?
- What measures will BRSA take against these findings?
- Who are the people appointed without performance evaluation?







