The Procurement Oversight Bureau (POB) has prohibited the State Agency for Digital Development (SAD) from concluding a contract with the winner of the procurement for the development, implementation, enhancement, and maintenance of the European digital identification wallet, according to information on the bureau's website.
The State Agency for Digital Development (SAD) has been instructed to eliminate the violations identified by the complaints review commission and to reconsider the applications submitted for the competition.
As reported, the SAD announced a competition for the development of a digital wallet in November of last year. The procurement was conducted in the form of a dialogue, allowing for discussions with candidates regarding project requirements to ensure effective solutions and a balanced distribution of risks.
The goal of the project is to create a universal and secure mechanism for accessing digital services in the public and private sectors. The European digital identification wallet is expected to become a single solution for digital identification, providing EU residents with a place to store and manage personal documents such as passports, driver's licenses, diplomas, powers of attorney, and more. The system also includes secure authentication and electronic signature capabilities on mobile devices, as well as digital payment functions. The European digital identification wallet will serve as a unified platform for communication with government agencies.
The project is planned to be implemented by 2029, with the first version of the digital wallet featuring basic functions expected to be developed by December 2026.
Three complaints were filed as a result of the procurement.
The complaint from LLC "X Infotech" concerned exclusion from further participation in the procurement due to the failure to provide certificates from foreign authorities regarding beneficiaries within the established timeframe. This complaint was deemed justified.
The Italian company "Namirial" pointed out a discrepancy in the competition's requirements for the data protection specialist. This complaint was also found to be justified.
The complaint from the consortium of LLC "Baltic Software Factory", LLC "Lightsoft Solutions", and LLC "Expert Quality" concerned exclusion from the competition due to the alleged non-payment of taxes by the beneficiary. This complaint was deemed unfounded.
