La actuación del SERCOP y la discordancia entre normativa y funcionalidad de herramientas en contratación pública

Abstract

This research aims to address in a first chapter the overreach of the National Public Procurement Service (SERCOP) in the exercise of the administrative powers conferred in its capacity as governing body of the National Public Procurement System (SNCP), due to the overflowing and incompatible issuance of administrative rules, misrepresentation in the attention to claims, diffuse and implausible control, for in a second chapter expose the discordance between the regulations and the functionality of the computer tools used around an electronic public procurement based on the use of ICT, both factors producing violation of the governing principles public procurement and inefficiency in the economic management of State resources. With the analysis of the performance of SERCOP in the exercise of its administrative powers and the discordances between regulations and functionality of tools in the SNCP, the consequences of the incorrect application of these powers will be identified, the discrepancies found between the regulations and tools will be exposed, as well as possible solutions. The methodology applied is the analytical, through the review of bibliography, current legal regulations framed in public procurement, since this source and laws analyze the relevance of the study to reach the objectives set, on the other hand, the comparative method will be used, through the functionality of the main tools and public procurement portal against the regulations of the matter. The result of the analysis demonstrates the need to place a brake on the overreach of the governing body of public procurement in the exercise of its powers, the importance of the use of “TIC” in public procurement but under parameters of reliability and concordance between the regulations and the systems used for efficient public procurement, and in the future we can see if necessary corrective measures are taken to avoid the aforementioned violations and restore legal certainty and legitimate expectations, which allow actions with criteria of certainty and predictability.