« Un étudiant, un ordinateur » : Daouda Ngom dénonce des contrats « nuls et de nullité absolue »
During his hearing at the National Assembly, the former Minister of Higher Education stated that he was informed of the program's shortcomings three days after taking office. He maintains that the contracts related to the 2025 edition were awarded outside the bounds of public procurement rules and defends the measures taken following the ARCOP report.
Former Minister of Higher Education, Daouda Ngom, gave his account of the irregularities found in the "One Student, One Computer" program during his hearing before parliamentarians this Friday. At the heart of his explanation were contracts that, according to him, did not comply with regulatory procedures, a lack of traceability in the service award documents, and decisions made after the submission of a report from the Public Procurement Regulatory Authority (ARCOP).
Facing the members of the parliamentary inquiry committee, the former minister was keen to clarify the circumstances in which he discovered the difficulties surrounding this program, while distinguishing his hierarchical responsibility from the dysfunctions reported by his collaborators.
Six billion CFA francs and a lack of traceability in the documents
Upon assuming his duties, Daouda Ngom stated that he noticed the "One Student, One Computer" program was not explicitly mentioned in the handover documents presented to him. According to his statements, the deposit accounts he was shown concerned five entities, including the Scientific and Technological Research Incentive Fund, the PGFSUP (Program for the Financing of Higher Education), the Research and Testing Centers (CRE), the Directorate responsible for the maintenance of higher education buildings, and baccalaureate registration fees. "If I base my opinion solely on the minutes, there is no mention of a 'One Student, One Computer' project," he explained to the members of parliament.
The former minister did, however, point out that the program appeared in a table detailing the budget execution rate. This table showed an allocation of 6 billion CFA francs, with an execution rate of 50%. According to his interpretation, this corresponded to 3 billion CFA francs spent and a remaining balance of 3 billion.
To understand the situation, Daouda Ngom claims to have spoken with the relevant administrative officials, including the Director General of Higher Education, Professor Abdoul Aziz Diouf, and the Director of Financing for Higher Education Institutions, Professor Mame Penda Ba.
According to his testimony, these two officials presented him with the program's difficulties three days after he took office on September 15. They reportedly mentioned a lack of coordination, non-compliance with the procedures manual, and the circumvention of decrees dating back to 2014.
Regarding the period from 2017 to 2025, officials reportedly informed him that the program was neither included in the ministry's procurement plan nor with the relevant commission. It was also allegedly not registered with the Central Directorate of Public Procurement (DCMP). According to Daouda Ngom, these constitute major breaches of public procurement regulations. However, these details are presented here based on his statements during the hearing.
In his statement, the former minister also outlined the steps taken even before he was fully informed of the matter. He indicated that on September 3, Professor Mame Penda Ba had sent a letter to ARCOP (the Regulatory Authority for Academic and Professional Training) requesting an opinion on the difficulties encountered in the program. Following discussions with the Director General of Higher Education, this request was reportedly transformed into a formal complaint on September 15, the day Daouda Ngom took office. Ngom claims to have been informed of all the problems around September 17. He says he then instructed the relevant departments to continue monitoring the case with the regulatory body.
According to his account, ARCOP then examined the case and issued its report on November 21, a document which he claims to have officially received on November 22.
When questioned about the measures taken after receiving the report, the former minister defended his department's position. He maintained that the irregularities found in the 2025 edition justified taking all legal and administrative action. "The contracts concluded are null and void," he declared, outlining the legal arguments on which he claimed to have based his position.
Daouda Ngom specifically cited Article 27 of the Public Procurement Code, which relates to the person authorized to conduct and sign contracts on behalf of the contracting authority. He also cited Article 28 of the same code, concerning the conditions for signing and approving contracts based on their value.
The former minister also referred to Law No. 2006-16 of June 30, 2006, amending the Code of Administrative Obligations. According to his interpretation of the provisions he cited, the absence of the required prior authorization or the incompetence of the authority that concluded a contract can render it null and void. On this basis, he believes that the contracts in question could not be considered legally valid if the mandatory procedures and authorizations had not been followed.
"Integrate the program within a strict regulatory framework"
Beyond challenging the validity of the contracts, Daouda Ngom emphasized the need to integrate the "One Student, One Computer" program into a framework that complies with public procurement regulations. He specifically advocated for the use of official channels, involving the relevant bodies, including the DCMP (Directorate of Public Procurement) and ARCOP (Regulatory Authority for Public Procurement), to ensure that the tendering, monitoring, and approval procedures are followed.
Regarding his personal responsibility, the former minister acknowledged that the program fell under the purview of the department responsible for financing higher education institutions, itself under the authority of the Directorate General for Higher Education and, ultimately, under the minister's supervision. He thus admitted to a hierarchical and moral responsibility linked to his position, while explaining that the irregularities had been brought to his attention by his colleagues after he arrived at the ministry.
Before the parliamentarians, Daouda Ngom reaffirmed his support for the initiatives aimed, in his view, at promoting transparency and truth in the management of public funds. He presented the measures taken following the ARCOP report as a commitment to addressing the reported irregularities and protecting the public interest.
Commentaires (15)
Dès le début ils ont retiré 5 milliards pour les distribuer à leurs militants. Du jamais vu! Ils sont pressés à s'enrichir du président au premier ministre en passant par les ministres,DG , Directeurs et députés.
Ce Ministre et les directeurs démissionnaires ne sont pas clean.
D'ailleurs il n'y a personne de clean à Pasteef
Je connais une société sénégalaise dont le responsable de gestion qualité a démissionné seulement quelques mois après l'arrivée de Macky Sall au pouvoir. Parce que lorsque Macky a nommé le premier directeur APR pour cette société, la première chose que ce directeur a faite est de s'attaquer à la gestion qualité même. Parce que cette gestion là, qui avait permis à la société d'avoir des certifications qualité internationales (c'était des auditeurs internationaux qui passaient régulièrement auditer la boîte), cette gestion l'empêchait de recruter des militants APR. Or c'était ça la première mission que Macky Sall lui avait confié. Le responsable qualité démissionna donc, pour aller vendre ses services dans un pays africain.
Alors, le directeur APR put recruter en quantités des responsables et militants APR qui recevaient leurs salaires sans jamais mettre les pieds dans la boîte. Si la gestion qualité était en cours, la procédure permettait à n'importe quel petit agent de la société de déposer une plainte interne contre le DG pour dénoncer le recrutement et réclamer la réparation de cette non conformité. C'est cette gestion où chacun, quel que soit son grade, était contrôlé par tout le monde, que les responsables de l'APR ne pouvaient pas supporter.
Et pourtant, ce DG là, lorsque ses dégâts ont atteint les projets à milliards de la société, des bailleurs de fonds européens ont réclamé à Macky Sall son limogeage comme condition pour la poursuite de leurs financements. Macky a refusé de le limoger, ils se sont retirés du financement du projet. C'est un projet qui a débuté sous Wade, Macky a trouvé le projet en cours avec les bailleurs, Macky y a mis la destruction que je viens d'expliquer, rien que pour caser des militants et responsables APR. Le projet s'est arrêté sous Macky Sall. Il est toujours à l'arrêt aujourd'hui, cherchant des bailleurs qui accepteraient de le finir.
NB: J'aurai pu mettre des noms. Je m'en garde pour le moment. Parce que le directeur en question a aujourd'hui affaire avec la justice pour d'autres raisons.
Participer à la Discussion
Règles de la communauté
💡 Astuce : Utilisez des emojis depuis votre téléphone ou le module emoji ci-dessous. Cliquez sur GIF pour ajouter un GIF animé. Collez un lien X/Twitter, TikTok ou Instagram pour l'afficher automatiquement.
Se connecter
Commentez avec votre profil, votre photo, et soyez averti des réponses.