Part Six
An Investigation into the Ministry of Finance’s Role in the Controversial Relaunch of the SIGEFP Procurement Process
Introduction
Why was the procurement process for the SIGEFP software relaunched after it had already been awarded to a foreign company with the World Bank’s approval? Why did MEDIABOX, which had initially been eliminated during the technical evaluation, eventually reappear at the center of the process? What role did the Minister of Finance, Dr. Alain NDIKUMANA, play in these developments?
These questions lie at the heart of our investigative series examining the role of the Minister of Finance in these developments and the alleged irregularities surrounding the award of this strategic contract for the management of Burundi’s public finances. The evidence gathered suggests that the SIGEFP case goes far beyond a standard public procurement process, revealing a struggle for influence over the future digital architecture of the Burundian State.
1. A Strategic Reform for Public Financial Management
The Integrated Public Financial Management System (SIGEFP) is one of the most significant modernization projects undertaken as part of the public finance reforms supported by the World Bank. The system is designed to integrate budget preparation, execution, accounting and financial monitoring into a single digital platform.
According to experts consulted during this investigation, the reform extends far beyond the computerization of administrative procedures. It fundamentally reshapes the distribution of budgetary authority between the Ministry of Finance, other government ministries and provincial administrations.
Under the new budgetary framework, each ministry, as well as each of Burundi’s five provinces, would enjoy greater autonomy in managing its financial resources. The Ministry of Finance would primarily retain responsibilities related to overall coordination, financial oversight and revenue collection.
As a result, control over the technical development of the SIGEFP system represents not only a technological issue but also a major political and administrative stake.
2. The Transfer of the Digital Economy Directorate to the Ministry of Finance
Before 2025, the Directorate of the Digital Economy operated under the Ministry of Communication. Digital transformation projects and strategic government software procurement were traditionally managed by that ministry.
At the time, Dr. Alain NDIKUMANA headed the Bureau of Strategic Development Studies (BESD) within the Presidency of the Republic. He had established himself as one of the government’s most influential experts on economic development and public sector reforms.
According to several sources familiar with the matter, Dr. NDIKUMANA believed that the success of the government’s development agenda largely depended on effective control over the State’s financial management instruments. It was within this context that preparations were allegedly made to transfer the Directorate of the Digital Economy from the Ministry of Communication to the Ministry of Finance.
The reorganization took place shortly before Dr. NDIKUMANA was appointed Minister of Finance in August 2025. Officially, the transfer could be presented as an administrative measure aimed at aligning digital transformation projects with ongoing public finance reforms. Nevertheless, the decision generated considerable confusion and concern within the Ministry of Communication.
According to information gathered during this investigation, the late Gabby BUGAGA, then Minister of Communication, repeatedly sought to have the Directorate returned to his ministry. The World Bank, the principal technical and financial partner supporting the digital sector, also reportedly questioned the reasons behind the transfer.
At this stage of the investigation, no evidence establishes any connection between Gabby BUGAGA’s death and this institutional dispute. It remains noteworthy, however, that the issue generated significant tensions within the government administration.
3. A Contract That Had Already Been Awarded
By the time Dr. Alain NDIKUMANA assumed office as Minister of Finance, the SIGEFP procurement process appeared to have reached its conclusion. The Tunisian company SIGA had already been declared the successful bidder following the international tender.
The procurement process had advanced through all the major stages:
-
The World Bank had issued its official No Objection Letter, validating the procurement process.
-
The PAFEN project had sent three invitation letters in preparation for the signing of the contract.
-
The selected company was preparing to begin implementation.
At that stage, MEDIABOX had already been eliminated during the technical evaluation and was no longer considered a potential contractor.
Everything suggested that the procurement process had been completed and that the contract would soon be signed.
However, events would take an unexpected turn.
4. The Unexpected Cancellation of the Procurement Process
The situation took a dramatic turn when, just two days before the contract was due to be finalized, the three invitation letters were cancelled by Bienvenu IRAKOZE, the PAFEN Project Coordinator. This decision effectively suspended the procurement process and paved the way for a complete relaunch of the tender.
According to several sources interviewed during this investigation, the decision to reopen the procurement process was reportedly justified to the World Bank on the grounds that it had been ordered by the country’s highest authorities.
However, information gathered by our investigation suggests that no formal directive was issued by either President Évariste NDAYISHIMIYE or Prime Minister Nestor NTAHONTUYE instructing that the contract, which had already been awarded to SIGA, be cancelled.
On this basis, a new international tender was launched in May 2026, effectively reopening a procurement process that had appeared to be fully completed.
5. The Controversial Appointment of Odely NDIHO
At the same time as the procurement process was being relaunched, another development attracted the attention of observers: the appointment of Engineer Odely NDIHO, then an executive at MEDIABOX, as Director of the Digital Economy Directorate.
The appointment immediately raised questions about a possible conflict of interest. Several specialists interviewed during this investigation expressed surprise that an executive from a company competing for a public contract had been appointed to lead the very department responsible for overseeing such procurement processes.
Shortly after his appointment, the Tunisian company SIGA was ultimately removed from the procurement process, while the tender was reopened, allowing MEDIABOX to return to the competition despite its earlier elimination during the technical evaluation.
The World Bank eventually opposed this course of action, concluding that the conditions required for a transparent and regular procurement process had not been met.
6. The Relationship Between the Minister and MEDIABOX
One of the central questions examined in this investigation concerns the nature of the relationship between Dr. Alain NDIKUMANA, Burundi’s Minister of Finance, and Donatien NDAYISHIMIYE, Managing Director of MEDIABOX.
Several elements raise legitimate questions, including:
-
the apparent determination to bring MEDIABOX back into the procurement process despite its initial technical elimination;
-
the earlier transfer of the Digital Economy Directorate to the Ministry of Finance;
-
the appointment of a former MEDIABOX executive to lead the Directorate responsible for digital economy projects;
-
the decision to relaunch a procurement process that had already been validated by the project’s principal financial partner, the World Bank.
At this stage, these elements raise important questions but do not, on their own, establish evidence of wrongdoing or legal liability.
7. The Hypotheses Examined by Experts
Experts in public financial management information systems consulted during this investigation have outlined several hypotheses that may help explain why control over the development of the SIGEFP software could represent a strategic advantage.
a) Modifying Budgetary Functions
According to these specialists, controlling the software’s development could theoretically make it possible to alter certain budgetary functions, particularly those relating to the financial autonomy of ministries and provincial administrations.
Such modifications would be considerably more difficult if the system were developed and maintained by an independent international company operating under strict external oversight.
b) Risks of Payment Manipulation
Some experts also point to the general risks associated with poorly secured financial management systems, including the possibility of duplicated payments, unauthorized alterations to budgetary data, or the execution of unauthorized financial transactions.
c) Hidden Software Scripts
Other specialists refer to the theoretical possibility of introducing hidden software scripts capable of executing financial operations without the knowledge of ordinary system users.
It is important to emphasize that our investigation has not established that any such mechanisms were actually implemented within the SIGEFP project. These scenarios are presented solely as potential risks identified by specialists in order to illustrate the importance of maintaining full transparency and robust oversight over the development of a national public financial management system.
8. A Central Question: Why Was SIGA Removed?
Based on the facts established thus far, one fundamental question remains:
Why was a contract that had already been awarded with the approval of the World Bank ultimately reopened?
The sequence of events appears particularly striking:
-
SIGA wins the international tender.
-
The World Bank issues its No Objection Letter.
-
The invitation letters for contract signature are cancelled.
-
The procurement process is relaunched.
-
A former MEDIABOX executive is appointed to head the Digital Economy Directorate.
-
MEDIABOX returns to the competition.
-
The World Bank ultimately rejects the revised procurement process.
Viewed individually, each of these developments could potentially be explained by administrative considerations. Viewed together, however, they raise significant questions regarding the transparency and integrity of the decision-making process.
Provisional Conclusion
The evidence gathered during this investigation highlights a series of administrative and political decisions that fundamentally altered the course of the SIGEFP procurement process.
The transfer of the Digital Economy Directorate to the Ministry of Finance, the unexpected cancellation of a procurement procedure that had already received the World Bank’s approval, the appointment of a former MEDIABOX executive to a strategic government position, and the subsequent attempt to relaunch the procurement process in favor of a company that had previously been eliminated all warrant further explanation from the authorities involved.
Ultimately, the central issue extends beyond this single procurement case. It concerns the governance of Burundi’s digital public finance reforms and whether a project of such strategic importance was conducted in accordance with the principles of transparency, impartiality and sound public financial management.
Our investigation will continue as we examine additional documents, interview new sources and seek to clarify the responsibilities of the various actors involved in this matter of significant public interest.