The State Audit Office has finished its review of public procurement at "Power Plants of North Macedonia" and the finding is what every taxpayer suspected but few could prove: millions of euros paid for equipment that never started working.

The audit covered 27 procedures from 2022, 2023 and 2024, carried out in 2024. The total value of obligations entered into that year comes to 143.6 million euros. The auditors established material non-compliance of the planning, the procedures and the implementation with regulations, plans and contracts.

Three procurements, three ways to spend money with nothing to show

A gas engine for around 2.48 million euros. It was never put into operation. The preconditions for using it were missing - which means somebody bought an engine without checking where and how it would run.

An additive for around 2.29 million euros. Most of it went unused and its shelf life ran out. So it was not lost, not stolen - it expired. It sat in a warehouse until time made it worthless.

Relocation of equipment for around 1.72 million euros. The equipment was moved and then never put into use.

Together, that is close to 6.5 million euros for three items that produced not a single kilowatt-hour.

Planning that changes 19 times

The audit found 19 amendments to the annual public procurement plan in the course of 2024 alone. That is more than one amendment a month. When a plan changes at that frequency, it stops being a plan and becomes a record of decisions taken on the move.

The auditors also found insufficient market research, the legal value threshold for procurement without a procedure exceeded, and technical specifications which, according to the audit office, may point to a specific design, brand or authorised manufacturer. That last one is the classic mechanism by which a tender is formally open while being written, in practice, for a single bidder.

And the figure that completes the picture: six economic operators accounted for more than 70 percent of the total value of the contracts signed.

An audit finding is not a verdict - but it is a foundation

It should be said plainly: the audit office's finding does not establish criminal guilt. It establishes that money was spent contrary to regulations and without result. What happens with that depends on institutions which have not so far been known for their speed in cases like this.

The questions are simple, and each of them has a specific signature behind it. Who justified the need for the gas engine? Who confirmed that the conditions for using it existed? Who accepted delivery of the additive and approved the payment? And what was done once it became clear the purchase was not serving its purpose?

ESM is a state-owned company. Its purchases are paid for out of bills that every household settles. When an additive worth 2.29 million euros expires in a warehouse, that is not a technical error - it is a cost somebody has already paid.