RENUKA RAI | Thimphu
The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) of the Parliament of Bhutan has raised serious concern over what it describes as a “systemic failure” in engineering and procurement capacity within government agencies, linking it directly to recurring financial irregularities in public infrastructure projects.
The issue has been highlighted in the PAC’s report to the Fifth Session of the Fourth Parliament, based on findings from the Annual Audit Report (AAR) 2024–2025 compiled by the Royal Audit Authority (RAA) on 12 June in the joint sitting of the Parliament.
The Public Accounts Committee Chairman and National Council Member from Pemagatshel Dr. Jamyang Namgyel said the problem is no longer limited to individual project mistakes but reflects a structural weakness in how public works are planned, supervised, and executed.
According to the report, procurement of works alone accounted for 421 audit observations amounting to Nu 996.093 million, with Nu 291.909 million still unresolved as of March 31, 2026. The Committee notes that these repeated irregularities point to deeper capacity constraints rather than isolated administrative lapses.
The PAC observes that one of the main causes is the shortage of experienced technical personnel within engineering and architectural services. It highlights that junior engineers are frequently assigned to manage large and complex infrastructure projects without adequate supervision or technical support, resulting in poor planning, weak design quality, and implementation delays.
In several cases reviewed by the Committee, engineers with limited field experience were responsible for overseeing multi-million-ngultrum projects, raising concerns about whether assigned responsibilities match professional capacity. The report states that such situations contribute to cost overruns, substandard construction outcomes, and recurring audit objections year after year.
The Committee further points to a mismatch between government supervisory capacity and contractor expertise. While contractors often deploy highly experienced engineers on project sites, government monitoring teams are frequently led by relatively junior officials, weakening the state’s ability to enforce contract standards and quality compliance.
The PAC also highlights broader structural constraints in the engineering workforce. Based on Civil Service Statistics 2025, the report notes that out of 1,005 personnel in engineering services, only 432 are in the professional category. A significant proportion of these professionals are in lower and mid-level positions with limited years of experience. In architectural services, only 8 out of 40 professionals are in senior positions, while urban planning and survey engineering units remain understaffed relative to national demand.
The Committee warns that this shortage of senior technical expertise is particularly concerning given the scale of infrastructure development underway across the country. It notes that the current system places excessive responsibility on junior officers without sufficient mentoring or technical oversight, which directly affects the quality and sustainability of public infrastructure.
The report states that this imbalance is now reflected in audit findings across multiple agencies, indicating that technical capacity gaps are a consistent underlying factor in financial irregularities. It adds that the issue is not only about numbers but also about the distribution and experience level of staff deployed in critical infrastructure roles.
Beyond staffing shortages, the PAC also points to weaknesses in institutional design and project allocation. It notes that engineers are often handling multiple high-value projects simultaneously, reducing their ability to provide detailed attention to design, estimation, and supervision. This, the Committee says, has led to weak technical documentation and insufficient site monitoring in several cases.
The PAC concludes that without urgent reform in how technical human resources are deployed and supported, procurement irregularities in public works are likely to persist. It recommends rationalizing workloads, improving supervision structures, and strengthening technical capacity across engineering and architectural services as a matter of priority.
The Committee further calls for a long-term strategy to build a stronger pool of experienced engineers and architects within the civil service, warning that current capacity gaps risk undermining both financial accountability and infrastructure quality in the long run.
While the report acknowledges that the government has introduced various procurement reforms, including revised evaluation systems and monitoring mechanisms, it stresses that these measures alone will not be sufficient unless the underlying human resource constraints are addressed.
The PAC’s findings suggest that improving procurement outcomes will require not only regulatory changes but also a fundamental restructuring of technical capacity within the public sector, particularly in infrastructure-heavy agencies.
