Buġibba fast ferry tender hits legal snag over alleged bias

Plans for a new fast ferry service between Sliema, Buġibba and Gozo have hit a wall after one of the bidders filed a legal challenge arguing the tender’s deadlines and conditions breached EU rules and favoured incumbents.

Supreme Travel filed a legal challenge to the government’s multi-million tender claiming the process had been designed to favour incumbent operators and effectively shut out newcomers.

In its objection, lodged with the Public Contracts Review Board, Supreme Travel argued that the tender process was filled with unlawful and disproportionate requirements that breached EU and Maltese procurement rules.

The company claimed that the tight 21-day submission deadline, the technical requirements privileging operators already running high-speed craft, and the short 21-day window to launch the service had distorted the process in favour of established players while discouraging genuine competition.

Supreme Travel said the 21-day submission period fell below the 30-day minimum established at law and failed to account for the complexity of the service being tendered. It insisted that its longstanding experience operating passenger ferries on the same route had been dismissed because it did not use the high-speed or dynamically supported craft specifically demanded by the tender.

It described this as a disguised barrier to entry that ran counter to the EU principle of proportionality and effectively ensured only incumbent operators could compete.

The company also objected to the tender’s suitability criteria, arguing that requiring operators to hold Maltese licences before even being awarded the contract contradicted EU rules on maritime cabotage, which guarantee all EU shipowners the freedom to provide domestic services in any Member State.

It further described the service launch requirement, obliging the successful bidder to commence operations within 21 days of contract signature, as unreasonable and discriminatory because it favoured operators who already had ships and crews stationed in Malta.

In its reply, the Transport Ministry dismissed the claims as unfounded and accused Supreme Travel of raising objections tactically after failing to seek clarifications during the tendering stage, when concerns could have been addressed promptly.

On the issue of the submission deadline, the ministry acknowledged that the law established a 30-day minimum, reduced to 25 days when submissions were electronic, but insisted that the 21-day timeframe had been justified by the urgency of launching the service and the relatively straightforward requirements.

It argued that no other bidders had objected or requested an extension at the time and stressed that it was nevertheless willing to extend the deadline if ordered by the review board, purely as a courtesy.

The ministry rejected the suggestion that the suitability criteria contravened EU cabotage rules, insisting that all operators, Maltese or foreign, were required to comply with national safety and certification laws before operating commercial services in Maltese waters.

It maintained that the requirement merely ensured that any successful bidder would already be in a position to operate lawfully and safely and did not constitute protectionism or a barrier to foreign competitors.

On the most contested points—the technical requirements—the ministry was equally defiant. It said the experience of operating high-speed or dynamically supported craft, and the requirement for at least 10,000 passenger trips in the past five years, were entirely proportionate and directly linked to the service’s objectives.

The ministry said these conditions were standard practice to ensure that the successful bidder would be capable and reliable, and were moderate enough to allow a wide range of operators to compete while guaranteeing a minimum level of competence.

As for the 21-day service start condition, the ministry maintained that the deadline was reasonable given the public interest in having the ferry service begin as soon as possible and that all bidders, including newcomers, faced the same requirement. It dismissed the idea that it amounted to discrimination, saying it was not the contracting authority’s role to compensate for the commercial decisions or preparedness of individual bidders.

The ministry concluded that the tender process had been conducted in full compliance with the law and procurement principles, treating all bidders equally and transparently while ensuring value for the public.

It also pointed out that the objections could have been raised during the clarification stage and accused Supreme of escalating the matter unnecessarily.

The case is set to proceed before the Public Contracts Review Board, which was expected to hear oral submissions from both sides and summon witnesses, including officials from the European Commission’s Malta office and rival operators.

The outcome could delay the launch of the new Buġibba fast ferry service, which has been billed as a major step forward for Malta’s coastal transport network.

The ministry nevertheless reiterated its willingness to adjust minor aspects of the process if directed by the board, while denying any breach of law or procurement principles.

Lawyer Reuben Farrugia appeared for Supreme Travel.