Solomon Islands Games audit finds SBD128m in deals without budget proof

Auditors examining Solomon Islands' 2023 Pacific Games said approved budgets were not supplied for five procurement samples worth SBD127.96 million, leaving them unable to establish whether those purchases had been planned and controlled against authorized amounts.

The finding appears in the Office of the Auditor General's special procurement report, signed on 21 August 2026 and published on its website in September. The review examined 16 procurements worth SBD222.40 million, selected from SBD502.16 million in purchase orders processed when the audit began. The five transactions represented 57.5% of the sample's monetary value, not 57.5% of all Games spending. A missing approved budget in the audit file is not proof that the full contract value was lost, stolen or paid unlawfully.

Among the five cases without approved budgets supplied were the design and construction of the Solomon Islands Football Federation academy, valued at approximately SBD84.29 million, and a SBD34 million property purchase for a planned sports legacy building. The auditor also recorded a toilet-paper procurement initially linked to a SBD300,000 budget despite a proposed contract amount of SBD6.18 million. The latter amount was later reduced to SBD1.89 million, still above the stated budget. These figures are contract or procurement amounts, not confirmed losses.

What the audit found beyond missing budgets

The auditor identified five bid waivers totalling SBD29.61 million, including catering, septic-waste services, drainage and toilet-paper supply. It questioned whether the legal conditions for bypassing competition were properly satisfied in each case. The audit also described inconsistent tender evaluation, weak supplier due diligence and conflict-of-interest safeguards, and incomplete customs-exemption records. Those findings indicate control failures and possible risks; the public report does not establish criminal fraud by each supplier or official.

The report says the successful football-academy contractor's SBD84.3 million revised price was SBD9.66 million above the lowest conforming tender, despite an alternative supplier having stronger technical scores. This is an audit criticism of the documented evaluation and award process, not proof that the SBD9.66 million difference was a cash loss. The audit also said the successful contractor had been deregistered before and during the contract period; company-specific registry status and any later reinstatement require independent follow-up.

The auditor drew attention to a separate High Court ruling in civil case 628 of 2025. According to the court declarations summarized by the government and auditor, expenditure from the Sports Solomon Fund required lawful financial warrants, and the National Hosting Authority's blanket waiver of competitive tendering exceeded its statutory powers. That is a finding about the authority's spending and procurement framework, not a criminal conviction of individual officials or contractors.

The hosting authority's response

In a statement published on 3 September, the National Hosting Authority acknowledged the audit and accepted the court's determinations, including that the blanket-waiver policy exceeded its lawful authority. It said the board had believed the measures were lawful and necessary under intense deadlines to deliver the Games, and it pointed to the sporting venues and infrastructure completed.

The authority also argued that financial-statement audits delivered sooner could have helped officials correct weaknesses while the Games organizing bodies were still operating. It pledged to work with the Ministry of Finance and Treasury on the warrant requirements and with auditors on outstanding financial statements. Its statement said the court had not made findings of individual wrongdoing.

The audit itself includes the authority's responses and says it agreed to investigate possible customs leakages, while contesting or minimizing several other recommendations. The differences between the audit and the authority should be tested against original contract files, budget approvals, waiver decisions and subsequent corrective measures rather than resolved by assertion.

What remains open

The public report says details of individual exceptions were withheld from the published summary and supplied to designated government authorities, in part to protect possible investigations. As of the documents reviewed for this article, the newsroom has not independently established the later status of any police referral, supplier-specific prosecution, recovery or corrected budget authorization.

The next public-interest questions are which budget approvals and contract variations can now be produced, whether lawful financial warrants have been issued for special funds, what the completed financial-statement audit establishes, and whether the authorities have implemented the eleven audit recommendations. Any future report should distinguish an official audit criticism, a court's legal declaration and a proven criminal offense.