The audit report into Maldives Ports Limited's (MPL) finances found MVR 86 million worth of goods were procured without going through a bidding process.

According to the audit report of MPL's transaction in 2018, the previous government had allowed goods and services to be procured forgoing a competitive bidding process between the years of 2015-2017. The report revealed that a total of MVR 86 million worth of goods and services were bought from various third parties, with separate quotations issued for each one.

Likewise, MVR 69.2 million worth of goods and services were contracted from parties directly selected by the company's board of directors.

The report also found that MPL had not been compensated for the purchase of a landing craft. The advance of USD214،500 (two hundred and fourteen thousand five hundred) still hasn't been returned to the company.

Furthermore, the report found transactions for the lease rights of two pieces of land in Thilafushi island for a total of MVR 14.9 million from two private companies. This includes a transaction with Vimla Construction for a 20,000 acre (twenty-thousand) piece of land procured for MVR7.3 million alongside a 12,000 acre (twelve-thousand) piece of land procured for MVR 7.6 million from Sir Trading Company.

The Auditor-General has recommended filing a complaint with the Anti-Corruption Commission of the Maldives (ACC), as the report found no proper documentation detailing the use of the land.

Another highlight of the report includes an engine-less, 95-foot long, wooden cargo boat bought in 2016 for MVR6.9 million. The report states that the boat has been sitting idle for the past two years.

Moreover, while the meeting minutes of the board of directors showed that the vessel was bought after the board members held a discussion and chose the cheapest out of three quotations presented, the report found that these quotations were presented without issuing a public announcement or competitive bidding process.

Based on the lack of documents, the report concluded that the procurement of the vessel could be deemed as providing undue gain for a third party, and recommended forwarding the case to the ACC for inquiry.