A major construction industry leader in Trinidad and Tobago has leveled serious allegations of improper procurement practices against the state-run Housing Development Corporation (HDC), claiming his firm was secretly blocked from competing for 11 contracts under a suspended $3.4 billion national housing development initiative.
Emile Elias, executive chairman of NH International (Caribbean) Ltd (NH), the country’s largest local housing contractor, told local media outlet the Express that his firm was unfairly excluded from the bidding process entirely, rather than being rejected after a standard competitive tender review. In response to the exclusion, NH filed a formal challenge with the Office of Procurement Regulation (OPR) on April 21 this year, seeking an independent review of the HDC’s April 8 award notice for the 11 project contracts.
Three business days after NH submitted its application, the OPR’s three-person review panel—led by chair Rev Joy Abdul-Mohan with members Susan Torry and Joy Joseph-Lara—dismissed the challenge without holding an oral hearing. The panel cited NH’s failure to meet procedural requirements outlined in Section 50(20)(a) of the 2015 Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Property Act (as amended) and Regulation 4(b) of the 2021 Challenge Proceedings Regulations. The core reasoning for the dismissal was that the application was submitted after the statutory deadline for challenges to pre-qualification or preselection decisions by state procuring entities.
Elias pushed back against this ruling, noting that the OPR’s decision relies on a fundamental misreading of his firm’s challenge. Six days after the dismissal, NH sent a follow-up letter to the OPR asking for procedural clarification and highlighting what the firm calls the regulator’s error in the dismissal.
In its correspondence with the OPR, NH outlined that the only pre-qualification notice published connected to the program was released by an HDC subsidiary in the Sunday Express on July 20, 2025. That notice was explicitly marked for internal use only, and was not tied to any specific housing project under the $3.4 billion program. Per Trinidad and Tobago’s public procurement law, this notice did not qualify as an official pre-qualification invitation for the current contracts, so NH never launched a challenge to it—a fact the firm clearly stated in all 11 of its review applications, noting that the pre-qualification challenge section of the application forms was not applicable to its case.
Elias explained, “When we challenged, we did not challenge on the basis that we had a pre-qualification for the project and our pre-qualification was not accepted. We did not challenge that because there was no pre-qualification for any project as defined under the act.”
Instead of challenging a pre-qualification outcome, NH’s core complaint centers on the HDC’s refusal to run an open, competitive bidding process for the contracts, and alleged breaches of statutory requirements for transparency, non-discrimination, equity and fairness in public procurement. Elias emphasized that NH and the general public had no advance knowledge that procurement for these projects was underway until the HDC published its formal award notice on April 8, 2026. “There was simply no invitation for pre-qualification issued by the HDC in relation to the projects, and NH, like the wider public, only became aware that procurement proceedings were afoot in relation to these projects when it had sight of the notice,” the firm’s letter to the OPR reads. “NH could not, therefore, challenge something that it knew nothing about.”
As the head of the country’s largest housing contractor, Elias called the exclusion baffling. “How could you invite tenders and somehow contrive not to even invite NH? Remember, we did not tender and say, ‘Look, our price was higher and we did not get the job.’ Nothing like that. We were not allowed to tender. We were secretly disbarred, and all of this, I am sure, will come out in the OPR investigation.”
In a surprising move, Elias confirmed that NH has no plans to pursue immediate judicial action over the dismissal, instead placing full confidence in the OPR to conduct a transparent and thorough investigation into the allegations. “We will permit the OPR to complete its investigations without additional court proceedings acting as a kind of distraction. The big point is this country is relying on the OPR to prevent the abuses of the past, and these abuses took place in all governments. OPR is our best chance of stopping all of this from happening, hence my unwavering support, as well as that of the Joint Consultative Council (JCC),” he said.
Elias also raised additional red flags about the qualifications of some of the firms that were awarded contracts under the program. He noted that multiple awardees are trucking companies and small hardware retailers with no prior experience constructing residential housing, despite the large size and technical demands of the $3.4 billion program. A search of the national companies registry revealed that some firms awarded multi-million-dollar contracts hold only $2 in total share equity, split between two $1 shares, a fact Elias says warrants further scrutiny from regulators.
The $3.4 billion housing program was suspended by the HDC earlier this year at the OPR’s instruction, following a whistleblower submission that raised concerns about irregularities in the public-private partnership procurement process. Last weekend, the Sunday Express published additional allegations of potential collusion between two winning contractors and a senior HDC official connected to two of the 11 awarded contracts.
When contacted for comment on the latest allegations, HDC chairman Feeroz Khan declined to speak on the record. “Given that the matters relating to the procurement process in question are currently engaging the attention of the Office of the Procurement Regulation, senior counsel has advised that the matter is sub judice, and hence it would be improper to comment on same,” he said.