international journal of government · pdf file©2001 international journal of government...

©2001 International Journal of Government Auditing, Inc.

The International Journal of Government Auditing is published quar-terly (January, April, July, October) in Arabic, English, French, Ger-man, and Spanish editions on behalf of INTOSAI (InternationalOrganization of Supreme Audit Institutions). The Journal, whichis the official organ of INTOSAI, is dedicated to the advancement ofgovernment auditing procedures and techniques. Opinions and be-liefs expressed are those of editors or individual contributors and donot necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Organization.

The editors invite submissions of articles, special reports , and newsitems, which should be sent to the editorial offices at U.S. GeneralAccounting Office, Room 7806, 441 G Street, NW, Washington, D.C.20548, U.S.A. (Phone: 202-512-4707. Facsimile:202-512-4021.E-Mail: <[email protected]>).

Given the Journal’s use as a teaching tool, articles most likely to beaccepted are those which deal with pragmatic aspects of public sec-tor auditing. These include case studies, ideas on new audit method-ologies or details on audit training programs. Articles that deal pri-marily with theory would not be appropriate.

The Journal is distributed to the heads of all Supreme Audit Institu-tions throughout the world who participate in the work of INTOSAI.Others may subscribe for US$5 per year. Checks and correspon-dence for all editions should be mailed to the Journal’s administra-tion office, P.O. Box 50009,Washington, D.C. 20004, U.S.A.

Articles in the Journal are indexed in the Accountants’ Index pub-lished by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants andincluded in Management Contents. Selected articles are included inabstracts published by Anbar Management Services, Wembley, En-gland, and University Microfilms International, Ann Arbor, Michi-gan, U.S.A.

InternationalJournal

ofGovernment

AuditingApril 2001—Vol. 28, No. 2

Board of EditorsFranz Fiedler, President, Court of Audit, AustriaSheila Fraser, Interim Auditor General, CanadaMohamed Raouf Najar, Premier President, Court of Accounts, TunisiaDavid M. Walker, Comptroller General, United StatesClodosbaldo Russian Uzcategui, Comptroller General, Venezuela

PresidentLinda L. Weeks (U.S.A.)

EditorDonald R. Drach (U.S.A.)

Assistant EditorLinda J. Sellevaag (U.S.A.)

Associate EditorsOffice of the Auditor General (Canada)Deepak Anurag (ASOSAI-India)Luseane Sikalu (SPASAI-Tonga)Michael C.G. Paynter (CAROSAI-Trinidad and Tobago)EUROSAI General Secretariat (Spain)Khemais Hosni (Tunisia)Yadira Espinoza Moreno (Venezuela)INTOSAI General Secretariat (Austria)U.S. General Accounting Office (U.S.A.)

Production/AdministrationSebrina Chase (U.S.A.)

FinancesU.S. General Accounting Office (U.S.A.)

Members of the Governing Board of INTOSAIGuillermo Ramirez, President, Court of Accounts, Uruguay, ChairmanJong-Nam Lee, Chairman, Board of Audit and Inspection, Korea,

First Vice-ChairmanTawfik I. Tawfik, State Minister and President, General Audit

Bureau,Saudi Arabia, Second Vice-ChairmanFranz Fiedler, President, Court of Audit, Austria, Secretary GeneralArah Armstrong, Director of Audit, Antigua and BarbudaIram Saraiva, Minister-President, Court of Accounts, BrazilLucy Gwanmesia, Minister Delegate, CameroonSheila Fraser, Interim Auditor General, CanadaMohamed Gawdat Ahmed El-Malt, President, Central Auditing

Organization, EgyptHedda Von Wedel, President, Court of Audit, GermanyV. K. Shunglu, Comptroller and Auditor General, IndiaAbdessadeq El Glaoui, President, Court of Accounts, MoroccoBjarne Mork Eidem, Auditor General, NorwayCarmen Higaonna de Guerra, Contralor General, PeruAlfredo Jose de Sousa, President, Court of Accounts, PortugalPohiva Tui’i’onetoa, Auditor General, TongaDavid M. Walker, Comptroller General, United States

Contents

1

3

6

10

14

16

17

20

Editorial

News in Brief

Integral Auditing

Adjusting External Audits

Audit Profile: Nigeria

Reports in Print

Inside INTOSAI

Subscription Form

International Journal of Government Auditing�April 20011

Planning for the XVII INTOSAICongressBy Jong-Nam Lee, Chairman of the Board of Audit and Inspection, Korea

Next, the Committee on Internal Control Standards,chaired by the Hungarian SAI, reported on the outcome of theSecond International Conference on Internal Control held inMay 2000.

The Public Debt Committee, chaired by Mexico, reportedon its various activities including publication of its twoguidelines, �Guidelines for the Planning and Execution of PublicDebt Audits� and �Guidelines for Public Debt Reporting.�

The Committee on EDP, chaired by the Indian SAI,reported on its projects related to IT audits and asked SAIswith experience in dealing with government regulation for theirassistance.

The Working Group on Environmental Auditing, chairedby the SAI of the Netherlands, reported that all regions havedecided to organize their own Working Groups; they alsoreported on the adoption of the final version of the booklet�Guidance on Conducting Audits of Activities with anEnvironmental Prospective.�

The Working Group on Privatization, chaired by the UK,reported on the use of the privatization guidelines.

Finally, the Working Group on Program Evaluation,chaired by France, reported that it will focus on, among others,setting up the Working Group�s website and on developing areport for submission to the 17th INCOSAI.

The INTOSAI Congress has always inspired the supremeaudit institutions of all member countries since ourorganization�s first meeting took place in Havana, Cuba, in1953. Since that time, each Congress has provided a newguiding light to audit directions and technologies for theimprovement and enhancement of audit work.

In this respect, the Board of Audit and Inspection of Koreais very proud to host the first INTOSAI Congress in the newmillennium. We believe that this Congress is timely in thatreform in the government sector has been actively pursued allover the world. The themes of the 2001 Congress are:

Theme I: The Audit of International and SupranationalInstitutions by SAIs.

Theme II: The Contribution of SAIs to Administrative andGovernment Reforms.

Subtheme IIA: The Role of SAIs in Planning andImplementing Administrative and Government Reforms.

Mr. Jong-Nam Lee

#1

Spring seems to be justaround the corner and thewarm weather will certainlyprovide energy and inspirationto the Secretariat of the 17thINTOSAI Congress as weprepare for the congress to beremembered as one of the mostmemorable ever.

It only seems yesterdaythat the 47th INTOSAIGoverning Board took place,which all of the Board of Auditand Inspection (BAI) staffconsidered as the testingground for the Congress inOctober 2001. We welcomed 24 Board member countries andobservers to the meeting, which was held successfully, and wewere pleased to receive very positive feedback from theparticipants.

The meeting included active discussions on the reportsby INTOSAI�s eight standing committees and working groupsand other INTOSAI programs. Because of the importance oftheir work, and because they will also report at the Congress inOctober, I would like to share the following highlights of theirreports.

First, IDI submitted a strategic plan for the period 2001-2006 for future IDI training programs and activities. The planwas based on the results of the survey conducted by the IDI.In January 2001, the SAI of Norway assumed responsibility ofthe IDI secretariat from the SAI of Canada.

The Auditing Standards Committee reported that theiractivities will focus on two areas: first, restructuring of theAuditing Standards, and second, developing guidance on theimplementation of the auditing standards. Chaired by Sweden,the committee is planning to report the final version of theINTOSAI Auditing Standards for approval at the 2001Congress.

The Accounting Standards Committee, chaired by theUSA, reported on the drafting of �Accounting StandardsFramework Implementation Guide for SAIs ManagementDiscussion and Analysis of Financial, Performance andGovernance Information� by the year 2001.


Subtheme IIB: The Role of SAIs in AuditingAdministrative and Government Reforms.

Theme I will discuss creating and developing well-organized and independent audit systems in international andsupranational institutions. Audit of international andsupranational institutions has been of interest to INTOSAImembers for more than the past forty years since it wasdiscussed at the second congress in Belgium in 1956. It isexpected that the discussions at the 17th INCOSAI willencourage international and supranational institutions toimprove and modernize their budgeting, accounting andreporting system and to enhance their efficiency, effectivenessand economy.

Theme II will deal with SAIs� roles in administrative andgovernment reforms. Rapidly changing environment andcitizens� calls for a small but effective government has causeda number of countries to improve the quality of public servicethrough reform in the public sector. Theme II discussions willexplore the roles of SAIs in the reform process and how to

audit reform measures. It is expected that INTOSAI memberinstitutions will be able to apply Theme II recommendationsresulting from the 17th INCOSAI to making public service better.

INTOSAI member countries were invited to preparecountry papers and 47 member SAIs submitted country papersfor Theme I, while 50 countries submitted papers for subthemeIIA, and 55 countries submitted papers for subtheme IIB.

Now I would like to discuss in more detail the progressmade so far by the Secretariat as we prepare for the 17th

INCOSAI. The Congress will be held at the COEX (http://www.coex.co.kr) and the COEX Intercontinental Hotel (http://seoul.interconti.com/coeic_kr) where the third ASEM (Asia-Europe Meeting) was held in 2000. As for lodging, theSecretariat has reserved rooms in several hotels to provide theparticipants a variety of choices. In April, the official homepagefor the Congress will be opened. It is our hope that thehomepage will help INTOSAI member countries get access toa variety of information they need in relation to the INTOSAICongress, including registration, theme papers, country papersand comparative review papers so they can prepare for theCongress discussions. In addition, the homepage will allowconvenient one-step on-line registration.

BAI�s hosting of the first Congress in the new millenniumhas captured the interest of the public and the media as well.Since Korea hosted the 47th INTOSAI Governing Board meetingin May last year, the press has remained interested in theprogress made. The Korea Herald, one of the leading Englishdaily newspapers in Korea, published a three-page featuresection on the 17th INTOSAI Congress.

In closing, I would like to express my special thanks to allof those who have provided unlimited support as we arepreparing for the Congress and would like to ask for continuousassistance because all of your ideas and opinions are veryvaluable to us.

Wishing you and your institution the best of health andsuccess, I look forward to meeting all of you in October inSeoul! �

View of the Convention and Exhibitiion Complex in Seoul, venue ofthe XVII INCOSAI. Pictured here are the Convention and ExhibitionCenter, hotels, and World Trade Center.

#2

For further information about the 2001 Congress, pleasecontact the XVII INCOSAI Secretariat, Board of Audit andInspection, #25-23 Samchung-dong, Chongro-ku, Seoul 110-706, Korea (tel: ++82-2-7219-290; fax: ++ 82-2-7219-297,276;and e-mail: [email protected]).


News in Brief

Bangladesh

International Conference onImproving Oversight Functions

The Office of the Comptroller andAuditor General of Bangladesh incooperation with UNDP and the WorldBank hosted an International Conferencetitled �Improving Oversight Functions:Challenges in the New Millennium�during September 10-12, 2000, in Dhaka.The conference provided an importantforum for discussion, exchange of ideas,and sharing of experiences on the keyissues involved in improving financialoversight functions. The HonorablePresident of the People�s Republic ofBangladesh, Justice ShahabuddinAhmed inaugurated the conference,which was also graced by the HonorableFinance Minister Mr. Shah AMS Kibria.Messages from Honorable PrimeMinister and Speaker were also receivedand published in various Nationaldailies.

Parliamentarians, heads of SAIs,professionals and policy makers,including distinguished delegates from20 countries spanning five continents,

attended the conference. Their activeparticipation was compelling testimonyto the importance and the timeliness ofthis conference. The importance of thetopic was also reflected in the positiveand wide coverage received from thenational media.

In addition to the inaugural andconcluding sessions, three substantivebusiness sessions were held on�Parliamentary Control of Public Ex-penditure�, �Public Sector Auditing inBangladesh� and �Accountancy Pro-fession in Bangladesh.� Significantcontributions were made by, amongothers, Mr. John G. Williams, MP andChairman, PAC of Canada; Mr. AndrewFeinstein, MP & Deputy Chairperson,Audit Commission, South Africa; Dr.Sario Bundihardjo Joedone, AuditorGeneral of Indonesia & President ofASOSAI; Mr. P. J. Barrett, AuditorGeneral, Australia; Mr. V. K. Shunglu,Comptroller and Auditor General, India;Mr. Bishnu Bahadur K. C., AuditorGeneral, Nepal; Mr. Kunzang Wangdi,Auditor General, Bhutan; Mr. S. C.Mayadunne; Auditor General, Sri Lanka;as well as by senior officials from theSAIs of Canada, China, India, Indonesia,

Kuwait, Korea, Malaysia, theNetherlands, Saudi Arabia, USA,Northern Ireland and officials from theWorld Bank.

Participants were unanimous thatstrong oversight was the key to goodgovernance. The free flow of ideas andexchange of experiences were valuablein helping conference participantsformulate important recommendationsfor improving financial oversightfunctions in Bangladesh. The mainrecommendations of the conferencewere: Attitudes towards the activities ofParliamentary Committees shouldchange; Parliamentary Committeesshould scrutinize the budget before it ispassed; The work of ParliamentaryCommittees should be visible andtransparent to the people; Meetings ofthe PAC should be open to the publicand the media; The accounting and auditfunctions of the C&AG�s office shouldbe separated; The tenure of the CAGshould be increased to a minimum offive years and the constitution amendedaccordingly; Need for amendments tothe companies Act, SEC Rules, BankingAct, Insurance Act and by-laws ofprofessionals institutes to make thestandards mandatory on all publiccompanies and large private companies;and, Training and entrance requirementsin the accounting profession should bechanged.

For more information, contact: theOffice of the Comptroller and AuditorGeneral, Audit House, 189, Shahid SyedNacerul Islam Sarani, Dhaka 1000,Bangladesh, E-mail: [email protected].

Hong Kong

Audit Report IssuedThe Director of Audit�s Report

No. 35, which includes the results ofvalue-for-money audits completedbetween March and September 2000,was submitted to the President of theLegislative Council on October 30, 2000,

#3

Distinguished speakers and leaders prepare for a session of the international conference co-sponsored by the SAI and Bangladesh and the UNDP and World Bank.


and was tabled in the Council onNovember 15, 2000. Subsequently, thePublic Accounts Committee (PAC)tabled its report on the Director of Audit�sReport in the Council on February 14,2001.

The Director of Audit�s Reportcontains twelve value-for-money auditstudies, including studies on: (a) theGovernment�s efforts to control floodingin urban areas; (b) Government�s supportand administration of kindergarteneducation; (c) the use of employers�returns and notifications for assessingand collecting salaries tax; (d)interdiction of government officers; (e)Employees Retraining Scheme; and (f)Comprehensive Redevelopment Pro-gram of the Housing Authority. Mostof the recommendations in the Reporthave been accepted by the Governmentand the PAC. Moreover, the studieshave identified some US$70 million ofsavings and benefits to the Governmentof the Hong Kong SpecialAdministrative Region.

The Report�s findings haveprompted improvement measures to betaken by the Government. For example,the study on kindergarten educationrevealed that there was a lack of controlon miscellaneous fees charged bykindergartens. The PAC urged theAdministration to take expeditiousmeasures to strengthen the control onmiscellaneous fees, and to take actionsagainst those kindergartens which failedto comply with the EducationDepartment�s guidelines on the chargingof miscellaneous fees.

For more information about theReport, please visit Audit Commission�sInternet Home Page at http://www.info.gov.hk/aud/ or contact: Director ofAudit, Audit Commission 26/F,Immigration Tower, 7 Gloucester Road,Wanchai, Hong Kong, China, Fax: (852)2824 2087, E-mail: [email protected]. hk.

Ireland

1999 Annual ReportThe Comptroller and Auditor

General presented his Annual Report onthe 1999 accounts of Government to

Parliament in September 2000. TheReport is used by the Parliament�s PublicAccounts Committee as the basis for itsexamination of the heads of publicservice organizations on theirstewardship of public moneys.

The main issues includedshortcomings in the fight against taxevasion; level of overpayments of socialwelfare; poor management of DefenseForces stocks; weaknesses in controlover the cost of a major IT system forthe Police Force; debt collection in theDepartment of Agriculture; inefficienciesin the processing and payment of civilservice pensions; and, effect of delaysin introducing a modern clearing systemfor government cheques.

The complete Report is available onthe office website at http://www.irlgov.ie/audgen or by writing to the office ofthe Comptroller and Auditor General,72076 St. Stephen�s Green, Dublin 2,Ireland.

Malta

Year 2000 ActivitiesThe Auditor General, besides

reporting annually on the workings ofthe National Audit Office reports to theParliament on the accounts ofGovernment Ministries and Departmentsand on Local Government. He may alsoprepare audit reports on other bodiesadministering, using or holding publicfunds.

The mandatory and primaryobjective of the NAO, in terms of theConstitution and the Auditor Generaland National Audit Office Act, is toprovide independent information,assurance and advice to Parliamentabout how Treasury, governmentdepartments and certain non-centralgovernment entities (particularly LocalCouncils) account for and use publicfunds. Another objective, in terms ofthe Act, is to establish whether publicmoneys have been used economically,efficiently and effectively.

The Auditor General submitted his1999 Audit Report to the Speaker of theHouse of Representatives in November2000. The Audit Report included anumber of shortcomings relating to

errors in government salaries andpensions, a substantial increase inarrears of revenue due to government,over-budgeted expenditure by a numberof Local Councils, breach of regulationsrelating to allowances paid to publicofficers traveling abroad, lack of clearlydefined benchmarks and performanceindicators in government Departments,and deficiencies in the control ofgovernment transport.

A number of value for money auditreports were also published during 2000and submitted to the Speaker of theHouse. These included reports on theinternal audit function within gov-ernment ministries, the VAT departmentinspectorate unit, and the generalpractitioners function within healthcenters.

All Reports were automatically alsoreferred to the Public AccountsCommittee (a Committee of the House ofRepresentatives) which reviewed themby holding hearings and summoningwitnesses.

NAO has participated actively inthe international sphere, particularly inINTOSAI, EUROSAI, EU-related andother foreign activities. One NAO officerhas been appointed as the sub-coordinator of SAIs from theMediterranean region on audits andstudies relating to Environmental Audit.Another officer is participating in theWorking Group Meetings for LiaisonOfficers of EU candidate countries. TheOffice is also a member of the INTOSAICommittee on Accounting Standards.Furthermore, the NAO has locally held anumber of meetings with foreign visitorsto exchange views on the National AuditOffice and discuss issues of an auditnature.

In its endeavor to promote andachieve professionalism, the NAOaccomplished an extensive trainingprogram for both its experienced andnew staff during the last part of 1999and into 2000. NAO has furthermorebeen sponsoring those employeeswilling to undertake courses to degree,professional examination and diplomalevels. The Office also participated inseveral local conferences and seminarson varied issues relating to auditing,taxation, IT and EU-related matters.


In the year 2000, the National AuditOffice continued with its recruitmentprocess. Its staff complement practicallydoubled from 30 to 58 within one year.Several of the new recruits possess orare reading for degrees or otherprofessional qualifications in account-ancy or related professions.

During 2000, the IT function at theOffice had to be expanded in order toaccommodate the increase in staff.Existing equipment and software at theOffice were upgraded to latest standards.

An important milestone was thelaunching of an Office Intranet wherebyinformation of a common nature andinterest started being shared by all NAOstaff. The Intranet, which was developedby the IT unit of the Office, is beingupdated and enhanced as an ongoingproject. The launching of an InternetWebsite in the near future is expected tofurther enhance the image of the NAO.

For more information, pleasecontact: National Audit Office, NotreDame Ravelin, Floriana CMR 02, Malta;telephone: +356239659; fax: +356220708;E-mail: [email protected].

Sweden

Annual Report and AccountsIn February, the Swedish National

Audit Office (RRV) submitted its AnnualReport and Accounts to the SwedishGovernment. The publication will betranslated into English and should beavailable upon request by the end ofJune 2001. The RRV has audited theaccounts of some 450 governmentagencies, organizations, foundationsand state owned companies.

Within the area of performance audit,the RRV has primarily prioritized the auditof new forms of operation andderegulated markets. Another focus hasbeen to determine whether thegovernment agencies, within theirrespective areas of responsibility, havemanaged to maintain the state�sresponsibility in accordance with theGovernment and Parliament�s goals anddemands, and the citizens� right to ruleof law as well as efficiency andeffectiveness in government operations.

Good quality in its work is anecessity for the RRV, and it has, duringthe past year, continued its extensiveinvestments in continuous training ofthe staff, in order to maintain a high andeven quality of work in the long run.RRV�s aim is also to secure a stableorganizational capacity. In the FinancialAudit Department, the qualitycertification of government auditors hascontinued. In the year 2000, the RRV hasfinished the measures deemed necessaryfor quality assurance; defined the skillrequirements for financial auditors, andthe definition is the basis of the internaltraining of auditors; and developed testsconducted in cooperation with theSupervisory Board of PublicAccountants.

In the Performance Audit Depart-ment RRV has, during the year 2000,developed and defined the professionalprofile of a performance auditor. We havealso taken measures to further increasethe capacity and skills of ourperformance auditors; by arrangingtraining and seminars as well as byintegrating efforts in the audits, amongother things in the form of projectsupport.

For more information, contact theSwedish National Audit Office, P.O. Box45070, S-104 30 Stockholm, Sweden, E-mail: [email protected], website: http://www.rrv.se.

United States of America

Combined Accountability andPerformance Report ProvidesLook Back, Look Ahead at GAOOperations

Heeding congressional calls forconsolidated information on federalagency performance, GAO this weeksent Congress a streamlined reportencompassing its fiscal year 2000accountability report and performancereport and fiscal year 2002 performanceplan.

In spite of its compact size (41 6x9-inch pages), the performance andaccountability highlights report (GAO-

01-627SP, April 2001) contains a lot ofinformation. It discusses the keymeasures of GAO�s performance duringFY 2000, including US$23 billion inmeasurable financial benefits (a returnof US$61 on every dollar invested inGAO), 788 actions taken to improvegovernment operations or services, 263congressional testimonies, 1,224 newrecommendations, and 96 percent on-time delivery.

There are a number of specificexamples of GAO�s accomplishments,presented in �GAO at Work� anecdotes,as well as in one-page summaries ofGAO�s performance by each of theagency�s four strategic goals. Lookingahead, the report discusses the issuesGAO plans to address in fiscal year 2002as well as its goals for the period andstrategies and challenges for achievingthem. A condensed version of GAO�sfinancial statements, which received anunqualified opinion from its independentauditor, is also included.

The compact accountability andperformance document should meet theneeds of most parties who follow GAO�sactivities. But those who need moredetailed information can access thecomplete texts of the FY 2000accountability and performance reportsand the FY 2002 performance plan (GAO-01-626SP, April 2001) on GAO�s Internetsite (www.gao.gov).

Comptroller General Walker used thepublication of the combined performanceand accountability report to send apersonal message to GAO staffmembers. �It gives me the opportunityto thank you once again for yourcontribution to our agency�sachievements during the past fiscalyear,� he said in a memo to all employees.

As part of its outreach effort, theperformance and accountabilityhighlights report is being distributed tomembers of Congress and key staffmembers, executive branch officials,accountability organizations, and othersinterested in GAO�s work.

For more information, contact:External Liaison, U.S. GeneralAccounting Office, room 7806,Washington, D.C. 20548 USA (tel: 202-512-4704; fax: 202-512-4021; e-mail:[email protected].). �


Integral Auditing

By Jameleddine Khemakhe, President de Chambre, Tunisian Court of Audit, and Tunisian Foundation for ComprehensiveAuditing

In recent years, the concept of auditing has evolved withinthe context of rapidly changing political/economic conditionsand expectations about the proper role of government andpublic management. Supreme audit institutions (SAI) have seentheir role change and diversify to include financial audits andcompliance audits, performance audits and value-for-moneyaudits, as well as comprehensive audits. Currently,developments in public management and efforts to promotegood governance are moving SAIs to go beyondcomprehensive auditing to a new auditing philosophy andapproach�which I am calling �integral auditing.� This articlewill outline the concept of integral auditing and discuss amethodology for implementing it.

The experience of the Tunisian Court of Audit has mirroredthese international developments. For more than 15 years, theCourt has been carrying out audits to determine the extent towhich public activities and programs are managed incompliance with laws and regulations, and with a view toeconomy, efficiency and effectiveness. More recently, the Courthas also implemented the comprehensive auditing approachpioneered in Canada and has been involved in research anddevelopment in order to make an appropriate methodologyavailable to the magistrates of the Court.

However, changes in the socio-political environment inTunisia�in particular the democratization of public life, thestrengthened role of civil society, the desire to consolidategovernance, and multiple reforms of the public sector�haveled the Court to increased interest and involvement in otheraspects of public management.

In Tunisia and elsewhere, governments are being calledupon to uphold not only traditional values such as the equalityof citizens, neutrality, and the continuity of public service, butalso the principles of democratic management�the right toinformation, transparency, respect for due process, theresponsibility to evaluate its actions, the accountability of civilservants, the clarity of laws and regulations, the accessibilityof public services, the participation of officials in modernizationefforts, and the right to a healthy environment and legalprotection. Taxpayers are becoming increasingly critical andare demanding that the government provide the quality servicesto which they are entitled and respect their rights as individuals.While public management is responsible for creating andimplementing systems and procedures that meet theseexpectations, the auditor can make a significant contributionto advancing governmental efforts in these areas.

Using an integral audit approach, auditors can makecontributions to government policies and reforms at a varietyof levels�from conceptualization, to implementation,evaluation, and impact assessment. This type of auditing goesbeyond the elements of the comprehensive audit to cover thequality of strategic planning and the provision of services tousers. Thus, integral auditing involves active participationthroughout the cycle of government policy and reforms efforts.Its main objective is to determine in a constructive manner theextent to which resources are managed economically, efficiently,and effectively with respect to the fundamental rights of thecitizen.

Since integral audit entails a new vision of auditing, it alsorequires new roles for the auditor and a new approach toauditing process.

Integral Auditing and the Auditor�sMission

In a comprehensive audit, the auditor is a guardian ofcompliance with laws and regulations as well as a partner. Inan integral audit, the auditor�s role is also that of a facilitator.The following sections describe each of these roles.

The Auditor�Guardian of ComplianceSAIs are traditionally the guardians of compliance with

laws and regulations. In most cases, however, this role is definednarrowly to include only the government�s compliance withlaws and decrees that determine the rules of administrativeand financial management. However, the rule of law, thefundamental principle of any democratic system, calls for abroadening of this definition.

Currently, the scope of SAIs�compliance audits isexpanding to cover other aspects of compliance related to therelationship between governments and citizens that are laiddown in the constitutions of different countries and ininternational agreements. In addition to examining legalcompliance, the auditor addresses other equally importantissues, such as equality before the law and governmentservices, the transparency of institutions and decisions, theestablishment of institutional mechanisms for consultation andparticipation in decision-making, and the recourse toconsultations on major issues. These elements shouldconstitute permanent objectives in SAIs� strategic andoperational planning and all auditing missions.


The Auditor as PartnerThis mission was initiated in the context of comprehensive

auditing. For the auditor it consists of evaluating the methodsand practices the government uses to fulfill the missions andmandates with which it has been entrusted, as well as providingan opinion on the realiability of financial statements andmanagers� reports. In this framework, the auditor-adviser hasan important role in supplying reliable, significant, and relevantinformation to different clients (such as the manager, companydirector, the executive, and legislature) that will allow them tojudge the validity of the information they receive as a basis fordecision-making. The auditor also formulates recommendationsintended to improve the management of the auditee�s activities.

Improving management thus becomes a joint taskundertaken by the auditor and the manager. Their sharedobjective is arriving at sound management practices that allowthe community or the organization to gain maximum value forthe resources used.

To carry out this role, the auditor not only examinesfinancial statements and audits the compliance of governmentactions with the legislation and regulations in force, but alsocarries out value-for-money audits. Value-for-money auditinghas introduced a new vision of the �auditing/control� functionthat the auditor shares with the manager. In this context, theauditor acts more like a true partner in setting up qualitymanagement in the public sector. In fact, value-for-moneyauditing demonstrates the importance of the partnershipbetween the auditor and manager. As an adviser, the auditorcan carry out an objective and constructive process topersuade the persons responsible to implement the desiredchanges and contribute to management improvements.

The Auditor as FacilitatorThe concept of the auditor as facilitator is a new function

introduced by integral auditing. In this function, auditorsemploy the capabilities and skills they have accumulatedthroughout their professional auditing careers to reflect onpublic strategies and policies and on the emphases anddirections of government. This contribution can be made intwo different ways.

First, SAIs� strategic and operational planning can addressthe major reforms undertaken in the country and evaluate themanner in which they have been implemented. This allows theSAI to draw conclusions about shortcomings and weaknesses,the quality of the work involved in drawing up these reforms,and certain key aspects of modernizing government andpromoting human rights. In this context, the auditor-facilitatorraises questions linked to citizens� rights, such as:

� how national strategies and policies match users�needs;

� the implementation of mechanisms which allow citizensto participate in representative structures to decidenational strategies and policies;

� the equitable and equal treatment of users;

� the availability of information on the use of publicfunds; and,

� the extent to which government activities providequality services and ensure better social and regionaloutreach to the underprivileged.

The auditor-facilitator also promotes the government�s roleas a service-provider at the disposition of citizens, rather a�controller� with all the means of legal constraint to put citizensin a position of weakness and subjection. Thus, the auditor-facilitator helps to ensure that government is organized so thatit satisfies citizens� demands, particularly in terms of ensuringhonest, prudent use of taxpayers� money; support of publicauthorities; and fair and impartial management of public affairs.Within government itself, the auditor-facilitator helps ensurethat human resource management is based on the values ofwork, accuracy, and excellence, and that these values are basedon dialogue and the free interchange of ideas.

Second, SAIs are regularly called upon to participate oncommittees responsible for drawing up reforms or generalpolicies and to give advice on reform projects. In this context,SAI auditors supply information drawn from the experienceand knowledge acquired in the course of their operationalactivities. They do not take part in decision making. Thus, theauditor-facilitator can draw attention to weaknesses in the areasexamined and will be in a good position to launch new ideasrelated to modernizing government and protecting users� rights.

A Methodological Approach to IntegralAuditing

Over the last decade, audit institutions have beenconcerned about extending their audits to include anassessment of performance. Adopting an integral auditingapproach will help audit institutions to address this concern.

Traditional value-for-money auditing is concerned withthe reliability of financial statements, sound financialmanagement, and the economy, efficiency and effectivenessof management. It begins at the level of knowledge about theentity�the nature of its operations; how it is organized; howits main structures function; and how members of seniormanagement direct, control and record operations and activities.Gaining an understanding of these aspects enables the auditorto focus on key aspects of the entity�s management, placingspecial emphasis on risk evaluation and establishing auditingcriteria, two critical factors in value-for-money auditing.

In the integral auditing framework, however, the auditorsintervene once administrative strategies and policies are beingimplemented. Inputs by the auditors would, however,indisputably be useful when these strategies and policies arebeing formulated. Furthermore, in value-for-money auditing,auditors do not address another important phase: impactassessment, which is particularly important when evaluating


the performance of public entities. While these two phases donot always have a direct link with the audited entity, auditorinvolvement in them would give the auditing operation anintegral character. Furthermore, the SAIs would also have thecapacity to judge the quality of the strategies and policiesadopted by means of the various reviews they carry outthroughout the year.

Contributions to Conceptualizing and ImplementingReforms and Strategies

A rigorous and scientific approach to conceptualizing andformulating public reforms and strategies is critical and has agreat impact on their success. Before determining what majoractivities should be undertaken to modernize management ofpublic affairs, the government needs to agree with both itspartners and the users of its services on the diagnosis andevaluation of its performance. Only then can the fundamentalchoices about reform strategies be determined democraticallyand the best way to implement those choices be defined inconcrete terms.

At this stage, SAIs can be the partners of choice becauseof their independence, their objectivity, their experience, theirstaff�s professionalism, and their structured evaluationmethodology. The SAIs can contribute to evaluatinggovernment performance through the reports, observations,and recommendations made at the time of various auditingoperations. They can help identify the constraints that preventgovernment from obtaining value-for-money. SAIs alsoconstitute a credible source of information on the performanceof administrative structures both in terms of the quality ofservices and the cost. In the end, SAIs are in the best positionto evaluate the compliance of proposed global strategies withlaws and regulations and to accurately evaluate the resourcesneeded for implementation in terms of investments to be madeor of costs to be borne.

At the implementation stage, SAIs can concentrate onpromoting respect for the major principles of democraticmanagement: transparency, continuity of management andorganization, efficiency, balanced input-output ratios, andequity that avoids the abusive or arbitrary use of power. Infact, through external, objective, and constructive audits inwhich they schedule and implement value-for-money auditsand evaluations of different government sectors, SAIs may bethe only entity in a position to monitor that these values arerespected when public reforms are implemented.

Furthermore, because of their experience, SAIs occupy aunique position among those institutions capable ofcontributing to reduced and �lean� administration, simplifiedprocedures, decentralization, promoting quality actions withingovernment, and determining areas in current laws andregulations that are not transparent. All of these factors affectnot only the effectiveness of the legal system but also theproper functioning of democracy.

Contributing to the Impact Assessment PhaseImpact assessment has a democratic objective: assessing

the public sector�s actual performance and promotingaccountability to the citizens of a country. Because of itsanalysis of results, impact assessment goes farther than value-for-money auditing. It seeks to throw light on all the effects ofa policy or program and reveal causal relationships betweenthe effects observed and the action implemented by the publicsector.

Public entities are responsible for setting up internalassessment systems that enable them to be accountable forthe results of their actions, the use they have made of theresources allocated to them, and their success in achievingtheir goals. In addition to evaluating these internal controlsystems, which is a part of value-for-money auditing, SAIs, byvirtue of their objectivity, independence and external focus,are well-positioned to carry out an impact assessment. Thiscan be done either by evaluating the products of the impactassessment function the government has developed within itsstructures, or by the SAI carrying out impact assessments onits own.

This task may revert to the SAIs for governments ofdeveloping countries that are not yet equipped to develop theevaluation/assessment function in their management structures.In these cases, the SAIs have the experience and availablehuman resources to initiate this process of evaluation/assessment and to accustom auditees to this type of activity.

Impact assessments carried out by SAIs will be effective ifcertain conditions are fulfilled. First, it is essential that there belegislative empowerment and the commitment of top SAImanagement to this type of activity. A clear, agreed-uponphilosophy stating the general policy and aims of impactevaluation operations must be developed.

Second, the SAI must have expertise in value-for-moneyauditing and the versatile, experienced, and motivated humanresources required to incorporate the impact assessment intotheir traditional tasks. Specifically, SAIs should be able to:

� program and select relevant subjects of concern forthose governing or for the country;

� organize its structures in a functional manner allowingit to adapt to a diversity of subjects; and,

� mobilize a multidisciplinary, motivated staff that willbenefit from ongoing quality training.

Finally, the SAI must develop a general methodologicalframework that is inspired by existing value-for-money audittechniques and that takes into account the requirements ofimpact assessment operations. It would be easy, for example,to introduce an additional evaluative stage in the existing SAIaudit methodology. It is essential to find a way of guaranteeinga �successful marriage� between traditional auditingtechniques (financial regularity, compliance, and value-for-money) and techniques encountered in impact assessmentoperations.


ConclusionThe task of adapting public administration to the rapidly

changing socio-economic environment is not the exclusivedomain of political decisionmakers and managers. It is acollective task they can share with supreme audit institutions,and both partners have important roles to play. While managersare in the best position to evaluate how they manage and theresults of their actions, SAIs can set up a process to reviewmanagement systems and practices, introduce changes inapproach, and orient government towards the needs of thecitizen-client.

SAIs are currently being called upon to go beyondcomprehensive auditing and play the role of facilitator. Theyare being asked to provide input when strategies and policies

are being worked out and to incorporate an impact-assessmentphase into their auditing tasks to evaluate governmentperformance more precisely. Thus, SAIs can supply objectiveand accurate information that can be of use first to managersand then to other public authorities and citizens.

In working to help public authorities guarantee transparent,responsible, participative, and equitable management of thecountry�s resources in order to achieve sustainable economicand social development, SAIs will make an undeniablecontribution to the promotion of good governance. They willalso help consolidate the rule of law and reinforce respect forcitizens� rights.

For more information, contact the author at the: Cour desComptes, 54 Avenue Bilal, Menzah VI, 1004 Tunis, Tunisia. �


Adjusting External Audits to FacilitateResults-Oriented Government

By Matthew Andrews, Maxwell School, Syracuse University

IntroductionAuditing involves evaluating and reporting on

organizational behavior. In the public sector, such evaluationand reporting has traditionally focused on short-term financialmanagement and control, and central concerns of publicaccountability. Recently, governments have extended theiraccountability focus to include concern for long-termmanagement issues and public sector performance (See Bourn,2000 regarding the emphasis on Improving Public Services).The emphasis of this results-orientation has been on results-oriented management, however, and not on evaluations�theconcern of auditors. This article discusses new challenges togovernment auditing arising from this extended accountabilityconcept and argues that credible external auditors have a centralrole in results-based reforms.

I will concentrate on the issue of auditing performanceand performance-related reforms, discussing lessons learnedin extending results-oriented government beyond managementto incorporate evaluation and auditing. Such results-orientedevaluations and audits are central in motivating and facilitatingresults-oriented government.

The Results Movement and theExternal Audit Function

A popular quote in management literature is, � What getsmeasured gets done.� Put another way, the focus of evaluationcreates incentives for management. The quote is particularlyrelevant in considering adjustments needed in the external auditdomain to facilitate results-oriented government. The auditfunction has traditionally focused on process and financialcontrol, measuring adherence to rules and the ability to spendwithin budget, and failing to measure aspects of managementrelating to the efficiency and effectiveness of spending. Inmany governments, it is apparent that such evaluations (andthe broader financial and management systems they reflect)are associated with the short-term focus of administrators�an emphasis on how much is spent instead of what isproduced�and other inefficient managerial practices.

Such behavior is at odds with the recent move to results-oriented government, with its focus on what is produced andon aspects of efficiency and effectiveness. In order to overcomethis short-term focus, external auditors are challenged to focuson those factors that drive the kinds of behavior associatedwith efficient and effective government. The need toconcentrate on traditional financial and process accountability

(as in the United Kingdom�s financial and compliance audits)remains, but it is also important to shine the evaluation light onresults (as in the United Kingdom�s value-for-money audits)and the progress of results-oriented reforms. Evaluating thesethree factors ensures that all receive attention from managers,as shown in figure 1.

Ignoring one or more of the factors in external evaluationsgives internal administrators the message that such factors areunimportant and leads managers to concentrate their effortselsewhere. This is currently a problem in a number ofgovernments that are attempting to shift their focus fromprocess to performance but are concentrating on managerialissues and not on evaluations. In such situations, managersare receiving a conflicting message: �Manage for results�butremember that you will be audited on your adherence to process(not on the results)�. Public auditors have an important role toplay in clarifying the results-oriented message in governmentsaround the world. This role involves evaluating results so thattheir importance is clearly evident to the many managerstargeted by results-oriented management reforms.

Adjusting the External Audit Role toEnsure a Results-Orientation

Developing and developed countries are at the same pointin setting up independent, results-oriented evaluation


institutions. In the United States, a relatively youngorganization, the National Association of Local GovernmentAuditors (NALGA) promotes independent, effective localgovernment auditing and is a model for other countries (Niesner,1997). Along with similar organizations, the organization ischaracterized by a number of significant elements:

� It is independent and offers an objective approach toresults auditing.

� Its staff is both competent and committed, with wide-ranging skills.

� It evaluates results, efficiency, and reform progress.

� While being independent, it works with the entities itevaluates, developing relationships and ensuring thatthe evaluation experience is as much one of learning asone of grading.

These characteristics, and the experience of externalevaluators in other results-oriented governments, provide anumber of lessons for countries attempting to ensure that theexternal audit domain plays an active role in facilitating results-oriented management and evaluation in government. Theselessons are summarized in the following sections.

Ensure the Independence of External AuditorsExternal evaluation agencies must be independent to

maximize the effectiveness of the checks and balancesnecessary for effective evaluations. In the most effective cases,external evaluators are audit agencies that report to higherlevel governments (in the case of local governments withresults-oriented contracts tied to intergovernmental grants),elected officials, or the public. Central coordinating agenciesor legislative committees often fulfill this role.

Ensure the Broad Competence of External AuditorsThe expansion of audit services requires diverse skills in

evaluation and audit agencies. Skills and experiences requiredinclude performance measurement, benchmarking, control self-assessment, activity-based costing, information technology,investigations, and strategic planning. These skills are similarto the skills required for results-oriented management, whichsuggests that the central coordinating agency or other entityproviding such services to departments could also play acapacity-building role in less capable entities.

Ensure the Results Focus of External AuditorsMost external auditors have established methods of

evaluating fiscal probity but do not have abilities in measuringother aspects. Auditors should question the kind of resultstargets in place, ensuring that these targets relate to outputs(short-term measures directly related to production) as well asto outcomes (short- and long-term measures that result fromoutputs and constitute the closest point of public sector impactin society). Questions should also be asked about (1) howwell results targets have been met (both outputs and outcomes),

(2) the degree to which results can be ascribed to publicproduction (or the external environment), and (3) the continuedrelevance of results targets. External audits and evaluationsshould make suggestions about both future resourceallocations to cost centers and managerial activities in costcenters, focused on improving results in the future. Potentialquestions include the following:

Results targets:� Were clear and realistic objectives specified in the

budget?

� Are these objectives specified in terms of outputs andrelated directly to outcomes?

Results achievement:� Have results (particularly outputs) been achieved as

specified?

� Have objectives been met in terms of outcome targets?

� To what extent was performance the effect ofgovernment action?

� How did the environment affect output and outcomeperformance?

� What environmental factors had the greatest effect onperformance?

� Have there been any unforeseen results for otheradministrative entities?

The continued relevance of results targets:� Are the output and outcome objectives still relevant in

terms of broader policy objectives, economicconditions, and environmental factors?

� Is the existing policy still the right one for meeting theresults objectives (particularly the outcome objectives)?Will high performance in terms of outputs yield highperformance in terms of outcomes?

Audit and evaluation products in terms of results:� How should budgetary allocations be adjusted given

the performance of the administrative agency and therelevance of their objectives?

� What steps should be taken to improve objectives andresults targets?

� What lessons are evident, and how can capacity bedeveloped, for improving management of thedepartment under evaluation?

Ensure an Efficiency Focus of External AuditorsAlong with questions about results, auditors and

evaluators should ask questions probing administrative


efficiency. These questions should focus on the process(managerial efficiency), allocation (allocative efficiency), andcost (economic) efficiency of administrative production.Potential questions include the following:

Managerial efficiency:� Are departmental processes transparent?

� Does production follow planned amounts, timing, andquality, and are all inputs accounted for in financialrecords?

Allocative efficiency:� Does the administration explain why new projects and

programs were selected?

� Does the administration have to motivate new programselection with specific information? What is thatinformation?

� Are results taken into account when allocativedecisions are made?

Cost efficiency:� Have all inputs been included in the cost assessments

(including direct inputs, capital, overhead, and supportinputs)?

� How much of the input was wasted (irrelevant orunsuccessful projects, avoidance, deadweight costs,and/or unused capacity)?

� How do input requirements compare with those ofcomparable producers?

� What is the cost of a unit of output (distinguishprogram administration cost)?

� How effective are cost evaluation and managementpractices? Has there been an improvement in costefficiency?

� Were there any complaints about the administration?

Ensure that External Auditors Evaluate ReformProgress

Experts in budget reform have learned that most reforms,though carried out mechanically, do not actually influenceorganizations in a de facto sense. Organizations likegovernments need incentives to adopt reforms meaningfully,and the external audit function is a source of such incentive.Evaluating reform progress is central to ensuring reformsuccess. Questions suited to this task include the following:

Evaluating the reform mechanics:� Has the department adopted a strategic plan to

concentrate on results?

� Has the department implemented any new managementmechanisms?

Evaluating the adoption of the reform:� Are these mechanisms being used?

� Does the department communicate with customers ona regular basis? How does it communicate? Whatdoes it do with the information received from customers?

� Have departmental performance goals been improvedupon? Have departmental capacities to produce resultsbeen expanded?

Evaluating the Influence of the Reform on theOrganization�s Culture:

� Is the reform considered important in the department?Does the internal management have any alternativereform ideas?

� Is the management implementing internal changes tothe departmental culture?

� Is the reform strategy comprehensive, building on abase of social interaction and focusing management onresults? (Or is it made up of stand-alone elements)?

Ensure that Auditors Also Play a Capacity-Development Role

External auditors should also help in overcoming thetension between external evaluators and administratorsattempting to adjust their behavior from the process-orientationto the results-orientation. Neither administrators nor auditorsare currently well equipped to stand alone in focusing onresults. There is a high potential for conflict between thosehaving to produce results (without the established ability todo so) and those having to evaluate results (also without theestablished ability to do so). Auditing bodies are oftencentralized and enjoy significant resource and skill benefitsover conventional administrative bodies. Given this, results-oriented reform requires that at least in the opening stages ofresults-based reform, evaluators provide a service that extendsbeyond checking on managers to actually working withmanagers to identify results targets and to manage aroundsuch targets. Niesner (1999,36) sums this sentiment up bysaying, �Government auditors are uniquely positioned topromote performance measurement and performanceaccountability and to help ensure that these systems are usedto improve government services.�

Conclusion: A New Role for a CentralRole Player

Recent changes to the perspective of governance demandthat public audits extend their scope of investigation andanalysis. Established practices focused on short-term money


management need to be augmented by a new concentration onthe management and operational performance of departmentsin using resources to meet stated results (Davies and Shellard,1997). These additions are results-oriented audits thatconstitute both institutionalized checks on productionperformance and motivating factors facilitating progress withresults-oriented reforms. The external evaluations encouragechange and provide direction for capacity and reformdevelopment, bolstering results-oriented management withresults-oriented evaluation.

ReferencesBourn, Sir John (2000).�Improving Public Services.� The

International Journal of Government Auditing, October: 1-2,8-9.

Davies, Marlene, and Elaine Shellard (1997). �The Valueof Performance Measurement in the United Kingdom.� TheGovernment Accountants Journal, Vol.#46, Issue 3, 48-51.

Niesner, Helen (1999). �Local Government Auditing�Improving the Performance of Government in the NextCentury.� The Government Accountants Journal, Vol.#48,Issue 4, 32-38.

For further information, contact the author at: PublicAdministration Department, Maxwell School, SyracuseUniversity, Syracuse, New York 13244, e-mail:[email protected]. �


Audit Profile: Office of the AuditorGeneral for the Federation of NigeriaBy Florence N. Anyanwu, Chief Auditor

The 1999 constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeriadivided the government into three separate but equal arms: theExecutive (Presidency), the Legislature (the House ofRepresentatives and the Senate), and the Judiciary.

The Auditor General for the federation is the head of thesupreme audit institution (SAI) and is responsible to theLegislature but also takes directives from and cooperates withthe Presidency in matters relating to the audit of governmentaccounts and agencies.

Organization of the SAIThe SAI is divided into four operational departments.

1. The Ministerial Department deals with the audit ofaccounts of ministries and other agencies of government andall financial statements.

2. The Extra-Ministerial Department is responsible forvetting the audited accounts of government companies,corporations, agencies, commissions, and other authorities.

3. The Project Monitoring and Evaluation Departmentconducts value-for-money and performance audits. Theseinvolve examining and reporting on the economy, efficiency,and effectiveness of government projects and programs.

4. The Revenue Audit Department is responsible forauditing revenue accruable to the government. In this regard,efforts are made to ensure that the revenues collected from allsources are properly accounted for.

The SAI also has the following internal servicedepartments: Finance and Administration, Planning, Researchand Statistics, and Training. Each department is headed by adirector and has deputies and assistant directors to coordinatethe work of chief auditors heading audit offices in ministriesand government departments.

In order to ensure transparency, accountability andcredibility, an internal audit unit, headed by a high-level auditor,is responsible for auditing the SAI�s management.

The Functions and Independence of theSAI

The functions and scope of independence of the SAI arespelt out in the relevant provisions of the Audit Act of 1958,

which established the office, and in subsequent constitutionalprovisions, particularly the 1999 constitution. Theseprovisions�together with section 24 of the Finance (Controland Management) Act of 1958, the Financial Regulations of1976, the Audit Guide, the Audit Standards and the Civil ServiceRules�have emphasized, guided, and increased the scopeand the independence of the auditing process.

These statutory documents, especially the currentprovisions in the 1999 constitution, impose certain duties andresponsibilities on the SAI. For example, Section 85(2) states:

�The Public Accounts of the Federation and of all Officesand Courts of the federation shall be audited and reported onby the Auditor General, who shall submit his report to theNational Assembly; and for that purpose, the Auditor Generalor any person authorized by him in that behalf shall have accessto all the books, records, returns and other documents relatingto these accounts.�

Ironically, the Auditor General is not authorized to auditthe accounts or appoint auditors for government statutorycompanies and corporation. The Auditor General, however, isto provide such bodies with

� a list of qualified auditors from which they shall appointtheir external auditors,

� guidelines on the levels of fees to be paid, and

� comments on their annual account and auditors report.

On the other hand, Section 85(4) further states that �theAuditor General shall have power to conduct periodic checksof all government statutory corporations, commissions,authorities and agencies.� In recognition of the SAI�s need forindependence in performing the aforementioned functions,Section 85(6) states; �In the exercise of his functions underthis constitution, the Auditor General shall not be subject tothe direction or control of any other authority or person; andshall be appointed by the President on the recommendation ofthe Federal Civil Service Commission subject to confirmationby the Senate and shall be removed from office by the Presidentacting with and supported by two thirds majority of the Senate�.

The SAI head can be removed only on constitutionalgrounds of serious incapacitation or improper conduct.


ReportingThe SAI is required by law to forward annual reports to

each house of the National Assembly. The annua1 reportincludes accounts relating to revenues and losses of the federalgovernment and expenditure moneys appropriated by theLegislature.

In each house of the National Assembly, reports areconsidered by the respective Public Accounts Committee, whichin turn can make recommendations and impose sanctions andpunishment for corrective purposes.

Human Resource DevelopmentThe emergence of a new democratic order in Nigeria has

increased the demands on the SAI in carrying out itsconstitutional duties. Consequently, it has to ensure that itsstaff is qualified and adequately trained to meet these currentchallenges. Presently, the federal civil service, in collaborationwith different levels of SAI management, is responsible for therecruitment, promotion, and discipline of staff. Auditors arerecruited from varying and complementary disciplines. Thereare about 2000 professional and non-professional staff.

Retraining of audit staff is an ongoing process. Training iscarried out through on-the-job training, joint workshops, andseminars. Each year, some middle-level staff are sent to theFederal Treasury School, and some senior staff are trainedabroad in Britain and in the U.S. General Accounting Office.There is a training department under the Auditor General�sdirect supervision.

Future ChallengesThe computer unit of the SAI is still in its infancy. The

SAI�s information database needs to be increasinglycomputerized to ensure unrestricted access to-relevantinformation, continuity of work, and a review of audit standards.Another challenge is to initiate legislation to create an AuditService Commission, which will be mandated to recruit, promote,and discipline audit personnel. Furthermore, the SAI needs tobe funded directly from the Legislature and not by the Executivebranch.

For more information contact: Office of the Auditor Generalfor the Federation, Plot -849 Koforidua Street, Off MichaelOkpara Street, Wuse Zone 2, Abuja FCT, Nigeria, telephone234-9-5237792, facsimile 234-9-523-5322. �


Reports in Print

The World Bank�s report entitled Helping CountriesCombat Corruption will be of interest to Journal readers whomay be interested in minimizing fraud and corruption. Producedas a joint effort of the Poverty Reduction and EconomicManagement Network and the Operational Core ServicesNetwork at the World Bank, the report details the progressmade by the World Bank Group on it anticorruption andgovernance initiative which was launched by President JamesD. Wolfensohn in 1996. Several articles are presented on (1)approaches to combating corruption, (2) minimizing fraud andcorruption, (3) helping countries that request assistance, (4)mainstreaming corruption considerations, and (5) supportinginternational efforts to address corruption. To obtain a copyof this publication, contact The World Bank 1818 H Street,NW, Washington, DC 20433 U.S.A. (tel: 202-477-1234 orfax: 202-447-6391), or e-mail: [email protected].

* * * * *The Audit of Public Health-Care Systems by Supreme

Audit Institutions containing papers from the 14th UN/INTOSAISeminar on Government Auditing is now available. Over 50persons attended this seminar that addressed prevention ofirregularities in government health-care programs, the audit ofhealth-care programs, the audit of hospitals by SAIs, theperformance audit of the provision of public health-care servicesin economically and socially deprived areas, the audit of socialsecurity in France, and the European union financial activitiesin the medical field. For a copy of the report or more informationon the seminar, contact the INTOSAI General Secretariat,Rechnungshof, Dampfschiffstrasse 2, A-1033 Vienna, Austria(tel: 43-1-711-71-8456 or fax: 43-1-712-9425), or e-mail:[email protected].

* * * * *The Swedish National Audit Office (RRV) has published

an audit guide for its Financial Audit Department. The newAudit Guide is a very important tool for insuring that the qualityassurance of audits is met, and for use in human resourcedevelopments in the field of financial audit. Although theAudit Guide is intended for daily use by the RRV�s financialauditors, it provides readers around the world with informationon ethical rules, quality of work, organization and management,and steps to follow for the actual audit process. To obtain acopy in Swedish or English, contact the Swedish NationalAudit Office Box 45070 SE-104 30 Stockholm, Sweden (tel:46-8-690-40-00), e-mail: [email protected].

* * * * *Journal readers may be interested in obtaining the book,

Public Audit, Good Governance and Accountability. Edited

by B. P. Mathur with contributions from R. Venkataraman formerPresident of India, and V.K. Shunglu, Comptroller & AuditorGeneral of India, this book contains distilled experiences ofeminent experts and focuses attention on critical issues relatingto effective function of public audit and the institution of theComptroller and Auditor General. The book recognizes thatthe concept and establishment of auditing is inherent in publicadministration, and in keeping with the changing role ofgovernment, public audit has broken away from the traditionalfunction of auditing to the evaluation of government programs.To obtain a copy of the book for USD$20, contact the Instituteof Public Auditors of India, Mudrit Publishers 70, M BlockCommercial Complex, Greater Kailash II, New Delhi India110048 (tel: 91-11-646-2309, or 91-11 646-3068); fax: 91-11-6444169.

* * * * *The rapid developments in China have given rise to

complex and challenging problems for auditing and accountingprofessionals, and as such, China has become the subject ofscholarly studies and academic research. The Department ofAccounting of the Hong Kong Polytechnic University haspublished the China Accounting Finance Review (CAFR)which provides timely, high quality, and readily accessibleinformation on accounting in China to academics worldwide.A bi-lingual journal (in English and Chinese), CAFR focuseson publishing original papers on research and developmentsof financial accounting, auditing, management accounting,financial management, and taxation on China. CAFR ispublished by Oxford University Press. To obtain a copy, contactCAFR Office, Department of Accountancy, The Hong KongPolytechnic University Kowloon, Hong Kong (tel: 852-2766-4372 or 2766-4359; fax: 852-2764-2340.)

* * * * *The Technical Cooperation Among Developing Countries

unit (TCDC) within the UNDP has published another editionof its periodical, Cooperation South. This issue of CooperationSouth offers a two-part focus, by presenting innovations indevelopment policy and performance, while also providingcritical reviews of large global issues. The Number Two 2000issue examines key global issues such as the AIDS epidemic inAfrica and the availability of health services. Other articlesexplore experiences in developing policy and performancewhich can benefit developing countries as well as aid programs.Published in English, French, and Spanish, Cooperation Southmay be ordered by contacting the Special Unit for TCDC,United Nation�s Development Programme, One UnitedNation�s Plaza, New York, NY 10017, USA, or by sending afax to 212-906-6352. �


Inside INTOSAI

Get Connected!The INTOSAI internet web site www.intosai.org contains

a wealth of useful information about INTOSAI�s many programsand activities, including the work of the organizations eighttechnical committees, information about IDI, copies of thisJournal, as well as numerous publications which can bedownloaded at no cost.

In addition, the site contains a complete mailing list for allINTOSAI members, including their e-mail addresses andinternet sites. This information is updated daily by the GeneralSecretariat, and is the �place to go� for the most currentinformation about INTOSAI�s activities.

INTOSAI�s Internal Control StandardsSubcommittee Meeting in Budapest

The Subcommittee of INTOSAI�s Internal ControlStandards Committee held its last meeting for the year 2000 inBudapest on November 28. Representatives of the SAIs ofAustria, Belgium, the Czech Republic, Hungary, the Netherlands,Oman, Romania, the United Kingdom, and the United Statesattended the meeting.

The delegates agreed upon the following issues.

1. Information about the activities of the Internal ControlStandards Committee carried out following the 2ndInternational Internal Control Conference and future tasks.

� The proceedings of the conference were completed ontime and sent out to all INTOSAI members as well as 17international organizations.

� The Chairman of the Internal Control StandardsCommittee forwarded to the cognizant organizationsproposals made during the conference concerning twoother INTOSAI organizations. The first, a Russianproposal regarding the protection of auditors, wasforwarded to the Secretary General of INTOSAI. Thesecond, a proposal about protecting internal auditorreports against hackers, was forwarded to the Chairmanof the EDP Committee of INTOSAI.

� Members of the Subcommittee suggested thatfollowing the XVIIth INCOSAI Congress, theCommittee should deal with the proposal concerningthe importance of the Audit Committee and organizeseminars or workshops regarding this issue.

� Members of the Subcommittee agreed that theregulation of internal control in public institutions andcompanies is always the responsibility of executiveentities and not the Parliament. Therefore, theyproposed that the Committee not deal with this issue.

2. Information about the possibility of modifyingINTOSAI�s �Guidelines for Internal Control Standards�and working out proposals for the XVIIth INTOSAICongress.

� The Subcommittee accepted and approved the reporton the possibility of modifying the Guidelines.

� Members of the Subcommittee unanimously agreed topropose to the Committee that the modified guidelinesshould

� focus on combining and integrating the COSOmodel into the guidelines,

� emphasize the importance and impact of IT,

� include the concept of quality assurance in thestandards, and

� emphasize the importance of clear terminology andways of overcoming language difficulties.

3. Information about the task force that is preparing thebrochure on the responsibilities of management regardinginternal control.

� The Subcommittee approved the progress report onthe brochure and the respective timetable about thedeadlines for preparing and completing the booklet.Meanwhile, the Internal Control Standards Committeewill forward the relevant issues raised at the IIndInternational Internal Control Conference to the taskforce.

� The draft brochure will be discussed during the nextsession of the Internal Control Standards Committee inMiami, Florida.


� The completed brochure will be published in severallanguages.

4. Organizational issues

� During the conference, the Chairman of the InternalControl Standards Committee, the President of theHungarian State Audit Office, announced that duringthe XVIIth INTOSAI Congress he will resign his postas Chairman since, as of 2001, he will have been serving

in this capacity for nine years, the recommended timelimit.

� The Subcommittee proposed that the President of theBelgian SAI take over the chairmanship of theCommittee. The Chairman informed the GeneralSecretary of INTOSAI about this.

The next session of the Internal Control StandardsCommittee was scheduled for the beginning of April 2001 inMiami, Florida.

Progress Report From the AuditingStandards Committee

The Auditing Standards Committee (ASC) hasconsolidated the INTOSAI members� response to the ExposureDraft of the Restructured INTOSAI Auditing Standards. TheASC concluded that, besides the correction of some errors inparagraph references, there will be no changes to the documentpresented to the Congress as compared with the ExposureDraft sent to all INTOSAI members (and available on INTOSAI�swebsite <www.intosai.org>.

Many of the comments received were not possible toaccommodate within the limited mandate of the committeefrom INCOSAI in Montevideo 1998. Those proposals involved

adding text or changing the wording of the current text, whichis not possible without an extended mandate from INCOSAI inSeoul in October.

However, many of the ideas were very interesting and mayprove useful should the committee in the future be given amandate to expand or make more significant changes in theAuditing Standards.

For more information, contact: Swedish National AuditOffice, P.O. Box 45070, S-104 30 Stockholm, Sweden, e-mail:[email protected].

New Website for the INTOSAIWorking Group on EnvironmentalAuditing

The new website address is www.environmental-auditing.org. The website contains an overview of theactivities , products and members of the Working group, andcan supply you with guidelines and other informative materialfor use by SAI�s, including information on environmental audits

carried out by SAI�s all over the world. It also provides links toother relevant websites.

For more information, contact: Netherlands Court of Audit,Postbus 20015, N-L 2500 EA Den Hage, The Netherlands, e-mail: www.rekenkamer.nl.


2001/2002 Calendar of INTOSAI Events

April3rd IT Performance Audit SeminarLjubljana, SloveniaMay 14-16

Environmental Auditing SeminarOslo, NorwayMay 14-16

Public Debt Committee MeetingToronto, CanadaMay 24-25

EUROSAI Madeira ConferenceMadeira, PortugalMay 31-June 1

June

Editor�s Note: This calendar is published in support of INTOSAI�s communications strategy and as a way of helping INTOSAImembers plan and coordinate schedules. Included in this regular Journal feature will be INTOSAI-wide events and region-wide events such as congresses, general assemblies, and Board meetings. Because of limited space, the many training coursesand other professional meetings offered by the regions cannot be included. For additional information, contact the SecretaryGeneral of each regional working group.

August

OLACEFS CongressPanamaAugust20-24

September

DecemberOctober November

May

ARABOSAI AssemblyRabat, MoroccoApril 24-27

July

January February March

AFROSAI Board of Directors MeetingLibya(date to be announced)

ASOSAI Governing Board MeetingKuwaitSeptember 29-October 3

IDI Training Specialist SymposiumOslo, NorwayJune 4-9

XVII INCOSAISeoul, KoreaOctober 21-27

2002

international journal of government · pdf file©2001 international journal of government...

Documents