-
.
- Ελληνικά
In relation to today's statements by the Minister of Justice and Public Order Mr.Marios Hartsiotis on the so-called "modernization" of the Audit Service, we note the following:
We note with satisfaction the Minister's failure to refer to a change in the governance model of the Audit Service. We had from the outset expressed our surprise at the fact that in previous public statements the Government had left open and sustained the debate on the possibility of attempting a transition from something successfully implemented by the majority of states to something implemented by the minority, and which in any case no international body has ever recommended and which, fortunately, cannot be done as it requires an amendment to a fundamental article of the Constitution.
The supreme guide to the powers and responsibilities of the Audit Office is the Constitution. The Constitution also provides in Article 139 for an effective dispute resolution mechanism in the event of a challenge to the powers and responsibilities of any institution or authority in the Republic. Therefore, anyone who believes that there are ambiguities in the powers and responsibilities of the Auditor General is free to appeal to the Supreme Constitutional Court.
At the same time, we note that the acquis communautaire requires that the Supreme Audit Institutions (SAIs) operate in accordance with the Standards of the International Organisation of Supreme Audit Institutions (INTOSAI). These Standards clearly define the activities and functioning of HEIs.
The fundamental INTOSAI-P1 Standard essentially reproduces the Declaration, which was adopted in 1977 by the INTOSAI World Congress in Lima, Peru (Lima Declaration). As the Standard itself records, this document is considered the "Magna Carta" in the exercise of external auditing by governments, as it laid the foundation for public auditing. The Declaration sets out the key audit points and the basic principles for HEIs necessary to achieve independent and objective results. The principles established in the Lima Declaration were recognized by the UN General Assembly Resolutions 66/209 (dated 22.12.2011) and 69/228 (dated 19.12.2014). Legality audit, regularity audit and performance audit
1) The traditional task of Supreme Audit Institutions is to audit the legality and regularity of financial management and of accounting.
2) In addition to this type of audit, which retains its significance, there is another equally important type of audit-performance audit- which is oriented towards examining the performance, economy, efficiency and effectiveness of public administration. Performance audit covers not only specific financial operations, but the full range of government activity including both organisational and administrative systems.
3) The Supreme Audit Institution's audit objectives-legality, regularity, economy, efficiency and effectiveness of financial management - basically are of equal importance. However, it is for each Supreme Audit Institution to determine its priorities on a case-by-case basis."
The above is in full compliance with the Constitution and the laws of the Republic in terms of the powers and responsibilities they define for the Audit Office.
The Audit Office has been transformed over the last 10 years and is already unrecognizable. In 2015 we did a structured self-assessment, in 2016 we brought in the UK Audit Office for a peer review, in 2019 we established the Management Team introducing collegiality, we passed the test of the Common Evaluation Framework and recently joined, along with HEIs from 11 other countries worldwide, in an INTOSAI pilot project that aims to support HEIs in designing and implementing an audit quality management system based on the new quality management standard for HEIs, to be implemented in 2025.
From an Audit Service that was essentially a tailor-made Audit Service that implemented international standards partially and piecemeal, we are now a high-level Service that is moving steadily towards professional excellence.
In the recent GRECO and Commission reports on the Rule of Law, there are only positive reports on our Service and no recommendations for change, other than to document the problems created by the Government itself with our lack of unhindered access to information.
GRECO even states that "the Auditor General has demonstrated a critical role as an external auditor of the public service."
In light of the above, there are only questions and concerns about the Government's continued reference to the alleged "modernization" of the Audit Service. The Government has before it only one recommendation from an international organisation concerning the legal framework governing the Audit Service. This concerns the pre-accession requirement of the European Commission to ensure the financial independence of the Service, a requirement that was included in the Memorandum of Understanding with the Troika.
Therefore, any attempt by the Government to make legislative changes that would limit the powers and responsibilities of our Service, as these powers and responsibilities are defined by the Constitution and the acquis communautaire, will find us utterly opposed. We also note that, based on Pillar 3 of the Mexican Independence Principles, as the principles are explained in the INTOSAI-P10 Standard, "while respecting the laws enacted by the Legislature that apply to them, SAIs are free from direction or interference from the Legislature or the Executive in the organization and management of their office". This principle describes the distortion created by the auditee attempting to bring about changes in the way the auditor is organised and managed.
What we expect the Government to do is to remove the obstacles it places in the way of our free access to information and to actively support rather than undermine our work.
(EAT/NG)
Contents of this article including associated images are owned by PIO
Views & opinions expressed are those of the author and/or PIO
Source
