The Audit Bureau has completed its mandate to examine and review all government expenditures and procedures for the use of public funds allocated to confront the Corona epidemic crisis, and in my opinion, this report represents a document of exceptional importance related to evaluating the performance of the state’s public financial management during this crisis.
The supervisory role of the National Assembly will become clear to us through the observations contained in the report, especially in light of the provisions of Law No. (1) of 1991 regarding the protection of public funds.
The report revealed that the Bureau has faced challenges due to the delay of some government agencies in responding to its inquiries and requirements, noting that these challenges are classified as financial irregularities that require legal accountability in accordance with the provisions of the Audit Bureau law.
On the other hand, the Bureau indicated in its report the volume of expenditures that were spent in the face of the Corona crisis during approximately six months, which were estimated at 796.7 million dinars: of which (69.5%) were spent on intermediate accounts (554.5 million dinars). Done in contravention of the provisions of Articles (146 and 147) of the Constitution, by spending outside the scope of budget appropriations (intermediary accounts).
The Bureau also indicated that there are no clear laws to define the mechanism and forms of contracting in emergency situations, but in my opinion, the Audit Bureau has missed that public tenders law organized contracts in emergency and disaster situations.
And since the Bureau has precedence in revealing observations, it must follow them, and take disciplinary measures against those responsible for causing serious damage to public funds, in line with the Public Funds Protection Law.
The Ministry of Finance should also benefit from a guide it issued in 2014 on Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability (PEFA) indicators, which includes an indicator that measures the extent to which the budget considers emergency expenditures, which comes in the context of finance reforms.
Concerning the Bureau’s recommendation to study the possibility of establishing an emergency cash fund, I do not agree with the Bureau’s opinion. Because the state’s financial system accommodates such financial needs, as the state has a general reserve. Its purpose is to protect the state’s financial position from any emergency that results from circumstances beyond its control that the state did not expect, such as the Corona crisis, and the law has regulated the procedures for this.
In conclusion … in my opinion, the Audit Bureau has made a great effort in this report in light of this crisis, although I see that it has overlooked two important aspects in its report: The first relates to its role in verifying the adequacy of the systems and methods used to safeguard public funds and prevent tampering with them during this crisis. Whether the systems are internal, such as internal audit, or external systems, such as the tendering body, the Ministry of Finance, and the Financial Controllers Authority. To clarify its role in these observations, especially since there is great dissatisfaction on the part of public opinion regarding the role and effectiveness of regulatory agencies in light of the persistence of financial observations and irregularities as a public phenomenon.
The other side is related to the scope of his mandate issued by the National Assembly and related to preparing a report on all expenditures and government procedures for the use of public funds, as this scope is linked to the end of Corona`s crisis. Consequently, the Bureau had to continue to submit periodic reports on this mandate until the end of the Corona crisis. Whereas, the Bureau’s report did not include all expenses, whether they were disbursed or what will be disbursed after September 15, 2020, including rewards for workers during the Corona crisis under the so-called “front rows.”
مدونتي مرآه لآرائي
Bader alhammad 