Compliance audit in the context Of Court model The 4300

What’s been allready done ? First draft Case study redrafting Final Draft

A questionnaire This survey is expected to provide the Compliance Audit Sub-committee with areas of strength and weakness and allow the categorisation of different systems to serve as a basis for constructive conclusions and relevant recommendations.

The 4300 Seven Key issues

One The 4300 provides public sector auditors with further guidance on key issues related to Courts of Audit which have not been covered by ISSA 4100 and ISSA 4200.

Two The 4300 covers only the audit phase of work carried out by Courts of Audit but neither the instruction nor the judgment phase.

Three Personal and financial liability public officials are held personally or financialy liable for the loss or waste of public funds. The liability is personal because they are required to repay the full amount if the non-compliance instances lead to a loss or waste of money.

Four The audit of individual public accounts and the audit of the general state budget are interrelated

Five When the SAI has judicial functions, it comprises a Pubic Prosecutor Service, whose duties cover a wide range of activities that involves prosecuting to jurisdictional procedures

Six Reports on compliance audit of individual public accounts may include injunctions and recommendations. Personal or financial liability is concluded only in relation to injunctions. Recommendations have no affect on the personal liability of the public accountants

Seven Public sector auditors operating in a Courts of Audit environment may communicate compliance issues that may result in legal action, damages or prosecution for a criminal offence to the judge

Structure of the questionnaire This survey is structured into six parts: Part A: Audit mandates Part B: Jurisdictional audits Part C: Role of the Public prosecutor service in Jurisdictional audits Part D: Jurisdictional auditing capacity Part D: Compliance audit of the state budget Part E: Closure