Tag: INTOSAI P-50

The model of jurisdictional supreme audit institution (SAI) is recognized as that of an institution which is able to carry out all types of audit – performance, compliance, and financial audits – and, in addition, is invested with the power to issue formal rulings directly sanctioning the liability of managers of public funds when its audit findings show some irregularities, or when such irregularities are referred to the SAI by a third party.

Since 2020, the Federal Court of Accounts of Brazil (TCU) has been structuring a policy of professional trajectories, with the aim of greater professionalization of its auditors. A professional trajectory is defined as the sequence of positions or roles occupied throughout the functional life of an auditor, encompassing qualifications, experiences, and competencies necessary to perform functions at a certain career level.

The SAI of Portugal (Tribunal de Contas) is currently an institution that combines both the Anglo-Saxon and the Jurisdictional models of Supreme Audit Institutions. It means that although the audit function is a main function activity of the Court, it also complimentarily has also the power to judge financial liabilities.

The INTOSAI-P 50 document outlines twelve principles for the jurisdictional activities of Supreme Audit Institutions (SAIs) empowered with the corresponding mandate, which allows them to rule on the liability of individuals accountable by law in case of irregularities or mismanagement.

SAIs with jurisdictional powers are often misunderstood, and the value of their specific features is generally not fully appreciated. A SAI has jurisdictional powers when it has received the legal mandate to sanction a person on the grounds of an irregularity or damage, related to the use of public funds under the SAI’s jurisdiction and which can be imputed to that person, following contradictory-adversal proceedings.

At its General Assembly in Lisbon, Portugal in September 2021, the Forum of Jurisdictional SAIs adopted a set of guidelines designed to publicize and promote the exercise of jurisdictional and contentious missions by SAIs vested with this competence. These guidelines provide and illustrate in very concrete terms the frame of reference for this exercise in conditions of independence, objectivity or neutrality, legal rigor, public interest and fairness in line with the highest international standards.

The INTOSAI Core Principles are at the pinnacle of INTOSAI’s professional pronouncements, just behind the Lima and Mexico Declarations, which represent the “Magna Carta” of external government auditing and define the conditions for its independent and effective functioning. To date in 2024, there are three: one is devoted to the value and benefits that SAIs bring to citizens (INTOSAI-P 12), another to transparency and accountability (INTOSAI-P 20), and the third sets out the 12 principles that should guide the actions of SAIs with jurisdictional powers, in the exercise of their functions.

Supreme Audit Institutions (SAIs) with jurisdictional functions from around the world make up approximately a quarter of the International Organization of Supreme Audit Institutions (INTOSAI) membership. According to Pompe et. Al (2022), these SAIs not only audit, but also assume crucial roles in the adjudication and management of public funds. SAIs with jurisdictional functions have become a beacon of transparency and accountability, as they conduct reviews of accounts, and impose sanctions upon detecting poor management or financial irregularities in government administration. 

About 25% of all supreme audit institutions (SAIs) represented in INTOSAI undertake jurisdictional activities. Most of them are found in the French-speaking, Spanish-speaking and Portuguese-speaking areas of the world. But, it’s an attractive model that extends beyond these linguistic and cultural spheres: Latvia, South Africa and Thailand have recently equipped their SAIs with a new competence and an appropriate organization to sanction the misuse of public money. Others, like Indonesia or Vietnam, are willing to obtain new jurisdictional powers or similar functions. This is also a model that can evolve: The French legislator has just radically reformed the system of liability for public managers, which had been in force for decades.