Before the war on corruption reaches its finality--or at least before the term of Auditor General John Morlu expires--the attendant rows of the struggle will have exposed stunning contradictions in high and low places in the country. The remolded Liberia auditing office, the General Auditing Commission (GAC) has vowed to make a fundamental break with the past, distancing itself from, and shedding those, obsolete methods and traits which have long compromised the fight for greater transparency and accountability. But it seems such a radical move by the GAC is a thorn in the flesh of not only auditees and fiscal hoodlums, but also an irritation for some sections of the larger public, even including some professed anti-graft elements. The contradiction lifted its head in a recent statement by a civil society actor, and the GAC wasted no time in issuing a lengthy riposte that accentuates its irreversible determination to keep the fight at feet of the forces of corruption in all its forms and shades, as Our Senior Staff Writer reports.
Augustine Toe is his recent widely publicized yearend position statement calls into question the professionalism of the General Auditing Commission (GAC) as a few auditees had done. Amongst other things, he called for the audit of the Commission, accused it of “leaking its own audit reports”, of not respecting the “confidentiality” rights of auditees, and of being selective, perhaps bias, in targeting public institutions for audit.
John Morlu’s General Auditing Commission is not taking the allegations lying down. The Governmental Affairs Department of the Commission, the liaison between the GAC and public and private institutions, over the weekend syndicated an exhaustive rejoinder which methodically addressed the qualms of Toe, executive director of the Catholic Justice and Peace Commission.
Leaking Audit Reports
The JPC executive director, amongst other things, accused the GAC of leaking its audit reports, with specific reference to the draft audit report on fallen former Information Minister Laurent Bropleh.
On this count, the GAC says the JPC director has no evidence to prove that it leaked its own audit reports.
“It is regrettable that you have accused the GAC without evidence that we leaked our own draft reports, a report of which we had complete and total control to release at any time. How can one leak a report that he or she is legally entitled to release at any time? JPC has to remain mindful of many detractors that are targeting the GAC and its officials and employees, because of it being on the frontline against corruption,” the GAC said in a communication to the JPC director.
GAC says it does not put draft reports in the press as alleged by director Augustine Toe, quipping whether the civil society actor does not know that putting the MICAT draft audit report in the hands of 29 people in Liberia and 6 abroad including London, Washington, Senegal, New York, etc., for their comments was a porous situation with a high possibility for leakage.
The 29 people in Liberia copied, according to the GAC, included Bernard Warity, Julu Swen, Christopher Sele, Ernest Kiazolu, the President, several officials of the Central Bank, Ministry of Finance, MICAT and past Government officials and comptrollers of MICAT.
In less than two hours after submission, a non-GAC person took the draft report to Carey Street and discussed it in public, the GAC told director Toe in a communication. “GAC was notified and the AG informed the President. How did the BBC get a copy of the draft report to come to GAC to ask for explanation?”
Citing examples of leaked audit reports in the recent past, the letter reported that the Auditor General was not in the country when a deputy minister leaked the US$1.1 million audit and that he was in America and he complained about it.
“The Auditor General was in South Africa when he was notified by the President that ‘next week’ the NASSCORP audit would leak and he wrote wondering how could that be possible when the voluminous draft was only given to NASSCORP, the Office of the President and other relevant parties named in the report,” the letter further said. “There are many instances of leakage in Liberia. But we under professional obligation to ensure that the due process and the rights of others are respected, which means giving the audit reports to anyone who is named in the draft report. This is fundamental fairness and the right thing to do. But how can you control a draft report that is in the hands of 35 or more people?”
Further debunking Augustine Toe’s allegation that the GAC leaked its own reports, the Commission said leakages of public documents in Liberia is not unique to the GAC, propounding a chain of rhetorical questions:
“You also have taken note of the many leakages in Government, including letters written by the President to foreign officials leaking in the papers. I am sure you read FrontPageAfrica when a letter sent to Secretary of State Clinton was leaked on FrontPageAfrica on the same day the President wrote. I have read leaked Presidential memos in the papers. Would you say that the President leaked these documents? Or is it GAC that is doing so?
“Quite recently, a payment voucher was leaked to the papers (FPA) of alleged payment to Jackson E. Doe. It is also in the papers today. Did GAC leak Ministry of Finance records, as well? The letter from the President to former Minister Jackson Doe was leaked in the papers on this matter. So was it the Executive Mansion and the President who leaked it? I think not, because there is no evidence to support such a position. Did GAC leak the Anti-Corruption Commission report on the Ministry of Gender and Development? We have not seen a copy of that report, neither have you and I supposed to, but it was leaked in the papers. Did GAC also leak the LACC report on the CBL and other banks?
“Did GAC leak the NBI investigation on alleged contract between Ministry of Finance and a local auditing firm? Was it the GAC that leaked the mounting of emails that was reported as ‘Knuckle Gate II?’ This led to the establishment of the Dunn Commission report, a report in which the forensic analysis was leaked to the media. I could go on and on. GAC remains hopeful that JPC will not join a group of people who are bent on attacking and destroying the GAC and its work. What was the basis of publishing the draft TRC report? It is the right thing to do? Is it not paradoxical for you to praise the publishing of the TRC draft report but falsely chastised the GAC for draft reports being published? Both are government institutions. Is the TRC report not more security- and safety-related than audit reports on the use of taxpayers monies?”
The GAC clarification letter says the Auditor General and the GAC have all rights consistent with statute and international best practice and would not leak reports as alleged by the JPC director.
The Commission said those who leak reports do so to undermine the work of the GAC.
Audit Confidentiality
The JPC director contended in his statement that audit reports should be kept confidential because, according to him, it stigmatizes and violates the rights of auditees under the legal theory of culprit deemed innocent until proven guilty.
On this count, the GAC replies defiantly, saying that JPC has no legal reliance for such a proposition.
Addressing the Toe qualm, GAC flares another batch of rhetorically penetrating questions: “What is the issue of confidentiality that you are propagating? What is the legal reliance for your confidentiality theory? What are the auditing standards on confidentiality in the public sector and for the use of public monies? Mr. Toe, do you want Liberia return to the dark days of the past when audit was taboo? Not long ago, the budget of Liberia was deemed confidential document only given to a select few. Today, it is a public document and rightfully so because of the intervention of the GAC”.
The GAC says Section 8.35 of the Government Auditing Standards of America and Section 5.4 of the INTOSAI standards on auditing as adopted by GAC indicates that confidential information are defined by law through a classification system passed by the National Legislature.
In the absence of a law classifying and de-classifying records, the international standards as prescribed by INTOSAI and as reflected in standards of USA GAO (Yellow Book), the Auditor General determines what is confidential and what is not confidential, the GAC letter to JPC’s Augustine Toe asserts.
Confidential information relates as per auditing standards to only security and safety issues, the communication states. “But the auditing standards even caution Auditor Generals to be mindful in just saying this or that is confidential as the determination of confidentiality must be so great that it exceeds the “broader public interest.”
It is a very high threshold for any Auditor General to exclude information it determined confidential, the GAC says, adding that “in fact, in these circumstances, the auditing standards demand that a ‘Limited-Use Report’ is issued and that the taxpayers are given sufficient justification why such information is deemed confidential.
The GAC told human rights lawyer Augustine Toe that it is hard to argue that ghost names, fake vouchers, bogus procurement arrangements, etc are considered confidential. It is also difficult to argue that salaries and remuneration are confidential in Government, as even President Obama has released on White House Website the salaries and compensation for White House staff.”
Selectivity of Auditees
JPC’s Augustine Toe also accused the GAC of focusing its audit on certain public institutions while others remain untouched in terms of audit. But the GAC, in its response to Toe, said the human rights defender does not understand and appreciate the financial constraints or under-funding problem the Commission faces and how this contributes to the conduct of risk index to determine audit priority.
Upon taking office, the letter to Toe states, the Auditor General developed a risk index to determine objectively which institutions to audit given the risk profile.
“This Index was discussed with the international partners and it was on that basis that five ministries were selected for HIPC audits. In the absence of this Risk Index it would have been difficult to convince international partners since there was a general desire to audit all 72 government institutions as a condition to meet HIPC because the Government of Liberia was emerging from war and did not have the funds to audit all Government institutions, as auditing is a highly expensive venture.
“For instance, it was EU who paid US$320,000 to audit LPRC, US$512,000 to audit CBL, US$350,000 to audit the Maritime, etc during the Interim National Transitional Government of Liberia (INTGL). The Government of Liberia also paid KPMG US$1.2 million to audit just the domestic debt of Liberia. The Government of Liberia budgeted in 2007/2008, which was the first year of the new GAC, US$1.7 million for the entire GAC operations. You can compare this amount with US$1.2 million to a foreign firm on just domestic debt,” the GAC clarified.
The GAC says the main institutions that the Government of Liberia and international partners agreed on for the HIPC are also the institutions with the largest budgets.
There are several other institutions that receive a lot of funding from Government and are yet to be audited because of the concentration on HIPC audits and, more so, because of the lack of funding to the GAC.
While the GAC is among a list of 27 plus autonomous institutions in Liberia, the letter to Toe states it is interesting that Toe’s call for audit has singled out the GAC when there are other institutions that are also considered pillars of integrity.
On Calls For GAC Audit
Regarding the JPC’s Director’s call for an audit of the GAC, the Commission states it was Auditor General John Morlu, II, who fought hard to ensure that the Legislature commission an independent audit of the GAC, as it is a requirement for the GAC to meet Level Three status.
“In fact, it would interest you to note that an appraisal on the financial operations of the GAC is routinely carried by the Ministry of Finance and that GAC’s financial reports are published on its website: www.gacliberia.com,” the GAC stated in its letter to the JPC director, saying further that such a pioneering fiscal attitude is untypical in other countries like Zambia, where the Auditor General audits itself.
“In Liberia, we decided pursuant to our commitment to remain the torchbearer in the fight against corruption and graft and the paragon of transparency and accountability that it is important for the National Legislature to commission the audit of the GAC,” the GAC asserted. “So the auditing of the accounts of the GAC was largely promoted by the Auditor General and anyone else, coupled with a direct appeal to the Speaker to commission an audit. During the close of the National Legislature last year, the Speaker made a pronouncement that the National Legislature would commission an audit of the GAC and this was a big media event. We welcomed the audit of the accounts of the GAC at any time and we wanted it sooner than requested because we are audited monthly by the Ministry of Finance before a single dime is disbursed to us. We are sure of our fiscal deportment.”
The GAC told the JPC director that it welcomes the constant attacks directed at it from all angles and from all quarters, demonstrating the independence, professionalism and credibility it has garnered in so short a time, when the AG arrived in May 2007.
“Here at the GAC, we are clear on the fact that cleansing an archaic and a deeply corruption-cultured society would generate chaotic reactions and dissents in which the GAC and its staff will be prime targets.”
