Question 140

Does the Supreme Audit Institution (SAI) maintain formal mechanisms through which the public can suggest issues/topics to include in the SAI’s audit program (for example, by bringing ideas on agencies, programs, or projects that could be audited)?


 * a. Yes, the SAI maintains formal mechanisms through which the public can suggest issues/topics to include in its audit program.
 * b. The requirements for an “a” response are not met.
 * c. Not applicable (please comment).

OBS Guidelines
This question assesses whether the Supreme Audit Institution (SAI) has established mechanisms through which the public can provide suggestions on issues/topics to be included in its audit program. When deciding its audit agenda, the SAI may undertake audits for a sample of agencies, projects, and programs in the country; and such a selection could be based on complaints and suggestions made by members of the public. To receive such suggestions, the SAI may create formal mechanisms, like setting up a website, hotline, or office (or assigning staff to liaise with the public).

Please note that formal mechanisms that do not explicitly seek the public’s input in the audit program (such as general comment submission boxes on the SAI’s website) should not be considered for this question.

(1) What should be the minimum acceptable threshold for accepting “a" response?
In OBS 2017 we accepted mere comment boxes for “a”. In OBS 2019 we raised the minimum bar, and do not accept a general comments box to qualify for an “a”. We request researchers to look harder in annual reports of SAIs, personal experiences, interviews with officials to score “a”.

(2) Are the SAI's guidelines or laws allowing citizens to appeal to the audit institution an acceptable citation for “a”?
In countries where researchers cite the law but are not able to prove the exact mechanism through which suggestions for audit topics are collected (email/ surveys/ meetings), we could suggest researchers to call the SAI and understand the mechanism.