Question 142

Does the Supreme Audit Institution (SAI) maintain formal mechanisms through which the public can contribute to audit investigations (as respondents, witnesses, etc.)?


 * a. Yes, SAI maintains formal mechanisms through which the public can contribute to audit investigations.
 * b. The requirements for an “a” response are not met.
 * c. Not applicable (please comment).

OBS Guidelines
This question mirrors question 140, but instead of covering public assistance in formulating the SAI’s audit program, it focuses on whether the Supreme Audit Institution has established mechanisms through which the public can participate in audit investigations. In addition to seeking public input to determine its audit agenda, the SAI may wish to provide formal opportunities for the public and civil society organizations to participate in the actual audit investigations, as witnesses or respondents.

(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.