Prof. Edward Dua Agyeman
The Chairman of the Board of the Ghana Audit Service, Prof. Edward Dua Agyeman, has taken exception to a statement by the INTOSAI Development Initiative regarding what the Initiative describes as an interference in the work of the Auditor-General.
Prof. Agyeman has wondered why the Initiative ignored the standard principle of giving the other side, which is the board, the opportunity to be heard before drawing a conclusion on the subject.
The said statement authored by Einar Gorissen, the Director General of the Initiative, according to Prof. Agyeman, was not a true picture of the Ghana Audit Service.
“At no material time has the Board or the Ghana Audit Service interfered or engaged in any act, conduct or omission which has sought or intended to achieve any objectives of interference with the independence of Ghana’s Auditor-General,” he said.
INTOSODAI-IDA is the International Organisation of Supreme Audit Institution based in Oslo, Norway, which is charged with ensuring that the auditing profession is protected from interference from the executive.
The Director General’s correspondence which attracted the reaction of the Board Chairman of the Audit Service was dated 30th July 2020 and stems from the brouhaha over the Auditor-General, Yao Domelevo.
The chairman was quick to add in his reaction, however, that since the subject matter for which the Norway-based international audit integrity protection institution is in court, he was restricted on how much he can delve into the matter.
He pointed out that the Lima Declaration, the Mexico Declaration, the United Nations Resolutions and any other resolutions or declarations are anchored in the rule of law.
By this reference, the Prof. sought to imply that government action regarding the subject is steeped in law and nowhere arbitrary.
He said the independence of the Auditor-General of Ghana is firmly anchored in the Constitution.
The board chairman pointed out that Mr. Domelevo’s general aversion to comply with the requirements of the law led to other instances where his decisions to disallow any item of expenditure which is contrary to law and surcharge have been set aside by the courts of Ghana. These, he added, were based on the same or similar reason for non-compliance with the relevant laws and procedures.
“Clearly, it cannot be said that INTOSAI would be proud of an Auditor-General whose failure to adhere to the basic auditing principles resulting in such repeated dose of embarrassment in the auditing profession,” he noted.
He denied the allegation that the government or the Ghana Audit Service or any other state agency has engaged in any act intended to interfere with the independence of the Auditor-General.
By A.R. Gomda