Public sector performance auditing poses significant role in appraising the accountability of government through monitoring the operation of public power, especially how public resources are being used. In parallel, follow-up audit appear to be important to recheck on the responsiveness of auditee towards audit recommendation on various issues raised pertaining to improper use of public fund. Lack of audit follow-up may cause a problem to measure the real value of performance audit and expected results of audit recommendation. Accountability mechanism pertaining to follow up audit in public sector performance audit perspective need to be enforced not by sole actor but various actors. Accountability mechanism regarded as either the right to argument or questions information conveyed and information flow pertaining to unresolved performance audit issues by various actors for settlement. During the follow-up audit, a free flow of information by all those actors enable them to voice their concern or stand to ensure performance audit issues are well taken care in terms of corrective as well as preventive action. In other words it implies how auditors with the influence of Parliament, PAC, Media and citizen or general public participating during the follow-up audit and consequently become one of the accountability mechanism of public sector performance auditing. Since it involves various actors within the accountability circle, this study is anticipated to provide empirical facts on the influence of each actors in the current practice of follow-up audit as perceived by the SAI auditors based on the developed conceptual framework.
Keywords: Follow-up audit, Performance Auditing, Accountability Mechanism
ICAS Online Proceedings Library