BEGIN FROM THE TOP

Jan 14, 2009 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

I have never heard about a forensic audit of the assets of anyone. I have read and known about forensic audits of governmental projects and government departments, which have subsequently led to charges against persons concerned.
Right here in the region, when the Patrick Manning government came to power, it brought in forensic auditors to probe the new airport project which was built under the Basdeo Panday government.
The forensic auditors claimed to have found problems, and it is based on their findings that charges were laid against a number of persons.
Suffice to say that, years after the charges were instituted, not one person has been indicted in that case.
Last year, a Price Waterhouse audit of the operations of Tourism Development Company of Trinidad and Tobago reportedly found problems, including problems with the expenditure for Cricket World Cup 2007.
There have also been calls for a forensic audit of the Urban Development Corporation of that same country. A commission of inquiry was later set up to examine the operations.
When it comes to the assets of government officers, I have heard about investigations by integrity commissions and others, but I have never heard anything about a forensic audit of those assets.
It strikes me, therefore, that for the President of Guyana to call for a forensic audit of the assets of Customs officers and for overseas assistance to be contemplated is an admission of poor investigative capabilities in Guyana. I find it shocking and disgraceful that we need overseas expertise to simply conduct an investigation into the assets of Customs officers.
Amazingly, in another matter, we are being told that the Guyana Revenue Authority (GRA) will be investigating the assets of persons suspected to be involved in the drugs trade. Well, if the GRA is not capable of investigating its own staff, how can they be expected to investigate suspected drug barons?
If, however, we are going to seek the services of forensic auditors, there is no end to the number of cases and institutions in Guyana which should be subject to such audits. Years ago, there was a problem with the procurement of stone from Canada. There was no forensic audit of this controversy.
Then we had a problem with the exportation of wildlife. Later, we were told that the financial records of the Wildlife Division, which falls under the Office of the President, could not be reconciled.
Then we had the law books scandal, for which a public officer received a slap on the wrist. There have been many more areas and controversies which justified forensic audits, but to which the government did not call in external forensic auditors. There was also a big scam within the Ministry of Finance relating to duty free concessions on motor vehicles.
In the case of the latter, only two low level clerks were charged. This has eroded public confidence in these investigations, since only the small fish seem to be nabbed.
If external forensic auditors are therefore going to be recruited, this should be welcomed, since it could rebuild public confidence when it comes to wiping out corruption.
However, these audits should start from the top and not from the bottom. It is well known, for example, that the Integrity Commission does not have the skills and expertise to conduct detailed assessments of the assets of public officials, including ministers of the government.
Thus, while public officers have been asked to declare these assets each year, there has never been a forensic audit into any of those declarations, simply because the local capability does not exist within the Integrity Commission.
If the government is serious about stamping out corruption, if it is  serious about ensuring that public officials do not raid the public treasury, if it feels that forensic audits of the assets of such officials is a recourse it should pursue, then these forensic audits should begin from the top.
Let us first have an investigation into the assets of all government ministers. Let us use the declarations that have been provided to the Integrity Commission and let external forensic auditors be called in to examine whether these declarations reflect the true wealth of those making them.
Then let us move down the line, including to the Privatization Unit, so that there can be no questions about the integrity of our senior public officials.
When that phase is completed, let us move onwards towards investigations into specific controversies relating to stone importation, gold exportation, the floating away of the Charity wharf, the Cane Grove Sea Defense breach, the Wildlife Scam, and the law books controversy.
Let us bring in the experts to answer the questions which were left unanswered in relation to medicinal drugs supplied to the Georgetown Public Corporation, which the Auditor General raised in his last report.
The forensic audit should then move on to the many other alleged scams that have been making news in Guyana. Let us bring in the experts to probe the gold scam, the Charity wharf scam, the wildlife scam, the law books scandal.
I am sure that we will have a much better record than Trinidad and Tobago if this approach is taken. Rather than picking on a few Customs officers, let us start this process of forensic audits from the top, rather than from the bottom.

---

---