This is the accessible text file for the International Journal of 
Government Auditing, October 2011 edition: Special Issue on Peer 
Review. 

This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as 
part of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. 
Every attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data 
integrity of the original printed product. Accessibility features, 
such as text descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes 
placed at the end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, 
are provided but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format 
of the printed version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an 
exact electronic replica of the printed version. We welcome your 
feedback. Please E-mail your comments regarding the contents or 
accessibility features of this document to Webmaster@gao.gov. 

INTOSAI International Journal Of Government Auditing: 

October 2011: 
Volume 38, No. 4: 

Board of Editors: 
Josef Moser, President, Rechnungshof, Austria: 
John Wiersema, Interim Auditor General, Canada: 
Faiza Kefi, First President, Cour des Comptes, Tunisia: 
Gene Dodaro, Comptroller General, United States of America: 
Adelina González, Acting Comptroller General, Venezuela: 

President: Helen H. Hsing (U.S.A.): 

Editor: Muriel Forster (U.S.A.): 

Assistant Editors: 
Linda J. Sellevaag (U.S.A.): 
Melanie Papasian (U.S.A.): 

Associate Editors: 
Office of the Auditor General (Canada): 
Jagbans Singh (ASOSAI-India): 
Luseane Sikalu (PASAI-Tonga): 
CAROSAI Secretariat (St. Lucia): 
EUROSAI General Secretariat (Spain): 
Khemais Hosni (Tunisia): 
Basilio Jauregui (Venezuela): 
INTOSAI General Secretariat (Austria): 
U.S. Government Accountability Office (U.S.A.): 

Administration: 
Sebrina Chase (U.S.A.): 
Paul Miller (U.S.A.): 

Members of the Governing Board of INTOSAI: 
Terence Nombembe, Auditor-General Office of the Auditor-General South 
Africa: 
Liu Jiayi, Auditor General National Audit Office, People's Republic of 
China: 
Osama Jaffer Facieeh, President, General Auditing Bureau, Saudi 
Arabia: 
Josef Moser, President; Rechnungshof; Austria, Secretary General: 
Terrance Bastian, Auditor General, Department of the Auditor General, 
Bahamas: 
Ziriyo Bogui, President, Chambre des Comptes, Cote d'Ivoire: 
Carlos Ramón Pólit Faggioni, Contraloría General del Estado, Ecuador: 
László Domokos, President, Allami Számvevöszék, Hungary: 
Vinod Rai, Comptroller and Auditor General, Office of the Comptroller 
and Auditor General, India: 
Ali Al-Hesnawi, Auditor General, General People's Committee of 
Institution for Auditing and Technical Supervision, Libyan Arab 
Jamahiriya: 
Juan M. Portal-Martinez, Auditor General Auditoria Superior de la 
Federation, Mexico, Chairman: 
Lyn Provost, Controller and Auditor-General, Office of the Controller 
and Auditor-General, New Zealand: 
Jurgen Kosmo, Auditor General, Riksrevisjonen, Norway: 
Muhammad Akhtar Buland Rana, Auditor-General, Office of the Auditor-
General, Pakistan: 
Sergey Vadimovich Stepashin, Chairman, Accounts Chamber, Russian 
Federation: 
Amyas Morse, Comptroller and Auditor, General National Audit Office, 
United Kingdom: 
Gene Dodaro, Comptroller General, Government Accountability Office, 
United States of America: 
Adelina González, Acting Comptroller General, Contraloría General de 
la República, Venezuela: 

The International Journal of Government Auditing is published 
quarterly (January, April, July, October) in Arabic, English, French, 
German, and Spanish on behalf of INTOSAI (International Organization 
of Supreme Audit Institutions). The Journal, which is the official 
organ of INTOSAI, is dedicated to the advancement of government 
auditing procedures and techniques. Opinions and beliefs expressed are 
those of editors or individual contributors and do not necessarily 
reflect the views or policies of the organization. 

The editors invite submissions of articles, special reports, and news 
items, which should be sent to the editorial offices at: 

U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
Room 7814, 441 G Street, NW: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: 
U.S.A. 
(phone: 202-512-4707; fax: 202-512-4021; 
e-mail: intosaijournal@gao.gov) 

Given the Journal's use as a teaching tool, articles most likely to be 
accepted are those that deal with pragmatic aspects of public sector 
auditing. These include case studies, ideas on new audit 
methodologies, or details on audit training programs. Articles that 
deal primarily with theory would not be appropriate. 

The Journal is distributed to INTOSAI members and other interested 
parties at no cost. It is also available electronically at [hyperlink, 
http://www.intosaijournal.org] or [hyperlink, http://wwwintosa.org] 
and by contacting the Journal at spel@gao.gov. 

Articles in the Journal are indexed in the Accountants' Index 
published by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants
and included in Management Contents. Selected articles are included in 
abstracts published by Anbar Management Services, Wembley, England, 
and University Microfilms International, Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A. 

Contents: 

Editorial: 

Overview of Peer Review Documentation: 

News in Brief: 

Peer Review: Lessons Learned from Undergoing a Peer Review: 

Peer Review: Reflections of Peer Review Team Members: 

Spotlight on ISSAIs: 

INTOSAI-Donor Cooperation Update: 

Inside INTOSAI: 

IDI Update: 

INTOSAI Calendar: 

[End of section] 

Special Section on Peer Review: 

Editorial: Peer Review: A Quality Assurance Tool for SAIs: 

An interview with Dieter Engels, President of the German SAI and 
Chairman of the INTOSAI Subcommittee to Promote Best Practices and 
Quality Assurance through Voluntary Peer Reviews: 

In the field of science journalism, peer review has a track record 
dating back to the 17th century. In external government auditing, peer 
review is a relatively new tool that has gained increasing importance 
in the INTOSAI community in recent years. 

Subcommittee 3 of INTOSAI‘s Capacity Building Committee (CBC) promotes 
best practices and quality assurance through voluntary peer reviews. 
According to information provided by the subcommittee, 24 peer review 
projects have been successfully completed since 1999. More than 30 
supreme audit institutions (SAI) have participated in at least one 
peer review, either as the reviewed or reviewing SAI. Currently, five 
INTOSAI members are being reviewed by peers. 

This edition of the International Journal of Government Auditing 
focuses on peer reviews in recognition of their growing scope and 
importance within INTOSAI. 

The support team of CBC Subcommittee 3 interviewed Prof. Dr. Dieter 
Engels about the various approaches to peer review that SAIs have 
adopted and the German SAI’s own experiences with peer review. 

Question:  Why do SAIs carry out peer reviews? 

Dr. Engels:  Peer reviews are carried out for a variety of reasons. In 
most cases, a peer review is used as a quality assurance tool to 
answer the question, Who audits the auditor? It helps SAIs carry out 
their audit work in compliance with professional standards; it also 
helps them enhance their practices and procedures. For example, when 
the German SAI participated in a peer review of the Austrian SAI in 
2010, we investigated how the Austrian SAI could improve the way it 
carries out its core functions of auditing and providing advice. 

Peer reviews can also provide the basis for elaborating an SAI’s 
strategic development plan. When Estonia was preparing for its 
imminent accession to the European Union, its SAI underwent a peer 
review whose results provided key guidance for defining its future 
role and mandate. 

Question: You have just outlined the benefits for the reviewed SAIs. 
What incentives are there for SAIs to assume the role of reviewing SAI? 

Dr. Engels:  Peer reviews provide benefits to all participants. Their 
merits are not limited to the reviewed SAI. The reviewing SAI gains a 
deeper insight into the procedures and methods of a peer organization. 
Thus, it can identify good practices by comparing its own structure 
and procedures to those of the reviewed SAI. To date, the German SAI 
has participated in four peer reviews, and each time we identified 
helpful suggestions and ideas for our own work. 

Question:  All this sounds very positive. What about potential risks? 
And, if there are any, how can they be addressed? 

Dr. Engels:  Nobody likes to be criticized and, therefore, the 
decision to undergo a peer review requires courage, openness, and 
confidence in one’s own strengths. As a reward for this courage, the 
SAIs involved should deal with each other on an equal footing without 
any bias and in a spirit of friendship and cooperation. This does not 
mean that the process will be dominated by words of appreciation and 
that criticism is undesirable. A peer review yields optimum benefits 
only if the partner SAIs engage in a sincere, frank, and constructive 
dialogue and the recommendations and proposals for improvement are 
based on sound arguments. 

To avoid ambiguities or misunderstandings during a peer review, the 
participating SAIs should agree in advance on a framework for the 
process. For instance, it is essential to agree on the peer review’s 
objectives, timetable, and procedural steps and how its costs will be 
handled. These basic conditions should be spelled out in writing in a 
document known as a memorandum of understanding (MOU). 

In most cases, the organizational structure and audit environment of 
the reviewed and the reviewing SAIs will differ from each other. 
Therefore, the peer review team should receive all information it 
needs to familiarize itself with the legal, political, economic, and 
societal environment of the reviewed SAI. This will help ensure that 
the reviewed SAI can accept and implement the recommendations the peer 
review generates. 

Question:  What areas do peer reviews normally focus on? 

Dr. Engels:  There is no one generally applicable rule. Since peer 
reviews are carried out voluntarily, the participating SAIs are free 
to decide on their scope and content. 

On one hand, the peer review may follow a quite comprehensive 
approach, looking into all audit activities and the entire structural 
organization of an SAI. This was the case for the peer review of the 
European Court of Auditors that was conducted in 2008. 

On the other hand, peer reviews may focus on one or several specific 
fields of activities. As a case in point, I would mention the peer 
review of the Peruvian SAI, conducted in 2008, which addressed five 
selected fields of activity, including relations with Parliament and 
processing of petitions. 

Question:  Should the results of peer reviews be published? 

Dr. Engels:  The decision about whether or not to publish a peer 
review report lies exclusively with the reviewed SAI. Nevertheless, 
experience has shown that those SAIs that have undergone a peer review 
have usually decided to make the results available to the general 
public. 

Personally, I welcome such publication. An institution that deals with 
its strengths and weaknesses with equal openness creates confidence in 
itself and enhances the effectiveness of its work. Moreover, other 
SAIs can also benefit from the peer review report by, for instance, 
using it as a yardstick to design their own peer reviews. 

Question:  What other tools are available to help SAIs considering or 
definitely planning to have a peer review? 

Dr. Engels:  As you may know, the Subcommittee to Promote Best 
Practices and Quality Assurance through Voluntary Peer Reviews has 
drafted the Peer Review Guideline, which was adopted as ISSAI 5600 at 
the XX INCOSAI held in South Africa. The guideline is a useful tool 
that helps both the reviewing and reviewed SAI to successfully 
complete all stages of the peer review process. The document places 
particular emphasis on the contents of the MOU, whose importance I 
have already pointed out. 

The guideline has an appendix, the Peer Review Checklist, that 
contains detailed questions that can be asked in the course of a peer 
review. The checklist provides guidance to the team of reviewers 
depending on the scope of the review and the fields to be reviewed. 

Figure: ISSAI 5600: Peer Review Guideline and Checklist: 

[Illustration of Peer Review Guideline] 

The Peer Review Guideline developed by Subcommittee 3 of INTOSAI’s 
Capacity Building Committee (CBC) was adopted by the XX INCOSAI as 
ISSAI 5600. The guideline is available on the ISSAI Web site at 
www.issai.org and on the CBC Web site at [hyperlink, 
http://cbc.courdescomptes.ma] under “Guides & Materials.” 

The Peer Review Guideline makes recommendations for all stages of the 
peer review process. It discusses preliminary questions (such as the 
objectives of a peer review and the choice of partner SAIs) as well as 
specific advice on how to prepare, implement, follow up on, and 
evaluate a peer review exercise. 

A central chapter deals with the framework conditions to be agreed 
upon. Good practice cases based on earlier peer reviews supplement 
recommendations for the provisions that the memorandum of 
understanding should include. 

The Peer Review Checklist: Appendix to ISSAI 5600 provides guidance 
for conducting a peer review. The checklist includes questions 
designed to help understand the national environment of the SAI to be 
reviewed as well as the SAI’s structural organization, internal rules, 
audit standards, and audit procedures. It is also available on the CBC 
and ISSAI Web sites. 

[End of figure] 

The peer review documentation posted on the Capacity Building Committee’
s Web site [hyperlink, http://cbc.courdescomptes.ma] is another useful 
tool. At present, this documentation includes MOUs and reports of 20 
peer reviews (see the list of the documentation on p. 5). It can serve 
as reference material that will help SAIs make informed decisions 
about carrying out a peer review. 

Question:  You already mentioned that the XX INCOSAI adopted the Peer 
Review Guideline. Developing it was a major task of the peer review 
subcommittee. What issues will the subcommittee address in the years 
to come? 

Dr. Engels:  While we have finished the guideline, we have not fully 
accomplished our mission. INTOSAI’s Strategic Plan 2011–2016 assigned 
several tasks to our subcommittee to enhance the environment for 
conducting voluntary peer reviews. The subcommittee wants to continue 
its efforts to assist SAIs as much as possible with preparing for and 
implementing peer reviews. 

Specifically, one of our aims is to supplement and further refine the 
peer review documentation. Therefore, we are always anxious to receive 
professional input from SAIs that are conducting or undergoing a peer 
review. We also appreciate it very much if MOUs, reports of results, 
and other peer review documents are shared with us to enhance our 
documentation. 

We are looking for new ways of presenting peer review materials to 
facilitate research and reliance on the documents. 

Furthermore, we collect feedback on the applicability and the utility 
of the Peer Review Guideline and its checklist. For this purpose, the 
guideline includes a concise survey at its end inviting all INTOSAI 
members to share ideas and suggestions with us. Our subcommittee will 
use this feedback to review and refine the guideline. 

If you have questions, wish to provide feedback on the Peer Review 
Guideline, or wish to share relevant documents with other SAIs, please 
contact the German SAI at international@brh.bund.de. 

Special Issue on Peer Review: 

This issue highlights some of the peer review initiatives being 
carried out across the INTOSAI community. In addition to the interview 
with the chair of the INTOSAI peer review subcommittee in the 
editorial, two articles deal with the just-completed peer review of 
the Slovak Republic. 

The first article was written by Dr. Ján Jasovský, President, Supreme 
Audit Office of the Slovak Republic, and shares insights from 
perspective of the entity being reviewed. 

The second article was written by Pawel Banas and Jacek Mazur, Supreme 
Audit Office of Poland, two members of the peer review team. They 
share their reflections from the perspective of the team performing 
the peer review. 

INTOSAI’s peer review efforts are coordinated by subcommittee 3 of the 
Capacity Building Committee. The Journal wishes to express its 
appreciation to the subcommittee, chaired by the SAI of Germany, for 
its invaluable assistance in preparing this issue. 

[Photograph: Members of the INTOSAI subcommittee on peer review] 

Table: Overview of Peer Review Documentation: 

The documentation listed below is available on the Capacity Building 
Committee Web site [hyperlink, http://cbc.courdescomptes.ma] under 
“Guides & Materials.” If you wish to supply additional relevant peer 
review documentation, please contact the German SAI at 
international@brh.bund.de. 

Reviewed SAI: Austria: 
Year: 2009/2010: 
Peer Review Team (Reviewing SAI or other entity): Denmark, Germany, 
Switzerland; 
Documents[A]: Objectives; MOU (German); Report (German). 

Reviewed SAI: Canada; 
Year: 2004; 
Peer Review Team (Reviewing SAI or other entity): France, Netherlands, 
Norway, United Kingdom; 
Documents[A]: MOU; Questionnaire; Report; Action plan; Press release. 

Reviewed SAI: Canada; 
Year: 2010; 
Peer Review Team (Reviewing SAI or other entity): Australia, The 
Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark, Norway; 
Documents[A]: Report; Action Plan. 

Reviewed SAI: Czech Republic; 
Year: 2000; 
Peer Review Team (Reviewing SAI or other entity): SIGMA (Austria, 
France, Ireland, Sweden); 
Documents[A]: Report. 

Reviewed SAI: Denmark; 
Year: 2006; 
Peer Review Team (Reviewing SAI or other entity): Canada, Norway, 
Poland, Sweden; 
Documents[A]: Report. 

Reviewed SAI: Estonia; 
Year: 1999; 
Peer Review Team (Reviewing SAI or other entity): SIGMA (Netherlands, 
Germany, Denmark); 
Documents[A]: Report; Background paper. 

Reviewed SAI: Estonia; 
Year: 2005; 
Peer Review Team (Reviewing SAI or other entity): SIGMA (Germany, 
Netherlands, Sweden, United Kingdom); 
Documents[A]: Summary report; Report. 

Reviewed SAI: European Court of Auditors; 
Year: 2008; 
Peer Review Team (Reviewing SAI or other entity): Austria, Canada, 
Norway, Portugal; 
Documents[A]: Report. 

Reviewed SAI: Republic of Macedonia; 
Year: 2007; 
Peer Review Team (Reviewing SAI or other entity): Germany; 
Documents[A]: Key questions; Report. 

Reviewed SAI: Indonesia; 
Year: 2009; 
Peer Review Team (Reviewing SAI or other entity): Netherlands; 
Documents[A]: Report. 

Reviewed SAI: Mexico; 
Year: 2008; 
Peer Review Team (Reviewing SAI or other entity): Puerto Rico, United 
Kingdom, United States; 
Documents[A]: Summary information; Report. 

Reviewed SAI: Netherlands; 
Year: 2006/2007; 
Peer Review Team (Reviewing SAI or other entity): Norway, New Zealand, 
South Africa, United Kingdom; 
Documents[A]: MOU; Report. 

Reviewed SAI: New Zealand; 
Year: 2008; 
Peer Review Team (Reviewing SAI or other entity): Canada, United 
Kingdom, Australian National University, Environmental Risk Management 
Authority (New Zealand), Yarralumla Consulting Pty Ltd (New Zealand); 
Documents[A]: Report. 

Reviewed SAI: Norway; 
Year: 2005; 
Peer Review Team (Reviewing SAI or other entity): Denmark, Sweden, 
United Kingdom; 
Documents[A]: Report; MOU. 

Reviewed SAI: Peru; 
Year: 2008; 
Peer Review Team (Reviewing SAI or other entity): Costa Rica, Germany, 
Spain; 
Documents[A]: MOU (German, Spanish); Report (Spanish). 

Reviewed SAI: Poland; 
Year: 2001; 
Peer Review Team (Reviewing SAI or other entity): SIGMA (United 
Kingdom, Luxembourg, Sweden, Germany); 
Documents[A]: Report. 

Reviewed SAI: Poland; 
Year: 2006/2007; 
Peer Review Team (Reviewing SAI or other entity): Denmark; 
Documents[A]: Report. 

Reviewed SAI: Slovak Republic; 
Year: 2001; 
Peer Review Team (Reviewing SAI or other entity): France, European 
Court of Auditors, NATO, United Kingdom; 
Documents[A]: Summary information. 

Reviewed SAI: Switzerland; 
Year: 2004/2005; 
Peer Review Team (Reviewing SAI or other entity): Germany; 
Documents[A]: Peer Review Concept; Report (German). 

Reviewed SAI: United States; 
Year: 2005; 
Peer Review Team (Reviewing SAI or other entity): Australia, Canada, 
Mexico, Netherlands, Norway, South Africa, Sweden; 
Documents[A]: Report. 

[A] All documents are available in English, except as noted. 

Legend: 

MOU = memorandum of understanding. 

SIGMA = Support for Improvement in Governance and Management (joint 
initiative of the European Union and the Organisation for Economic Co-
operation and Development). 

[End of table] 

[End of section] 

News in Brief: 

Brazil: 

Recent Activities of the Chamber of Accounts: 

The Brazilian Court of Audit (TCU) is currently training 48 auditors 
from 13 Spanish-speaking Latin American SAIs in performance audit 
methods and techniques in a 3-month e-learning course. This course is 
being delivered in conjunction with the OLACEFS Regional Capacity 
Building Committee. Due to the intense interest of the participating 
SAIs, the TCU increased the number of training slots available in the 
course. 

The main course objective is training auditors to apply performance 
audit methodology in their own institutions. The course includes units 
on audit concepts, appropriate audit scope, audit criteria, types of 
performance audits, the steps of the audit cycle, techniques, working 
papers, and report preparation. 

The course began on August 17 and will end on November 11. During a 1-
week break, from September 19 to 26, some of the auditors from 
Mercosul countries will participate in the seminar Mercosul, Community 
Funds, and Regional Oversight, held in Brasilia. The seminar will 
include hands-on performance audit workshops led by instructors from 
the e-learning course. (Mercosul or Mercosur, the Common Market of the 
South, is a Latin American trade organization.) The seminar is being 
supported by the German international cooperation agency (GIZ) in 
partnership with OLACEFS. Following the seminar, the Mercosul SAI 
Organization (EFSUL) will conduct a coordinated audit on a project 
funded by the Mercosul Structural Convergence Fund (FOCEM). This audit 
will provide an opportunity for some auditors from the e-learning 
course to apply the performance audit methods that they are learning.
The TCU chairs INTOSAI’s Performance Audit Subcommittee and recently 
published a Spanish version of its internal Performance Audit Manual 
to support capacity development in the region. 

For additional information, contact the TCU: 

E-mail: arint@tcu.gov.br: 
Web site: www.tcu.gov.br: 

[Photograph: Course instructors for the Brazilian e-learning course on 
performance auditing] 

Pakistan: 

New Auditor General Appointed: 

In August 2011, Muhammad Akhtar Buland Rana began his 4-year term as 
the 17th Auditor General of Pakistan. At the time of his appointment, 
Mr. Rana was the most senior officer of the Pakistan Audit and 
Accounts Service. 

[Photograph: Akhtar Buland Rana] 

Mr. Rana has a master’s degree in political science and a law degree 
from the Punjab University, Lahore. He has taken international 
training courses in public financial management and commercial 
practices in telecommunication accounting in the United States, the 
United Kingdom, and Australia. He joined the Central Superior Services 
in February 1976. As a career public servant, he has taken training in 
investment analysis and economic management, problem resolution, and 
decision making, advanced performance auditing, and advanced public 
management. He attending the National Management Course of the 
National School of Public Policy, Lahore, and is a fellow of that 
institution. 

Mr. Rana brings rich experience to his assignment as Auditor General. 
After starting his carrier with public sector auditing, he managed and 
maintained the accounts of the Defense Services of Pakistan and worked 
in the consolidation of national accounts. He also served in key 
public sector commercial entities in the communications and IT sectors 
as an advisor on investment and finance. He headed the Ministry of 
Human Rights as its additional secretary in charge. As Auditor 
General, Mr. Rana envisions the SAI of Pakistan as an increasingly 
professional and responsive public body addressing the good governance 
concerns of both domestic and international stakeholders. 

Mr. Rana will serve as the Chairman of the Asian Organization of 
Supreme Audit Institutions (ASOSAI) and Permanent Secretary General of 
the Economic Cooperation Organization of Supreme Audit Institutions 
(ECOSAI). 

For additional information, please contact the Office of the Auditor 
General of Pakistan: 

E-mail: saipak@comsats.net.pk: 
Web site: www.agp.gov.pk: 

Romania: 

Recent Activities and Publications of the Romanian Court of Accounts: 

In line with its ongoing capacity-building efforts, the Romanian Court 
of Accounts (RCoA) published the July 2011 issue of its journal and 
posted it to its Web site. 

At recent meetings the Romanian Plenum approved a number of important 
materials for the RCoA’s activity. These include the following: 

* the final version of the human resources strategy for 2011–2014 and 
its implementation plan; 

* the activity program for 2012; 

* a report on the 2010 training program, which proposes that future 
training modalities include videoconferences, e-learning, 
brainstorming using an Internet forum for debates, and increased use 
of RCoA’s library; and; 

* a guide on checking the quality of audit activity that is designed 
to align RCoA’s audit work with international audit standards and best 
practice. 

[Photograph: Nicolae Vacaroiu (right), President of the Romanian Court 
of Accounts, and Dieter Engels (left), President of the 
Bundesrechnungshof, discussed areas of common interest during their 
July meeting in Bucharest] 

International Visits to Court of Accounts: 

In July 2011, the RCoA hosted official visits from the heads of the 
SAIs of Germany and China. 

Prof. Dr. Dieter Engels, the President of the Bundesrechnungshof, led 
a German delegation that visited the RCoA July 5–7. The heads of the 
two SAIs discussed bilateral institutional cooperation in the context 
of INTOSAI and EUROSAI. They shared information on their respective 
institutional frameworks, audits of European Union funds, and the 
relationships between their SAIs and Parliament. 

Liu Jiayi, Auditor General of China, led a Chinese delegation that 
visited the RCoA July 19-21. As a result of their meeting, the heads 
of the two SAIs agreed to renew the bilateral cooperation agreement 
between their SAIs that was originally signed in 2004. After the 
agreement is updated and finalized, it will be officially signed in 
Beijing. 

For additional information, contact the RCoA: 

E-mail: international.romania@rcc.ro: 
Web site: www.curteadeconturi.ro: 

[Photograph: Nicolae Vacaroiu (left), President of the Romanian Court 
of Accounts, and Liu Jiayi (right), Auditor General of the China 
National Audit Office, agreed to renew the bilateral agreement between 
their SAIs during their July meeting in Bucharest] 

Venezuela: 

Death of Comptroller General: 

In June 2011, Clodosbaldo Russián, Comptroller General of the 
Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, passed away in Cuba, where he was 
undergoing medical treatment after suffering a stroke during the 
preceding April. He was 72 years old. 

[Photograph: Clodosbaldo Russián] 

Dr. Russián, an economist and attorney, graduated from the Universidad 
Central de Venezuela. He had served as the Comptroller General of the 
Republic since 1999, when he was appointed by the Constituent National 
Assembly and subsequently ratified by the Parliament in 2000 for a 7-
year term. In 2007, he was reappointed for the 2008–2014 period.
He was a member of the INTOSAI Governing Board and the Board of 
Directors of this Journal. From 2003 to 2004, he served as the 
President of OLACEFS. He also chaired the OLACEFS Regional Training 
Committee of from 2000 until 2007. 

For additional information, contact the Venezuelan SAI: 

E-mail: contraloriavenezuela@gmail.com: 
Web site: www.cgr.gov.ve: 

Community of Portuguese-Speaking SAIs: 

International Seminar Held in East Timor: 

From June 29 to July 1, 2011, the International Organization of SAIs 
of the Community of Portuguese Speaking Countries (OISC/CPLP) 
celebrated its 15th anniversary and held its 2nd International Seminar 
in Dili, East Timor. SAI heads and staff members from Angola, Brazil, 
Cape Verde, East Timor, Macau, Mozambique, Portugal, and São Tomé and 
Príncipe participated in the events. 

[Logo illustration: The OISC/CPLP logo was designed by the Brazilian 
Architect Oscar Niemeyer] 

The Prime Minister of East Timor, Xanana Gusmão, attended the ceremony 
commemorating the OISC/CPLP’s anniversary. In opening remarks, the 
representative from the Brazilian Court of Audit, headquarters of the 
General Secretariat, recounted the various initiatives undertaken in 
the past 15 years to promote technical, scientific, and cultural 
exchanges and cooperation among Portuguese-speaking SAIs. 

A highlight of the event occurred on the first day, when the delegates 
received the news that the East Timorese Parliament had just passed a 
law creating a Timorese Court of Accounts, a crucial step toward 
institutionalizing a national audit body. 

During the 2nd OISC/CPLP Seminar, two major issues were debated: the 
role of supreme audit institutions in modern democracies and the 
importance of cooperation among SAIs for institutional development and 
capacity building. At the conclusion of the seminar, the 
representatives approved the Dili Declaration, which details the main 
recommendations coming out of the event. 

For additional information, contact the CPLP: 

E-mail: arist@tcu.gov.br: 
Web site: www.tribunaiscplp.gov.br: 

[End of section] 

Peer Review as a Form of Capacity Building: Lessons Learned from 
Undergoing a Peer Review: 

by Dr. Ján Jasovský, President, Supreme Audit Office of the Slovak 
Republic: 

More than 18 months have passed since the Supreme Audit Office (SAO) 
of the Slovak Republic (SR) decided to undergo a peer review of the 
quality and effectiveness of our work in several areas. The primary 
objective of this project was to examine the soundness of the SAO’s 
updated development strategy and its compliance with the mission of a 
modern audit institution. We focused mainly on audit activities—audit 
planning, conducting audits, and reporting results. In addition, we 
decided to have a review of our audit quality assessment methodology 
as well as our human resource and public relations functions. 
One of the SAO’s key values is to promote sound and effective public 
fund management and to provide the National Council of the SR and the 
public with objective audit findings. The SAO’s mission is to improve 
the quality and effectiveness of independent and internal audits to 
facilitate better public fund management. Accomplishing the SAO’s 
mission effectively requires an ongoing improvement process. 

[Photograph: A memorandum of understanding (MOU) for the peer review 
of the SAI of the Slovak Republic was signed by (seated from left to 
right) Frank Grogan, SAI of the United Kingdom; Jan Jasovsky, SAI of 
the Slovak Republic; and Tõnis Saar, SAI of Estonia. Representatives 
from Poland and Slovenia had signed the MOU earlier] 

The goal of the peer review was to improve the SAO’s work and examine 
the correctness of internal procedures specified in internal 
directives. We believed that an external independent review would show 
us the extent to which we had implemented international standards and 
the overall correctness of our internal procedures and also give us 
recommendations for improvement. 

At the time we were preparing for our peer review, our colleagues from 
the Austrian Court of Audit were undergoing a peer review, so we took 
advantage of their experience. We contacted several SAIs and, from 
those who replied positively, asked the National Audit Office (NAO) of 
the United Kingdom, the NAO of Estonia, the Supreme Audit Office of 
Poland, and the Court of Audit of the Republic of Slovenia to be our 
peer reviewers. I am very grateful to my colleagues from these SAIs 
for their willingness to cooperate. They provided their knowledge and 
resources and put together an international team of experts who 
dedicated their time and efforts to accomplishing the difficult task 
of examining the quality and effectiveness of our work. 

Looking back, we realize that the preceding 18 months meant a lot of 
hard work for both the peer reviewing team and for us. We prepared the 
necessary documents to run and implement the project as effectively as 
possible. During this period, six meetings were held, including 
discussions at all levels of our SAI. Altogether this amounted to 19 
working days at our headquarters in Bratislava and one of our eight 
regional offices. Dozens of conversations along with studies of our 
internal regulations formed the basis for examining our work and 
drawing up the final peer review report. 

Peer Review Guidance: 

Our peer review was conducted in compliance with ISSAI standards, 
using ISSAI 5600: Peer Review Guideline, which was recently elaborated 
by Subcommittee 3 of the INTOSAI Capacity Building Committee, chaired 
by the German SAI. The document was adopted at the XX INCOSAI, and our 
peer review was the first in the world conducted in compliance with 
it. I am proud that we can thus provide feedback and contribute to the 
global SAI community by sharing what we learned. 

The Peer Review Report: 

The hard work of carrying out the peer review has been completed 
successfully. The report was drafted and submitted for signature, and 
the signing ceremony took place on May 30, 2011, during the VIII 
EUROSAI Congress in Lisbon. Participants in the signing ceremony 
included the presidents of the participating peer review SAIs, the 
head of the German SAI delegation, and Dr. Josef Moser, General 
Secretary of INTOSAI. 

[Photograph: The peer review report was signed by (from left to right) 
Martin Sinclair, Assistant Auditor General, U.K. NAO; Jacek Jezierski, 
President, SAI of Poland; Jan Jasovský, President, SAI of the Slovak 
Republic; Igor Šoltes, President, SAI of Slovenia; and Mihkel Oviir, 
Auditor General, SAI of Estonia] 

The peer review report has 18 recommendations divided into five 
sections. The first deals with audit activities that focus on the 
central government. These recommendations are aimed at planning, 
conducting, and reporting the results of SAO audit activities. The 
second part deals with audit activities involving regions and 
municipalities and is structured similarly. The recommendations in the 
remaining three parts deal with audit quality assessment, human 
resources development, and public relations. 

The peer review team concluded that the SAO had responded effectively 
to the range of challenges that it had faced in recent years. 
According to the team’s assessment, we have improved the quality and 
professionalism of our activities. We have also increased the impact 
of our work by making it more accessible to its stakeholders and 
strengthening cooperation with the media. We have improved the 
infrastructure of our organization to support the overall objective of 
enhancing our performance. The team concluded that this ambition was 
clearly articulated in the SAO’s Development Strategy and that the 
strategy itself and its implementation would improve the quality of 
SAO audit activities and help us achieve our desired impact. The team 
also concluded that the audit quality methodology the SAO is putting 
in place complies with relevant INTOSAI guidance and standards. 

Recommendations from the Peer Review: 

The complete text of the report together with its recommendations will 
be available in Slovak and English on our Web site [hyperlink, 
http://www.nku.gov.sk]. Let me, however, mention several 
recommendations that have etched themselves on my memory as they 
relate to actions we had been considering before we began the peer 
review. The review simply confirmed that we were moving in the right 
direction. 

* Undertaking such audit activities as extending and strengthening our 
performance audit methodology and improving the skills of staff 
undertaking performance audit. We fully acknowledge the importance and 
added value of performance audit in the public sector, as well as the 
demanding nature of these audits, and we attach great significance to 
this issue. 

* Supplementing the resources available for the audits of regions and 
municipalities. 

* Developing links with external organizations to introduce regular 
external assessment of audit quality and considering the introduction 
of independently moderated professional qualifications for audit staff. 

Regarding this last point, INTOSAI may wish to consider establishing 
uniform ISSAI standards for certifying auditors in the future. Another 
interesting idea is increasing the use of external advice and expertise.
While it may seem that we have reached the final phase of the peer 
review process, the reverse is actually true. Members of the team 
responsible for implementing its results in our office have many tasks 
ahead of them. These tasks relate primarily to implementing the peer 
review recommendations to meet the project’s objective of improving 
selected SAI activities and methods. We have formed five working teams 
to implement the peer review recommendations. Currently, these teams 
are preparing an action plan. 

Lessons Learned: 

What can I say to those who are planning for or thinking about a peer 
review? Implementing a peer review is demanding and requires a 
significant investment of human and material resources. Since a peer 
review is international in nature, translations and interpretation may 
be expected. It is also necessary to inform all staff beforehand and 
prepare them for the work and discussions that the peer review will 
entail. Support from the SAI’s top management is important throughout 
the implementation and reporting phases because the results of the 
peer review must be implemented in accordance with internal 
administrative procedures and regulations. 

While undertaking a peer review is very demanding, its benefits and 
added value greatly exceed the demands. Recommendations confirm 
whether the institution’s management is headed in the right direction 
and advise management on ways to refine its methods to produce more 
effective work of even higher quality. Considering the unique position 
SAIs occupy in the public sector and the rapidly changing conditions 
and new challenges we face, a peer review is a worthwhile investment 
of time and resources. 

If you choose to do a peer review, we recommend using ISSAI 5600, 
where you can find guidance and instructions on how to proceed. The 
appendix to the guideline contains a helpful and practical checklist 
of possible questions to ask during the process. Other products of 
Subcommittee 3 of INTOSAI’s Capacity Building Committee can also be 
used. (See the CBC Web site at [hyperlink, 
http://cbc.courdescomptes.ma].) 

Last but not least, a peer review enables you to answer the question, 
Who audits the auditor? Audit work is at the core of each SAI’s daily 
activities. By voluntarily undertaking a peer review, you open your 
work to external assessment and audit based on international auditing 
standards. This is of great importance at both the national and 
international levels. 

Conclusion: 

In conclusion, let me repeat what I said at the beginning of this 
article: accomplishing the SAO’s mission requires an ongoing 
improvement process. Our peer review was not undertaken in isolation. 
At present, we are carrying out a 3-year educational project 
cofinanced by European Union (EU) funds and are implementing quality 
management according to the CAF (Common Assessment Framework) model. 
We are also building a new information system, cofinanced from EU 
funds as well. That is why the peer review has been so significant for 
us: we need to know that we are moving in the right direction in a 
high quality and effective manner. 

Let me again thank our international partners—the National Audit 
Office of the United Kingdom, the National Audit Office of Estonia, 
the Supreme Audit Office of Poland, and the Court of Audit of the 
Republic of Slovenia—for their cooperation and assistance in the peer 
review. 

For additional information, please contact the SAO at info@nku.gov.sk. 

[End of section] 

Peer Review of the Supreme Audit Office of the Slovak Republic: 
Reflections of Peer Review Team Members: 

by Pawel Banas and Jacek Mazur, Supreme Audit Office of Poland (NIK): 

[Editor’s note: Representatives from four SAIs (Estonia, Poland, 
Slovenia, and the United Kingdom) constituted the peer review team for 
the SAI of the Slovak Republic. In this article, the two Polish 
members of the team share their reflections on this experience and 
what they learned through it] 

During the course of its work, the peer review team gained an 
appreciation for the many strengths of the Supreme Audit Office (SAO) 
of the Slovak Republic. The team recognized that the SAO is an 
institution open to change and modern working methods. It commended 
the SAO’s professionalism, the quality of its audit activities, the 
development of its audit methodology, the growing importance and 
availability of the SAO’s audit findings to its stakeholders, and its 
cooperation with the media. 

The peer review team had many long discussions with its Slovak 
colleagues concerning the role, mandate, and functioning of their 
respective SAIs. Based on their audit experience, the team formulated 
recommendations to the SAO regarding: 

* improvements in present practices related to strategic and technical 
issues and; 

* the development of incentives to resolve problems that are 
frequently difficult to address and that the SAIs of the peer review 
team also face. 

This article presents some reflections of the Polish members of the 
peer review team resulting from those discussions. Its purpose is to 
show how the interactions among the members of the peer review team 
and with the entity being reviewed can provide knowledge and insights 
that are useful to all the parties involved and can be applied to the 
different organizations, mandates, and working methods of the 
individual SAIs.[Footnote 1] For us, the peer review was a great 
opportunity to compare and rethink our own solutions in the following 
areas: strategic goals, sources of audit topics, territorial 
organization of our SAI, development of performance auditing, the 
readability of audit reports, and approaches to audit activity 
assessment. The following sections discuss some of the insights we 
gained in these areas during the course of the peer review and give 
examples of the differing practices of the peer review team members’ 
SAIs in each area. We also discuss the overall benefits of a peer 
review for those involved in performing the review. 

The Purpose of SAI Activity: 

Many SAIs have adopted strategic documents that set out the basic 
directions and principles of their activity. While comparing the 
experience of various SAIs during the peer review, we observed that 
the general purpose of an SAI’s activity is not always clearly 
defined. Undoubtedly, the basic task of SAIs is to audit and report on 
expenditures of public funds. While in some countries (e.g., Austria, 
the Czech Republic, France, the Netherlands, and Spain) the 
constitution sets out the purpose of SAI activities, in most countries 
this is not the case. For example, the Constitution of Poland sets out 
the scope of auditing but does not specify the purpose of its SAI’s 
activity. 

Therefore, it is important to answer strategic questions about the 
ultimate purpose of an SAI’s audit activities: is it to assess the 
government as a whole or the performance of individual bodies? 

When selecting issues to audit, strategic objectives, risk analysis, 
materiality and the potential impact or added value of the planned 
audit are often taken into account. However, the concepts of risk and 
materiality can be further developed to better use an SAI’s resources 
to audit priority areas. Should the SAI conduct more audits at the 
strategic level (e.g., sectoral policies and governmental programs)? 
The Web sites of the SAIs of the peer review team contain examples of 
audits focused on assessing essential problems or whole areas. These 
include audits of the system of subsidies for state-owned enterprises, 
financial management in the central administration, the stability of 
the banking system, energy security, privatization of the shipbuilding 
industry, and implementation of a program to fight cancer. 

External Suggestions of Audit Topics: 

As the peer review team was analyzing the way in which the SAO 
develops its audit plans, a question arose about whether SAIs should 
consider informal suggestions about audit topics made by the 
Parliament, the government, other central state bodies and the public. 
A valid case can be made both for and against doing this. 

Each year, the Auditor General of Estonia asks the parliamentary 
Committee on Public Accounts to propose audit topics. To the extent 
that it is possible, the proposed topics are included in the audit 
plan, except for those issues that have been already audited and 
topics that are political in nature. 

In 2010, the Court of Audit of Slovenia’s 63 audits included 24 audits 
required by law, 20 audits related to issues selected based on risk 
analysis, and as many as 19 audits (almost 30 percent) selected from 
the 409 proposals received from various state bodies, companies, 
associations, and citizens. 

Every spring the President of the Polish SAI (NIK) asks for 
suggestions to help the NIK select audit issues. In 2010, 
parliamentary committees submitted 81 suggestions; the Speaker of the 
Senate submitted 15; the President of Poland submitted 6; the Prime 
Minister submitted 40; and the Ombudsman submitted 7. The 2011 audit 
plan included most of the suggestions in its 294 audit topics. 

During the course of a typical year, citizens suggest numerous issues 
for SAIs to audit—-for example, cases of suspected misuse of 
substantial resources, unclear tender proceedings, or other issues of 
interest. While ad hoc audits of such issues can be conducted, an SAI 
has the final word on how its often scarce resources are to be spent. 

Regional and Central Offices: 

Regional offices of SAIs often employ a large portion of their staff 
(in the case of Polish NIK, about 50 percent). The NIK has found that 
it can enhance its long-term potential by strengthening its regional 
offices, especially by dedicating part of their resources to managing 
national audits. 

Performance Audit Toolbox: 

Because most SAIs conduct, or want to conduct, performance audits, the 
peer review team considered ways to expand performance audit work. The 
Peer Review Checklist: Appendix to ISSAI 5600 identified questions 
regarding the extent to which an SAI uses different types of 
performance audit tools, such as process-based studies, organizational 
studies, impact and outcome studies, cost-benefit analysis, and 
service and quality management studies. A detailed description of 
performance auditing methods is presented in ISSAI 3000: Standards and 
guidelines for performance auditing based on INTOSAI’s Auditing 
Standards and practical experience and Appendix to ISSAI 3100. 

Readable Audit Reports: 

Because the Slovak and Polish languages are fairly similar to each 
other, we were able to review a number of original audit documents in 
Slovak, which allowed us to consider the issue of the readability of 
audit reports. Discussions with the other members of the peer review 
team showed that many SAIs have problems in this area. For example, 
even if audit reports are brief, their style, layout, and contents may 
diminish their clarity and, consequently, their impact. While the 
language and style of audit reports must be formal enough to ensure 
that they are accurate and verifiable, the reports must also be 
accessible to the general public. 

Audit reports can begin by describing the key conclusions of the 
findings to encourage the reader to read the whole document. It is 
also useful to present executive summaries in special typeface at the 
beginning of audit reports. The report contents can be divided into 
parts by types of findings and presented using understandable titles. 
Additionally, SAIs’ annual reports and reports on individual audits 
can be enriched with trend analyses, lists comparing findings with 
data from previous years, and systemic conclusions presenting SAI 
opinions on the audited issues. 

External Assessment of Audit Activities: 

In many SAIs, the audit quality process comprises continuous 
assessment that takes place during the course of an audit and 
postaudit assessment. 

Continuous external assessment of audit activities is a controversial 
issue because of the risks it poses to an SAI’s independence. Only a 
few SAIs practice it. For instance, in the United Kingdom, the 
National Audit Office’s financial audits have been subject to external 
review since 2001. The Comptroller and Auditor General chose to have 
this type of assessment to certify the quality of the SAI’s activities 
based on commonly accepted criteria. The SAI of Estonia also has an 
external assessment of its financial audit quality. In these cases, 
the company chosen to do the external assessment (usually an 
international audit company) reviews several audits selected using 
statistical sampling. 

[Photograph: The peer review team members were (from left to right) 
Pawel Banas and Jacek Mazur (SAI Poland), Frank Grogan (SAI U.K.), 
Tõnis Saar (SAI Estonia), and Mojca Planinšek and Alenka Zidar (SAI of 
Slovenia). Not pictured: Nina Furman (SAI Slovenia)] 

Benefits of a Peer Review: 

A peer review provides a unique opportunity to consider the basic 
principles and purposes of an SAI’s functioning and to compare them 
with the experience of other SAIs. Therefore, peer reviews are 
valuable experiences for both those who conduct them and for those who 
are reviewed as they seek to find solutions to problems that they 
share. We found many similarities between the challenges that the 
Polish SAI and the SAI of Slovakia have to respond to and, as a 
result, learned a great deal from each other. Both the Polish NIK and 
the Slovak SAO—like most SAIs in the world—face a key challenge in 
obtaining significant findings and recommendations and communicating 
them effectively to our readers, among whom citizens are the most 
important. Our discussions gave us a great opportunity to compare and 
rethink our solutions to this challenge and to challenges in the other 
areas mentioned in this article. 

The discussions during the peer review process also helped us identify 
the strengths of our SAI: numerous performance audits and effective 
communication with the public through our professional Web site. At 
the same time, we learned from the Supreme Audit Office of the Slovak 
Republic about being open to the experiences of others, striving to 
use new technical solutions, and presenting brief audit reports to the 
public. 

Another group of benefits for INTOSAI as a whole relates to our 
experience applying ISSAI 5600: Peer Review Guideline and its ready-to-
use checklist to this peer review. We found the checklist helpful in 
quickly screening all important matters. After the peer review, we 
were able to provide Subcommittee 3 of the Capacity Building Committee 
with feedback on problems that we had faced with these materials and 
our proposals for improvements. This was the first opportunity to 
provide feedback since ISSAI 5600 was approved at the XX INCOSAI in 
November 2010. 

For additional information, please contact the authors at: 
Pawel.Banas@nik.gov.pl, Jacek.Mazur@nik.gov.pl. 

Footnote: 

[1] This article does not, however, discuss the results of the peer 
review. These are contained in the peer review report that will soon 
be available in English and Slovak on the SAO Web site [hyperlink, 
http://www.nku.gov.sk]. 

[End of section] 

Spotlight on ISSAIs: 

by Bruce Robertson, Office of the Controller and Auditor-General of 
New Zealand, and Sarah Lineham, PASAI: 

Why Is Harmonization Needed? 

During its August 2011 Congress in Tonga, the Pacific Association of 
Supreme Audit Institutions (PASAI) took significant steps toward 
adopting the International Standards of Supreme Audit Institutions 
(ISSAI) into its work program, the Pacific Regional Audit Initiative 
(PRAI). PASAI’s Assistant Secretary-General, Sarah Lineham, 
successfully raised the awareness of congress participants by 
introducing them to an innovative ISSAI checklist that focuses on the 
ISSAIs on level 2 of the ISSAI framework, the prerequisites for the 
functioning of SAIs. 

The checklist enables an SAI to compare its current position against 
the prerequisites outlined in the ISSAIs. It is available online at 
[hyperlink, http://www.pasai.org/site/pasai/files/issai/ISSAI%20self-
assessment%20checklist.pdf]. 

Many SAIs face constitutional or organizational challenges to meeting 
the ISSAI prerequisites. At one of the congress workshops, PASAI 
delegates did a self assessment against the checklist as a first step 
in working with the ISSAIs. The workshop outcomes included sharing 
challenges that SAIs face in meeting all the prerequisites and that 
individual auditors-general face in developing strategies to move 
their SAIs toward effectively complying with the ISSAI framework. 

The PRAI and its activities are generally consistent with the ISSAI 
framework. The auditors-general recognize that ISSAI implementation 
will involve combining their self-initiated work with participation in 
the PRAI. 

The PRAI also involves a significant cooperative capacity-building 
program, under which manuals are produced on a cooperative regional 
basis for use in PASAI’s planned staff development program. The suite 
of manuals is near completion and includes financial and performance 
audit methodology manuals, reporting and quality assurance guidelines, 
and a human resource manual. The congress resolved that these manuals 
be reviewed to incorporate the relevant ISSAIs as they are produced. 
The manuals will be available on CDs and from the PASAI Web site 
[hyperlink, http://www.pasai.org]. 

Despite the challenges they face—-including funding-—PASAI members are 
keen to effectively implement the ISSAIs into their practice, moving 
beyond rhetoric into action. 

For more information on the checklist, please contact Sarah Lineham at 
sarah.lineham@oag.govt.nz. 

For additional information on the ISSAIs, see www.issai.org. 

[End of section] 

INZTOSAI: Donor Cooperation Update: 

Global Call for Proposals to Support Capacity Development: 

by the INTOSAI-Donor Cooperation Secretariat: 

In July 2011, the World Bank hosted the third INTOSAI-Donor Steering 
Committee meeting in Washington, D.C. The meeting resulted in several 
milestone agreements, including the development of a consolidated 
databank of ongoing projects designed to strengthen SAIs; the 
formation of a donor task force to take forward the establishment of a 
pooled fund for SAI capacity development, which would most likely be 
administered by the World Bank; and the issuance of a global call for 
proposals for SAI capacity development. The call for proposals is 
designed to support SAI capacity-development initiatives across the 
INTOSAI community that need additional financial, in-kind, peer-to-
peer, or other forms of support. The INTOSAI-Donor Secretariat’s task 
is to facilitate cooperation with the INTOSAI regional and subregional 
secretariats. 

Rationale for Global Call for Proposals: 

The 2010 SAI stocktaking identified a significant need for increased 
capacity-building support among SAIs, particularly in developing 
countries. Recognizing these needs, the INTOSAI-Donor Steering 
Committee decided to issue a call for proposals that would maintain 
the INTOSAI-Donor Cooperation’s momentum and increase coordination 
among, and levels of support to, SAIs. The call for proposals is not 
intended to replace existing support arrangements, and applicants are 
encouraged to view it as an additional means of support. 

Application Procedures and Deadline: 

In August 2011, the INTOSAI regions issued invitations to the SAI 
community to respond to the call for proposals. SAIs in developing 
countries, INTOSAI regions and subregions, and INTOSAI committees, 
subcommittees, and working groups are eligible and encouraged to 
apply. Final proposals must be submitted electronically to the INTOSAI-
Donor Secretariat—directly or through the INTOSAI regional and 
subregional secretariats—0by November 14, 2011. 

A proposal template has been developed for applicants together with 
relevant user guidance, including an indicative results framework 
(i.e., an illustration of the results chain for a comprehensive SAI 
capacity-development program, including examples of inputs, 
activities, outputs, outcomes, and impacts), and sample applications. 
These can be accessed at [hyperlink, http://www.idi.no] or through the 
INTOSAI regional secretariats. Applications can be submitted in 
INTOSAI’s five official languages as well as Portuguese. 

The Secretariat will check the completeness of all final proposals 
received and review them against key considerations. Finalized 
proposals will be forwarded to potential support providers, along with 
the Secretariat’s review of the proposal. 

In addition to the Steering Committee members,[Footnote 1] potential 
support providers may include other donors and SAIs engaged in 
supporting SAI capacity development. Individual SAIs and donors will 
decide what financial, in-kind, or peer-to-peer support will be 
provided for each application. Programs will be managed according to 
the policies and procedures the support providers and the applicant 
agree upon. The Secretariat will be responsible for effective 
coordination and communication between applicants and potential 
support providers and will report on progress at the fourth INTOSAI-
Donor Steering Committee meeting to be held in Jaipur, India, February 
23–25, 2012. 

The Steering Committee anticipates that the global call for proposals 
will be an important means of matching SAIs in need of capacity 
development support with donors or SAI providers. However, because the 
demand for capacity-building support is high and funding and other 
forms of support are limited, there are no guarantees that proposals 
submitted will be funded. 

For additional information about the global call for proposals, please 
contact the INTOSAI-Donor Cooperation Secretariat at idi@idi.no. 

Footnote: 

[1] Leadership of the Steering Committee is provided by Joint Chairs 
and Vice Chairs from the INTOSAI and Donor communities. The SAI of 
Saudi Arabia is Chair and the SAI of the United States is Vice Chair 
for INTOSAI. The World Bank is Chair and the U.K. Department for 
International Development is Vice Chair for the donors. The INTOSAI 
Development Initiative serves as Secretariat for the INTOSAI-Donor 
Cooperation. 

[End of section] 

Inside INTOSAI: 

UN/INTOSAI Symposium: 

The 21st UN/INTOSAI Symposium, jointly organized by the INTOSAI 
General Secretariat and the United Nations (UN), was held in Vienna, 
Austria, July 13–15, 2011. The symposium focused on effective 
practices of cooperation between supreme audit institutions (SAI) and 
citizens to enhance public accountability. 

About 140 representatives of 66 SAIs attended, along with 
representatives of various international organizations, including the 
UN, the Inter Parliamentary Union, the International Budget 
Partnership, and GIZ (the German development organization). 

For the first time in the symposium’s history, a UN Under-Secretary-
General participated in the event. Sha Zukang, Under-Secretary-General 
for Economic and Social Affairs, made remarks and met with symposium 
participants. Carman Lapointe, UN Under-Secretary-General for the 
Office of Internal Oversight Services, was also present as an observer. 

Dr. Josef Moser, INTOSAI General Secretary and Auditor General of 
Austria, opened the symposium and welcomed participants. The symposium 
sessions covered three themes: (1) communication between SAIs and 
citizens, (2) forms of citizen participation in government auditing, 
and (3) values and benefits of cooperation between SAIs, parliaments 
and citizens. Osama Jafar Faqeeh, President of the General Auditing 
Bureau of Saudi Arabia, served as theme 1 chair; a UN representative 
served as theme 2 chair; and Terence Nombembe, Chairman of the INTOSAI 
Governing Board and Auditor General of South Africa, served as chair 
for theme 3. 

The symposium featured presentations by 26 representatives of SAIs, as 
well as representatives of the UN Department of Economic and Social 
Affairs (UN DESA), the UN Committee of Experts on Public 
Administration, and the UN Office on Drugs and Crime. 

The symposium contributed to the implementation of the following 
strategic priorities in the INTOSAI Strategic Plan 2011–2016: 

* help ensure the independence of SAIs, 

* strengthen capacity building of SAIs, 

* demonstrate the value and benefit of SAIs, 

* further the fight against corruption, and, 

* enhance INTOSAI communication. 

The symposium reflected the ongoing cooperation and partnership 
between INTOSAI and the UN. In its concluding session, symposium 
participants made several recommendations to enhance public 
accountability through cooperation between SAIs and citizens. The 
recommendations included the following: 

* Continue the efforts to adopt a UN General Assembly resolution 
supporting the principles laid down in the Declarations of Lima and 
Mexico and recognizing the work of INTOSAI. 

* Apply the INTOSAI Framework on Communicating and Promoting the Value 
and Benefits of Supreme Audit Institutions to enhance the credibility 
of SAIs and improve the lives of citizens. 

* Increase public knowledge of the work and role of SAIs and their 
added value through ongoing media coverage, public campaigns, use of 
social media, and other awareness-raising activities in the local 
languages, as appropriate. 

* Develop and implement public relations and communication strategies 
for active, accurate, and transparent communication with the media.
Support budget transparency systems and actions that will inform 
citizens about the entire budget process, including amendments to and 
the execution of the budget. 

* Promote citizen participation by developing mechanisms to receive 
and monitor complaints for noncompliance and misuse, as well as 
suggestions for improved public administration. 

* Commit to contributing to the Rio plus 20 Summit on Climate Change 
in June 2012, at the UN’s invitation, through appropriate INTOSAI 
mechanisms. 

* Establish a joint agenda with UN DESA to build capacities in all 
countries, including partnership between developed and developing 
countries and aiming to improve the audit process, transparency, and 
the eradication of corruption. 

* Contribute specifically to the prevention of corruption in 
accordance with the United Nations Convention against Corruption. 

* Encourage sharing of information and experiences among SAIs to 
promote efficient and effective interactions with citizens. 

* Develop INTOSAI guidance on cooperation with citizens through the 
work program of the INTOSAI Working Group on the Value and Benefits of 
SAIs to address the opportunities as well as the risks associated with 
communication with citizens. 

The full set of conclusions and recommendations is available at: 
[hyperlink, 
http://www.intosai.org/blueline/upload/18conclusions200711e.pdf]. 

Professional Standards Committee: 

The Steering Committee of the Professional Standards Committee (PSC) 
held its 8th meeting in Wellington, New Zealand, June 22–24, 2011. At 
the meeting, delegates discussed initiatives related to raising 
awareness of the International Standards of Supreme Audit Institutions 
(ISSAI), carrying out the ISSAI harmonization project, and maintaining 
the ISSAIs and INTOSAI Guidance on Good Governance (INTOSAI GOV). 

[Photograph: Participants in the June 2011 PSC Steering Committee 
meeting in New Zealand] 

ISSAI Awareness Raising: 

The delegates from Bahrain and Poland gave presentations on their 
experiences with awareness-raising events in ARABOSAI and EUROSAI, 
respectively. Their presentations were followed by extensive knowledge 
sharing on other ISSAI awareness-raising events and activities. The 
delegates welcomed the news about various initiatives and acknowledged 
achievements to date. They also emphasized the need to accelerate the 
work, include aspects of implementation, and focus on all four levels 
of the ISSAI framework. The PSC Secretariat was encouraged to gather 
information on different ways the PSC Web site can be used to 
implement the ISSAIs and support knowledge sharing. The Secretariat 
would also greatly appreciate receiving more information about member 
SAIs’ experiences related to implementing and using the ISSAIs and 
requests that relevant information on these topics be forwarded to the 
PSC at psc@rigsrevisionen.dk. 

The ISSAI Awareness-Raising Task Force will keep track of already 
planned INTOSAI events, in particular regional events, and seize these 
opportunities to promote the ISSAI framework. The PSC wishes to employ 
a demand-driven strategy in which it is seen as a willing assistant 
and active participant in awareness-raising activities that INTOSAI 
members plan and organize. In connection with this, the task force has 
developed a set of standard presentations on the ISSAIs that SAIs can 
use. The presentations can be found on the PSC Web site. All materials 
are available in English and some are also available in INTOSAI’s 
other official languages. 

ISSAI Harmonization Project: 

The delegates emphasized the critical importance of the ISSAI 
harmonization project, approved at the XX INCOSAI in Johannesburg, in 
supporting the successful implementation of the ISSAIs among INTOSAI 
members. The project’s overall objective is to revise the text of 
ISSAIs 100–400, fundamental auditing principles, and develop the 
ISSAIs into a more coherent set of standards. The PSC Steering 
Committee’s intention is that the revised fundamental auditing 
principles should provide a better overview of the full set of ISSAIs, 
including the implementation guidelines on financial, performance, and 
compliance auditing (ISSAIs 1000–4999). The INTOSAI family’s full 
support of the revised fundamental auditing principles is essential 
for the project to succeed, and various means of communication 
(including the ISSAI Web site) will be employed to keep INTOSAI 
members updated on project developments. 

Maintenance of the ISSAIs and INTOSAI GOVs: 

In November 2010, the XX INCOSAI endorsed the due process for INTOSAI’
s professional standards, which defines, among other things, 
responsibilities for maintaining the ISSAIs and INTOSAI GOVs. The 
Steering Committee delegates discussed the implementation of these 
requirements and agreed that the relevant subcommittees should decide 
on the frequency of maintenance reviews and publish the maintenance 
frequency on [hyperlink, http://www.issai.org] before November 2011. 

All reports and additional meeting materials can be found on the PSC 
Web site [hyperlink, http://www.psc-intosai.org] under “PSC SC.” 

Capacity Building Committee: 

Subcommittee 1: Forging Stronger Links with the Regions: 

Under the Chairmanship of Dr. Ahmed El Midaoui, the Capacity Building 
Committee (CBC) is strengthening its links with the INTOSAI regions. 
Over the next few years, one of the CBC’s key activities will be 
helping support and strengthen regionally based capacity-building 
activities. To launch this process, all regions were invited to 
participate in the June 2011 meeting of CBC Subcommittee 1 (Promote 
Increased Capacity Building Activities among INTOSAI Members) at the 
United Kingdom’s National Audit Office in London. The regional 
delegations gave presentations showing how their regions are 
supporting capacity building, what activities are planned, and what 
are the main challenges being faced. The few regions unable to attend 
sent PowerPoint presentations to assist with the discussions. 

These presentations confirmed the vibrancy of the regions and the 
extent of their innovations in the design and delivery of capacity-
building activities. Most are running regional training courses for 
audit and corporate support staff and senior managers, as well as 
developing regional audits. Their innovations include the following: 

* Annual technical updates to share the latest developments in 
auditing standards and practices. 

* Creating awards to recognize innovative research and analytical 
activities in the audit field. 

* Using mixed modes of training—-for example, e-learning plus face-to-
face meetings. 

* Launching cooperative or parallel audits so that SAIs can work 
together on common audit areas. 

The presentations also revealed opportunities for getting more out of 
this work and achieving greater effectiveness and efficiency, 
something dear to our hearts as auditors! Many regions have been 
developing quality assurance guides and training courses, but few 
outside of each region knew of these developments and were making use 
of them. In the future, it may be possible to increase resource 
sharing and reduce cost and duplication by involving several regions 
when developing new programs or materials. 

Similarly, it was evident that some regions have been better able than 
others to obtain the resources to build up their support systems and 
recruit more regional staff. There are opportunities to share lessons 
learned in securing and managing regional resources and running 
efficient regional capacity-building programs. Also, regional capacity-
building Web sites can be improved by identifying, disseminating, and 
applying best practices. The meeting also highlighted issues around 
access to subject matter expertise, communication difficulties caused 
by distance and language differences, and a lack of follow up and 
evaluation of training and capacity-building activities. 

From the ensuing discussions, the subcommittee added the following to 
its action plan for the period leading up to XXI INCOSAI in China in 
2013: 

* Strengthen the capacity of the regional secretariats by helping them 
attract funds, access the work of other regions, improve planning, and 
develop better Web sites. 

* Strengthen CBC’s role as capacity-development broker by developing 
better knowledge-management and information-sharing arrangements, 
helping avoid unnecessary duplication, and strengthening the CBC Web 
site to ensure that it provides easy access to other relevant sites, 
in particular to the regions. 

* Use CBC Subcommittee 1 as an arena for meetings/exchanges between 
INTOSAI regions-—for example, to consult on documents and guides 
developed or being developed by INTOSAI regions. 

* Encourage the use of more innovative and cost-effective forms of 
training, building on the INTOSAI Development Initiative’s work with e-
learning. 

This meeting was an important step in working out new ways in which 
INTOSAI and the regions can better work together. Participants want to 
see continued efforts to collaborate during future subcommittee 
meetings. The Board of Audit of Japan has generously offered to host 
the next meeting of Subcommittee 1 in Tokyo, June 14–15, 2012. 

For additional information, contact the subcommittee at 
iain.johnston@nao.gsi.gov.uk. 

Subcommittee 2: Annual Meeting Held in Peru: 

The third annual meeting of the CBC’s Subcommittee 2 (Develop Advisory 
and Consultancy Services) was held in Lima, Peru, August 31–September 
1, 2011. During the meeting, the SAI of Morocco summarized the 
activities of the CBC’s three subcommittees in accordance with the 
INTOSAI strategic plan and highlighted the importance of their work. 
In addition, the SAIs of Peru and Pakistan presented progress reports 
on Subcommittee 2 activities. The SAI of Germany submitted a final 
report on standardizing guidelines on cooperative audits. The SAIs of 
Pakistan, Morocco, and Peru discussed strategies to carry out the 
three lines of activities that constitute the subcommittee’s work: 
developing and promoting a database of experts, coordinated and joint 
or parallel audits, and internships and visitor programs. 

The SAI of Peru, Chair of Subcommittee 2, presented working papers on 
the development of an INTOSAI database of experts. The members of the 
subcommittee agreed to disseminate this important tool within INTOSAI 
and expand the database’s listing of experts on government audit. 
Therefore, INTOSAI community members are encouraged to contact the 
subcommittee at cooperacion@contraloria.gob.pe to request a username 
and password so that they can register their experts in the database. 
Current database users can both register and search for experts at 
[hyperlink, https://apps.contraloria.gob.pe/intosai/]. 

The SAI of Pakistan offered to include new provisions into the 
guidelines for internship programs and prepare a proposal outlining a 
standard agreement for these programs. 

For additional information, contact the subcommittee at 
cooperacion@contraloria.gob.pe. 

Working Group on Public Debt: 

INTOSAI’s Working Group on Public Debt (WGPD) is celebrating its 20th 
anniversary in 2011. Since its creation in 1991, the WGPD has carried 
out specialized research and generated and published guidelines and 
other products to encourage sound reporting and proper auditing and 
management of public debt. 

The National Audit Office of Lithuania (NAO), a member of the WGPD 
since 1996, hosted this year’s meeting, which took place in a time 
when the current financial crisis has made public debt-—in particular 
its rapid growth and implications for general fiscal stability-—an 
issue of primary importance for many countries. Public debt has posed 
many unexpected challenges to governments as well as their SAIs. 

In this context, Lithuanian Auditor General Giedre Švediene, noted the 
following during her opening address at the WGPD meeting: “Such [a] 
situation demands that SAIs redouble their efforts to help provide 
accountability for their governments, to ensure transparency of 
borrowing, [and to] look for more effective ways to manage the debt. 
The WGPD is uniquely positioned to support SAIs now facing emerging 
public debt issues and, I believe, will pay particular attention to 
new debt management issues and challenges emerging from the recent 
financial turmoil.” 

The WGPD’s activities are part of goal 3 of the INTOSAI Knowledge 
Sharing Committee and currently revolve around six themes ranging from 
the impact of financial crises on public debt to contingent debt and 
information systems related to public debt management. Since 2002, the 
WGPD has worked closely with the INTOSAI Development Initiative to 
help create capacity-building programs on public debt management. It 
also supports the work of the Professional Standards Committee in 
developing the International Standards of Supreme Audit Institutions 
(ISSAI). Thus, the WGPD is harmonizing its official products with the 
new ISSAI standards and determining which should be modified, 
eliminated, or maintained. 

As of July 2011, the members of the WGPD are Mexico (Chair), 
Argentina, Austria, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Egypt, Fiji, 
Finland, Gabon, Indonesia, Jordan, Korea, Lithuania, Moldova, 
Portugal, the Russian Federation, Sweden, the Ukraine, the United 
States, Yemen, and Zambia. 

For additional information, visit the WGPD Web site at [hyperlink, 
http://www.wgpd.org.mx] or e-mail the WGPD at secretariat@wgpd.org.mx. 

Working Group on the Fight against Corruption and Money Laundering: 

The Working Group on the Fight against Corruption and Money 
Laundering, chaired by the SAI of Egypt, held an international seminar 
on September 12, 2011, in Prague, Czech Republic. The seminar included 
sessions on trends, approaches, and successes in the fight against 
corruption; promoting integrity, transparency, and accountability in 
public administration; and the status and powers of SAIs in the fight 
against corruption, as well as the risks, and proposals for 
anticorruption measures. These sessions featured presentations from 
experts in governments, SAIs, and international anticorruption 
organizations. 

After the seminar, the working group held its fifth meeting on 
September 13 and 14. During the meeting, the working group discussed 
its progress on the new work plan for 2011–2013, which had been 
approved at INCOSAI XX. The group discussed cooperative efforts among 
SAIs in preparing guidelines to support efforts to detect and fight 
corruption and money laundering. 

The working group also addressed implementing the following: 

* reviewing channels of communication and cooperation with key 
international partners named by the World Bank’s Financial Market 
Integrity group, 

* cooperating with the INTOSAI Working Group on Environmental Auditing 
to develop a guideline on corruption and fraud in environmental 
auditing, 

* developing a database of SAI best practices and expertise in 
fighting corruption and money laundering, 

* publishing the Russian SAI’s document on guidelines and principles 
for SAIs and translating it into INTOSAI’s five official languages, 
and, 

* publishing the working group’s First Book 2007-2010 in Arabic and 
English on its Web site. 

For additional information, contact the working group: 

E-mail: wgfacml@cao.gov.eg
Web site: www.wgfacml.cao.gov.eg 

AFROSAI General Assembly Held in Gabon: 

The African Organization of Supreme Audit Institutions (AFROSAI) held 
its 12th General Assembly in Libreville, Gabon, July 18–23, 2011. 
Hosted by the President of the Court of Audit of Gabon, Gilbert 
Ngoulakia, the assembly drew delegates from Arabic-speaking SAIs 
(AFROSAI-A), English-speaking SAIs (AFROSAI-E), French-speaking SAIs 
(AFROSAI-F), and Portuguese-speaking SAIs. Over 50 countries sent 
delegates, while guests and observers included ministerial officials 
and representatives from the INTOSAI Development Initiative (IDI), the 
Institute of Internal Auditors, various international donor 
organizations, and this Journal. 

The opening ceremony, held at the Laico Okoume Palace Hotel in 
Libreville, was attended by the Prime Minister of Gabon, Paul Biyoghe 
Mba, who made opening remarks to the delegates. Mr. Ngoulakia, 
incoming AFROSAI President, and Terence Nombembe, outgoing AFROSAI 
President and Auditor General of South Africa, also made welcoming 
remarks. 

At the first plenary session, Mr. Nombembe underscored the importance 
of having all regions and language groups of Africa represented and 
participating in AFROSAI meetings. He noted that he was pleased to see 
such a large and diverse group attending the General Assembly and that 
he hoped this level of cooperation and participation would continue 
into the future. He also congratulated Mr. Ngoulakia on his new role 
as incoming AFROSAI President. 

Mr. Ngoulakia thanked Mr. Nombembe and stated that it was an honor to 
take the role of AFROSAI President and that he looked forward to 
continuing the good work in AFROSAI that Mr. Nombembe had initiated. 

In other opening business, the assembly approved the appointment of 
the Auditor General of Gambia, Bubacarr Sankareh, as Technical Vice-
President for the 12th AFROSAI meeting. The SAI of Libya hosts the 
AFROSAI General Secretariat and, due to the situation in the country, 
was unable to attend. Alfred Enoh, Director of the Secretariat of 
AFROSAI-F, represented the secretariat ad interim and announced that 
the AFROSAI prize, normally awarded to an SAI for its role in 
supporting AFROSAI, would not be awarded this year because of the 
absence of the SAI of Libya. Mr. Enoh awarded the science competition 
prize to Khemraj Reetun of the SAI of Mauritius. 

The assembly also heard remarks from Magnus Borge, the head of IDI, 
and Francis Salsmann, representing the Court of Accounts of France, 
who discussed the complexities of the relationship between SAIs and 
their parliaments. 

Bame Gueye, President of AFROSAI-E and President of the Court of Audit 
of Senegal, delivered the AFROSAI General Secretariat report. He spoke 
about the status of AFROSAI dues, the upcoming introduction of the new 
AFROSAI strategic plan and procedure manual, relations with the donor 
community, and capacity building within the regional language 
subgroups. 

Mr. Nombembe introduced the new 2012–2014 AFROSAI strategic plan, 
noting its three priorities-—strengthening governance structures, 
technical capacity building of member SAIs, and institutional capacity 
building for member SAIs within their own jurisdictions. He also 
highlighted the section of the plan dealing with AFROSAI financing, 
which essentially comes from member dues and donor contributions. He 
noted that if donor contributions diminish, it will even more 
essential that AFROSAI ensures that all member dues are kept current 
and paid in full. 

Mr. Gueye presented delegates with the newly completed AFROSAI 
Procedures Manual, which was adopted unanimously by the assembly. The 
assembly also unanimously approved the strategic plan. 

In other business, Mounira Abd El Hadj presented the report of the 
AFROSAI Journal. Representatives of the AFROSAI language subgroups 
each made presentations, followed by remarks from Emma Kellner, 
representative of German development organization GIZ, who discussed 
12 projects already completed with AFROSAI, including work on the 
strategic plan and procedures manual and seven more ongoing capacity-
building projects. 

The second plenary session focused on the presentation of papers and 
discussions on three themes: 

* performance audit (theme chair Ghana, rapporteur Namibia, and 
reports from Botswana, Lesotho, Zimbabwe, Senegal, and South Africa); 

* audit of public debt (theme chair Mauritania, rapporteur Morocco, 
and reports from Egypt, Cameroon, Gabon, and Guinea); and; 

* auditing government salary payments (theme chair Cameroon, 
rapporteur Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), secretary Senegal, and 
reports from Cameroon, DRC, Gabon, and Guinea). 

In the third general plenary, the assembly unanimously approved the 
admission of four new members to AFROSAI: Guinea, Togo, South Sudan, 
and Zimbabwe. It also approved the election of new language subgroup 
representatives to the AFROSAI Governing Board: Algeria (AFROSAI-A), 
Cameroon and Senegal (AFROSAI-F/CREFIAF), and Namibia (AFROSAI-E). 

Various issues regarding AFROSAI’s finances were discussed, with 
particular emphasis on the situation in Libya and the functioning of 
the General Secretariat. It was agreed that a decision regarding the 
General Secretariat would be taken at the Governing Board meeting 
before the next AFROSAI General Assembly. 

Finally, the delegates unanimously adopted the Libreville Accords, and 
proposed that Morocco host the next AFROSAI General Assembly in 2014. 
The delegates approved the proposal, and Morocco accepted the 
invitation to host the 13th AFROSAI General Assembly. 

VIII EUROSAI Congress: 

From May 30 to June 2, 2011, the VIII EUROSAI Congress was held in 
Lisbon. The congress was organized by the Tribunal de Contas of 
Portugal, which is serving as the President of EUROSAI for 2011–2014. 

[Photograph: Guilherme d’Olvieira Martins, President of the Portuguese 
SAI and President of EUROSAI, welcomed participants to the VII EUROSAI 
Congress in Lisbon at the beginning of June 2011] 

Congress Themes: 

The congress focused on two main themes. 

* Theme I dealt with the challenges, demands, and responsibilities of 
public managers and the role of supreme audit institutions (SAI). 
Discussions on this theme were divided into two subthemes: I.A, 
challenges and demands faced by public managers today, and I.B, the 
role of SAIs in the accountability and responsibilities of public 
managers. 

* Theme II focused on SAI audits of independent regulatory agencies. 

The following SAIs served as chairs and reporters for each theme and 
subtheme: 

* Subtheme I.A: Netherlands (chair) and Slovenia (reporter). 

* Subtheme I. B: Spain (chair) and France (reporter). 

* Theme II: Poland (chair) and United Kingdom (reporter). 

Working groups for each theme and subtheme prepared principal papers 
and discussion papers for the congress. EUROSAI members contributed 
country papers that served as a significant basis for the exchange of 
experiences, discussions, and deliberations. 

The presentations of congress speakers also contributed to fruitful 
debates, which were, in turn, enriched by participant interactions. 
The participants included representatives of 47 EUROSAI member SAIs 
and 20 observers from the public audit community (including other 
representatives of INTOSAI and its regional organizations). All had 
the opportunity to discuss issues of common interest and major 
importance that were raised in the context of the congress themes. 

[Photograph: Participants in the VIII EUROSAI Congress in Lisbon] 

Conclusions and Recommendations for Theme I: 

New realities in society have had a significant impact on public 
management and accountability. In a fast-changing world, governments 
must respond more quickly to meet the needs and expectations of their 
citizens. 

Congress participants noted a challenging tension in government 
between (1) careful democratic processes of legislation and control 
and (2) flexibility to deal with rapid developments. However, they 
believe that there is no contradiction between flexibility and an open 
system model, on the one hand, and accountability, on the other hand. 

SAIs have an important role to play in promoting a culture of 
accountability and facilitating an effectively operating 
accountability process by auditing, reporting, issuing 
recommendations, highlighting good practices, and—-in some cases—-
exercising their jurisdictional and sanctioning powers. 

Therefore, the congress adopted recommendations on the need for SAIs 
to adapt to the innovations and changes in society and promote 
different dimensions of accountability. 

Within the framework of the EUROSAI strategic plan adopted by this 
congress (see below), the congress recommended that EUROSAI build upon 
this theme through a structured dialogue and other joint efforts to 
meet the challenges of change, and that the results be shared with the 
wider INTOSAI community, in accordance with INTOSAI’s motto, Mutual 
Experience Benefits All. 

Conclusions and Recommendations for Theme II: 

EUROSAI members recognized that independent regulators are an 
important, and growing, feature of the public sector landscape in many 
European countries. They have developed as the result of a variety of 
factors, and there is no common definition of regulation; in fact, 
there are many different regulatory roles and functions, and they 
differ from country to country. However, three primary groups of 
regulators can be found across EUROSAI members: infrastructure 
regulators, competition and consumer regulators, and financial 
services regulators. 

The financial crisis has led to enhanced roles for financial 
regulators across the EUROSAI countries. This can complicate SAIs’ 
audits of regulation in this area because not all SAIs have audit 
responsibility for central banks. 

Regulators and SAIs have much in common. They have different mandates 
to contribute to good governance and public sector management, but 
both aim to protect the interests of citizens. 

The congress recommended that given the independent discretion 
available to regulators and their varied mandates, SAIs and others 
external bodies need to rigorously scrutinize regulators’ use of 
financial resources and effectiveness. 

The main conclusions and recommendations for each theme can be found 
at [hyperlink, http://www.eurosai2011.tcontas.pt/Pages/Welcome.aspx]. 

Other Congress Actions: 

Other fundamental milestones of the congress were the adoption of the 
EUROSAI Strategic Plan 2011–2017, which can be found on the EUROSAI 
Web site [hyperlink, http://www.eurosai.org], and the decision to hold 
the next congress in the Netherlands in 2014. 

The congress also approved a statement, Reinforcing the independence 
of SAIs, which can be found at [hyperlink, 
http://www.eurosai2011.tcontas.pt/Pages/statement-of-
independence.aspx]. In this document, EUROSAI members recognize with 
appreciation and support internal and external INTOSAI initiatives 
promoting greater transparency, accountability, and the effective and 
efficient receipt and use of public resources for the benefit of 
citizens. 

For additional information, please see the congress Web site at 
[hyperlink, http://www.eurosai2011.tcontas.pt/Pages/Welcome.aspx] or 
the EUROSAI Web site at [hyperlink, http://www.eurosai.org]. 

EUROSAI Signs Cooperation Agreement with European Confederation of 
Institutes of Internal Auditing: 

In March 2011, EUROSAI and the European Confederation of Institutes of 
Internal Auditing (ECIIA) signed a cooperation agreement in Rome that 
created a process allowing the two organizations to benefit mutually 
from each other’s work and promote knowledge sharing. The ECIIA is a 
regional organization of the Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) a 
well-known body in the international community of auditors. The IIA 
has been a partner of INTOSAI since 2007, when it signed a memorandum 
of understanding with the Professional Standards Committee that was 
renewed in 2010. As a regional branch of the IIA, the ECIIA assists 
and represents the European internal audit profession in both the 
private and public sectors. Thus, collaboration between ECIIA and 
EUROSAI, as European structures of the two organizations, seemed a 
natural step toward implementing the achievements of the global 
organizations at the European level. 

[Photograph: Phil Tarling (left), President of the ECIIA, and Jacek 
Jezierski (right), then Chair of the EUROSAI Governing Board, signed a 
cooperation agreement between their two organizations in March 2011 in 
Rome] 

Work on the agreement had already started in 2009. After a series of 
meetings, representatives of EUROSAI and ECIIA identified areas of 
collaboration and set common objectives and framework initiatives in 
the field of public sector internal auditing that were later captured 
in the agreement on cooperation. It was based on the awareness that 
the internal auditing and public external auditing professions 
complement each other. An effective internal audit function is a vital 
component of good governance providing public managers, especially 
senior management, with assurance about the efficiency and 
effectiveness of their operations as well as suggestions for 
improvement in all areas of control and governance. Supreme audit 
institutions, being bodies of public external audit, can benefit from 
the results of internal auditors’ work. 

The cooperation process initiated by the signing of the agreement 
includes (1) facilitating dialogue and knowledge sharing between SAIs 
and internal auditors in the public sector across Europe, (2) 
developing a common understanding of the issues related to public 
sector accountability, auditing, and shared terminology in the field, 
and (3) sharing experiences in implementing existing professional 
standards. To accomplish these purposes, the ECIIA and EUROSAI have 
agreed to develop a common platform to share their publications, 
tools, and resources; inform each other of all initiatives related to 
the public sector; and identify and implement joint projects, such as 
conferences, seminars, and training and research activities. 

The agreement was signed by Jacek Jezierski, President of the SAI of 
Poland and the then Chair of the EUROSAI Governing Board, and Phil 
Tarling, President of the ECIIA. 

[End of section] 

IDI Update: 

IDI Update keeps you informed of developments in the work and programs 
of the INTOSAI Development Initiative. To find out more about IDI and 
to keep up to date between editions of the Journal, look at the IDI 
Web site: [hyperlink, http://www.idi.no]. 

Phase 2 of the IDI/CAROSAI Program on a Risk-based Approach to 
Financial Auditing: 

A Program on Risk-based Approach to Financial Auditing was launched in 
2010 to follow up on the Program on Quality Assurance in Financial 
Auditing delivered in 2009. Audit teams from six CAROSAI members 
participated in developing guidelines for risk-based financial audits 
and carried out pilot audits based on the guidelines. The program 
culminated with an IDI/CAROSAI guide, A Risk-Based Approach to 
Financial Auditing. In 2011, the program will be delivered again for 
those CAROSAI members that were not able to participate in the first 
round. IDI staff and regional experts met for a design meeting in July 
2011 to develop comprehensive courseware, which will be used to 
deliver a workshop on a risk-based approach to financial audits by the 
end of 2011. 

[Photograph: Participants in the IDI/CAROSAI design meeting] 

IDI/CREFIAF Strategic Planning Program: 

IDI is currently cooperating with CREFIAF (French-speaking AFROSAI) to 
deliver a Strategic Planning Program. A Workshop on Needs Assessment, 
the first activity of this program, was delivered to eight SAIs in 
July 2011. The workshop trained participants in how to assess capacity-
building needs using the framework and tools described in the IDI 
Capacity Building Needs Assessment Guide. After this workshop, the 
participating teams conducted needs assessments in their own SAIs. 
These assessments will be reviewed when the teams reconvene at a 
combined Needs Assessment Review and Strategic Planning Workshop in 
2012. The program will be delivered twice during 2011 and 2012. The 
heads of the second group of SAIs will attend an initial strategic 
planning meeting in October 2011. 

IDI/AFROSAI-E Management Development Program: 

IDI and AFROSAI-E (English-speaking AFROSAI) launched a regional 
Management Development Program (MDP) in 2009 to enhance leadership and 
managerial capacities in the regional SAIs. After conducting several 
workshops targeting SAI heads and senior and operational managers, IDI 
and the region are now ready to roll out the program to other SAI 
staff. In August 2011, a selected group of senior and operational 
managers who had taken part in the program’s first phase participated 
in a Workshop on Facilitation Skills to prepare them for their roles 
in delivering the program to five AFROSAI-E members. 

IDI/PASAI Cooperative Performance Audits on Fisheries: 

IDI has agreed to support PASAI in delivering a third cooperative 
audit focusing on fisheries after the successful completion of two 
cooperative audits on solid waste management and access to safe 
drinking water. Team members from the participating SAIs held an audit 
planning meeting in August 2011 and are to conduct field audits, 
analyze data, and draft audit reports before reconvening for a 
feedback meeting early in 2012. 

[Photograph: Participants at the IDI/PASAI cooperative audits on 
fisheries planning meeting] 

IDI/ASOSAI Program on Development and Implementation of Strategic 
Plans: 

After a 2009 ASOSAI needs assessment survey revealed the need to 
strengthen SAI strategic planning capacities in the region, IDI and 
ASOSAI agreed to launch a new cooperation program to develop and 
implement strategic plans. As a first step, a strategic planning 
meeting was held in September 2011 with the heads of nine 
participating SAIs to obtain their commitment and agree on the program 
components, outputs, and outcomes. 

Completion of the Transregional Program on Public Debt Management 
Audit and Issuance of the Public Debt Practical Audit Guide: 

The Transregional Program on Public Debt Management Audit, the single 
most comprehensive program in IDI’s history, has reached its 
completion. Audit teams from 29 SAIs have attended an e-learning 
course, conducted a public debt management audit, and completed their 
audit reports and audit guidelines. The program was delivered in both 
English and French. 

The program’s final activity was held in September 2011. IDI staff, 
subject matter experts, members of the INTOSAI Working Group on Public 
Debt, and representatives from the three groups of participating SAIs 
convened in Lisbon to finalize the draft Public Debt Practical Audit 
Guide, one of the planned outputs of this program. The guide is based 
on the relevant International Standards of Supreme Audit Institutions 
and the feedback and experiences gained through the program’s pilot 
audits. The participating SAIs have committed to adopting the guide 
for use in their institutions. 

The final Public Debt Practical Audit Guide will be made available to 
the INTOSAI community in early 2012. 

Contacting IDI: 

To discuss any of the issues raised in this edition, please contact 
IDI: 

E-mail: idi@idi.no: 
Web site:  www.idi.no: 

[End of section] 

INTOSAI 2011-2012 Events: 

October 5-6: 
Meeting of the Steering Committee of the Committee on Knowledge 
Sharing and Knowledge Services, Moscow, Russian Federation. 

October 17-22: 
OLACEFS General Assembly, Caracas, Venezuela. 

October 27-28: 
62nd Meeting of the INTOSAI Governing Board, Vienna, Austria. 

November 7-10: 
Meeting of the Working Group on Environmental Auditing, Buenos Aires, 
Argentina. 

February 23-25: 
INTOSAI-Donor Steering Committee meeting, Jaipur, India. 

May 28: 
EUROSAI Governing Board Meeting, Ankara, Turkey. 

June 14-15: 
Capacity Building Committee meeting, Tokyo, Japan. 

Editor’s Note: This calendar is published in support of INTOSAI’s 
communications strategy and as a way of helping INTOSAI members plan 
and coordinate schedules. Included in this regular Journal feature 
will be INTOSAI-wide events and regionwide events such as congresses, 
general assemblies, and board meetings. Because of limited space, the 
many training courses and other professional meetings offered by the 
regions cannot be included. For additional information, contact the 
Secretary General of each regional working group. 

[End of October 2011 edition of The Journal]