CERTIFICATION OF INTERNAL AUDITORS IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR IN THE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA, ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES
Keywords:
audit, public sector, certificationAbstract
Every business entity in the public sector, as a user of public funds, should have a high position on the importance of the appropriate way of spending these funds to improve the overall well-being of citizens and achieve the trust entrusted to them. However, the absence of awareness and the existence of actions to the detriment of citizens is not uncommon, but for the benefit of a certain individual or group of individuals who thus directly or indirectly misuse public funds and public beavers, gaining illegal benefits. One of the ways to prevent and mitigate the negative consequences of such actions is the internal audit function, which can detect irregularities in the operations of public entities and act preventively as a deterrent function whose existence would deter potential perpetrators from illegal actions. Audit as a service of independent professional assurance requires a high degree of professional qualification and professional qualification from persons engaged in the subject tasks to maintain a high degree of independence, expertise, the reputation of the audit profession and audit role in the financial management and control system all stakeholders. The audit serves to compensate with its independent, objective and professional assurance of the existence of a gap in expectations that arises between the stakeholders and the managers of the business organization in question. In the context of the public sector, the key stakeholder in the state is the owner of the business organization in question, all citizens of the Republic of Serbia as taxpayers and financiers of state expenditures. Therefore, it is important that persons engaged in the audit profession in the public sector activity in the function of the citizens of the Republic of Serbia, performing control activities and independent assurance services, taking care of the regularity and efficiency of operations of state organizations. For that to be possible, it is necessary to ensure the existence of relevant and appropriate criteria for the selection of professional practitioners for engagement in auditing activities in the public sector. The subject of this paper is the analysis of the issue of certification of persons engaged in auditing in the public sector in the Republic of Serbia by performing a comparative analysis of conditions and programs for acquiring professional titles in the field of internal audit most often represented in the Republic of Serbia and its advantages and disadvantages. The main conclusion is that there are differences in the conditions and programs for acquiring professional titles, which are most pronounced in the domain of the number of exams taken, as well as the average time required to acquire a professional title.
References
Abu Hasan, H., Frecknall-Hughes, J., Heald, D., & Hodges, R. (2013). Auditee perceptions of external evaluations of the use of resources by local authorities. Financial Accountability & Management, 29(3), 252–287. https://doi.org/10.1111/faam.12015
Acker, W., & Bouckaert, G. (2019). The impact of supreme audit institutions and ombudsmen in Belgium and The Netherlands. Financial Accountability and Management, 35(1), 55–71. https://DOI:10.1111/faam.12182
Baker, C. R., Bédard, J., & Prat dit Hauret, C. (2014). The regulation of statutory auditing: An institutional theory approach. Managerial Auditing Journal, 29(5), 371–394. https://doi.org/10.1108/MAJ-09-2013-0931;
Bringselius, L. (2018). Efficiency, economy and effectiveness—but what about ethics? Supreme audit institutions at a critical juncture. Public Money & Management, 38(2), 105–110. https://DOI:10.1080/09540962.2018.1407137
Brown, P., Preiato, J., & Tarca, A. (2014). Measuring country differences in enforcement of accounting standards: An audit and enforcement proxy. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 41(1–2), 1–52. https://doi.org/10.1111/jbfa.12066;
Curtis, M., Jenkins, J., Bedard, J., & Deis, D. (2009). Auditors' Training and Proficiency in Information Systems: A Research Synthesis. Journal of Information Systems. 23(1), 79;
Ellwood, S., & Garcia-Lacalle, J. (2012). Local public audit – the changing landscape. Public Money & Management, 32(5), 380–392. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2012.692554
Hay, D., & Cordery, C. J. (2018). The value of public sector audit: Literature and history. Journal of Accounting Literature. 40, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acclit.2017.11.0010737–4607/;
Heald, D. (2018). Transparency-generated trust: The problematic theorization of public audit. Financial Accountability & Management. 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/faam.12175;
Jakovljević, N. (2021a). Analysis of the impact of the Covid-19 epidemic through the sojourn tax and the attitudes of the respondents. Trendovi u poslovanju, 2/2021(18). 20-29;
Jakovljević, N. (2021b). Irregularities in conducting the list of assets and liabilities. Trendovi u poslovanju. 1/2021(17), 94-104;
Jakovljević, N. (2021c). Political neutrality in the audit profession: attitudes of respondents in the Republic of Serbia. BizInfo (Blace) Journal of Economics, Management and Informatics, 12(2), 23-38;
Jakovljević, N., & Jakovljević, J. (2021). The impact of the Covid-19 global pandemic on the responsibility of auditors. Finansije, 92-113;
Jeppesen, K.K. (2012). Jurisdictional competition between private and public sector auditors: The case of the Danish Certified Public Sector Auditor Qualification. Financial Accountability and Management, 28(2), 215–246. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0408.2012.00543.x
Jeppesen, K.K. (2018). The role of auditing in the fight against corruption. The British Accounting Review. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2018.06.001
Jeremić, N., Jeremić, M., Jakovljević, N. (2021). Agilna interna revizija. Revizor. 24(95-96), 57-76;
Johnsen, Å., Meklin, P., Oulasvirta, L., & Vakkuri, J. (2001). Performance Auditing in Local Government: An exploratory study of perceived efficiency of municipal value for money auditing in Finland and Norway. The European Accounting Review. 10(3), 583–599. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638180120081580;
Johnsen, Å., Reichborn-Kjennerud, K., Carrington, T., Jeppesen, K.K., Taro, K., & Vakkuri, J. (2019). Supreme audit institutions in a high-impact context: A comparative analysis of performance audit in four Nordic countries. Financial Accountability and Management. https://doi.org/10.1111/faam.12188
Judge, W., Li, S., & Pinsker, R. (2010). National adoption of international accounting standards: An institutional perspective. Corporate Governance: An International Review. 18(3), 161–174. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8683.2010.00798.x;
Khan, S. H., & Hoque, Z. (2016). Changes in the public accounts committee of a less developed democratic country: A field study. Financial Accountability & Management. 32(1), 80–103. https://doi.org/10.1111/faam.12082;
Lapsley, I., & Pong, C. (2000). Modernization versus problematization: Value-for-money audit in public services. European Accounting Review, 9(4), 541–567. https://doi.org/10.1080/713764876
Lillis, A., M. (1999). A framework for the analysis of interview data from multiple field research sites. Accounting and Finance. 39(1), 79-105;
Pollitt, C., & Summa, H. (1997). Reflexive watchdogs? How Supreme Audit Institutions account for themselves. Public Administration. 75, 313–336. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9299.00063;
Torres, L., Yetano, A., & Pina, V. (2019). Are performance audits useful? A comparison of EU practices. Administration & Society, 51(3), 431–462. https://DOI:10.1177/0095399716658500