MRA inducts Office of the Federal Auditor-General into the FOI Hall of Shame
Media Rights Agenda (MRA) has
named the Office of the Auditor-General of the Federation into its Freedom of
Information (FOI) Hall of Shame for its brazen disregard for the FOI Act as evidenced
by its non-compliance with virtually all aspects of it over the last six years.
Ridwan Sulaimon, MRA’s Freedom of
Information Programme Manager, who announced the induction in a statement in
Lagos, noted that the Office of the Auditor-General is charged with auditing
and reporting on the public accounts of the federation as well as those of all
offices and courts of the federation.
Stressing that the Office of the
Auditor-General of the Federation itself ought to be transparent and
accountable if it hopes to fulfill its mandate of ensuring accountability in
the management of public resources, Sulaimon observed that “by virtue of his
functions, the Auditor-General has a uniquely complete overview of the
utilization and management of public funds. His conduct in the performance of his
functions can either serve to instill public confidence in the government or
erode any trust that citizens might otherwise have.”
He insisted that “the Office of
the Auditor-General should understand the importance of access to information
being an institution which's mandate requires the Auditor-General, or any
person authorised by him, to have access to all the books, records, returns and
other documents relating to the accounts it audits and reports on.”
Sulaimon further noted that while
the Office of the Auditor-General has a regularly updated website, no
information relating to its implementation of the FOI Act can be found on the
platform, indicating that it either does not implement the Act or that it has
no knowledge of its obligations under the law, including the obligation to
proactively publish the categories of information stated in Section 2(3), (4)
and (5) of the FOI Act and ensure that the information is widely disseminated
and made available to members of the public through various means, as required
by the Act.
“There is no indication that the
Office of the Auditor-General has complied with Section 2(3)(f) of the FOI Act
which requires the agency, as a public institution, to designate an appropriate
officer to whom applications for information under the Act should be sent and
to proactively publish the title and address of the officer.
“In the six years since the
enactment of the FOI Act, the Office of the Auditor-General has not submitted a
single annual report to the Attorney-General of the Federation as required by
Section 29(1) of the Act.
"It is unconscionable that
while in such flagrant breach of his statutory duty to report to the
Attorney-General of the Federation on his implementation of the FOI Act, the
Auditor-General of the Federation expects other public institutions to comply
with their constitutional duty to submit accounts and records to his
office," Sulaimon pointed out.
He added that the failure of the
Office of the Auditor-General of the Federation to submit its annual reports to
the Attorney-General of the Federation makes it difficult to ascertain how
responsive it has been to requests for information as such reports would have
provided the relevant information about the number of applications for
information that it has received annually over the last six years and the number
of such applications that it processed, granted or refused, alongside other
details that it is required by the Act to provide in its report to the
Attorney-General.
Instead, he said, there is little
or no information available on its handling of FOI requests, making it is
difficult to determine the extent of the implementation of the FOI Act by the
Office of the Auditor-General.
He also observed that MRA’s
assessment of the poor level of implementation of the FOI Act by the Office of
the Auditor-General of the Federation was consistent with the findings of the
Public and Private Development Centre (PPDC) in its 2017 ranking of 166 public
institutions released on September 28, 2017 based on an assessment of the levels of public access to procurement
related records and information, such as information on procurement plans,
procurement processes and capital expenditure.
According to him, the Office of
the Auditor-General of the Federation was among the worst performing public
institutions in PPDC’s FOI rankings, having scored zero for proactive
disclosure and zero for responsiveness to requests for information from members
of the public and an overall grade of zero for its general disclosure of
information under the FOI Act.
“Despite the provisions of Section
13 of the FOI Act, there is also no indication that the Auditor-General’s
Office has provided the required training for its officials on the public’s
right of access to information or on the implementation of the Act at any time
in the last six years.
"The fundamental function of
the Auditor-General’s Office is the protection of the public interest by
performing detailed and objective examinations of public accounts and timely
reporting of its findings. If the institution is to help the country do more in
tackling corruption and enhancing accountability as recently reiterated by the
President at the launch and public presentation of the institution’s five-year
Strategic Development Plan on September 21, 2017, it is imperative that the
institution takes urgent steps to implement the Act and fulfill its obligations
under the law.”
Launched by MRA on July 3, 2017,
the FOI Hall of Shame names an inductee once every week to highlight public
officials and institutions that are undermining the effectiveness of the FOI
Act through their actions, inactions, utterances and decisions.
Comments
Post a Comment