As the government seeks innovative ways to increase revenue collection, there is a need to cut on wastage and scale up efforts to enhance prudent use of public resources. This will guarantee sustainable development and delivery of quality services to the citizens.
Relevant investigative agencies must use the evidence from the Auditor General’s reports to push for successful prosecution of public officers who have not utilised public resources in line with the stipulated guidelines, irrespective of their status in society.
The Auditor General’s mandate of auditing and reporting on the use and management of public resources, must not end with submission of the reports to Parliament or the relevant county assemblies, as outlined in the Constitution. “Within three months after receiving an audit report, Parliament or the County Assembly shall debate and consider the report and take appropriate action,” reads Article 229 (8) of the Constitution.
Besides the auditees, who are expected to adjust their operations in line with recommendations from the audit reports, entities such as the Directorate of Criminal Investigations and the Ethics and Anti-corruption Commission have a duty to interrogate the issues flagged out.
Such institutions need to exercise their authority in accordance with the law and support efforts to ensure prudent utilisation of public resources. They must guard against temptations to view the adverse audit reports as an opportunity to cut deals, and ultimately neutralise hard-hitting findings.
Based on the Auditor General’s reports, the media has been awash with reports of public officers failing to account for public funds. The investigative and prosecuting agencies are expected to seize the audit reports and subject them to further scrutiny, with a view of holding the accounting officers adversely mentioned therein accountable.
However, making decisions at the whim of political expediency poses serious threats to public accountability. Overemphasis on political correctness seems to be diverting the country’s attention from the war against wanton wastage of public resources.
The danger of cheering Kenyans through such a path is that those found with their hands in the cookie jar feel emboldened to steal more. Some Kenyans appear to have surrendered to the misplaced belief that if you are on the right side of the political divide, accusations of misappropriation of public funds can easily be dismissed as malice or ‘hot air.’
This explains why some senior state and public officers who had a golden opportunity to change people's lives and make an impact on the citizenry want to remain on the government payroll. They are seeking a second chance even in positions considered junior to those they enjoyed.
Their quest to serve is not motivated by public but personal interests. They want to remain in positions of influence and safeguard their interests. Luckily, the Constitution is clear and President William Ruto has emphasised that nobody is above the law and the country must be governed by the rule of law.
The Executive must smile at the audit reports and use them as a mirror as it seeks to entrench good governance. The President and his foot soldiers must look beneath the reports because most often, due to the workload, they are based on random sampling and the evidence presented. The situation could be worse.
The country has adequate resources to spur meaningful development and positively impact people's lives, if Kenyans insist on value for money as opposed to just spending and producing receipts, to satisfy the auditors.
This explains why the Auditor General is not keen on only the evidence that money was spent but goes the extra mile to establish what the money was spent for, before endorsing a transaction.
The auditees, on their part, should not only seek alternative ways to right the wrongs but use the audit reports to improve performance. Collectively, as Kenyans, we can do better and end up being among the best, globally, in government expenditure.
