The limits in using pre-audit safeguard


10:21 PM November 26th, 2012

November 26th, 2012 10:21 PM

I agree with Sancho Caceres (Inquirer, 10/24/12)—“pre-audit is the best way to safeguard people’s money.” However, pre-audit is not a 100-percent guarantee that there will be no anomalies in government transactions. I can cite two instances where corruption can occur even in a pre-audit regime:

1. When the auditors are in connivance with the wrongdoers.

2. The auditors assigned are incompetent.

We have heard of Commission on Audit auditors in cahoots with “bad guys,” and non-CPAs being employed by the COA simply because of their political connections. Besides, if the pre-audit would be required in all government transactions, there would be a slowdown in doing business with the government.

I suggest a compromise: Clarify which transactions would  require pre-audit and those that would allow post-audit.

—BERNARDO V. PERALTA, CPA, retired professor and reviewer in auditing, Jones Avenue, Cebu City

Disclaimer: Comments do not represent the views of We reserve the right to exclude comments which are inconsistent with our editorial standards. FULL DISCLAIMER

For feedback, complaints, or inquiries, contact us.