EFEKTIFITAS LAPORAN HASIL TEMUAN PEMERIKSAAN DALAM MEWUJUDKAN REFORMASI TRANPARANSI FISKAL DAN AKUNTABILITAS SEKTOR PUBLIK (2001-2008) DI INDONESIA
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
Abstract
This paper examines and develops the criteria to measure the effectiveness of government auditing reports to enhance the transparency and public accountability from international literatures related to public administration and government auditing. The criteria can be divided into 2 (two) parts, namely: criteria related to information in the audit reports and criteria related to
acting on information in the audit reports. The first part consists of criteria related to the quality of information and the audit reports content. The second part consists of criteria related to communication of audit report information and acting on audit information. The research employed case study approach combining qualitative and quantitative methods in Indonesia. The study
surveyed and interviewed key informants including the management of the audit institutions, government auditors, the audited entities (local and central governments) and the Members of Parliament. By examining the reformation legal system for government auditing and comparing this with the best practices from the auditing literatures that formulated in criteria of government
auditing, the study shows that the Indonesian government auditing has not completely addressed the real needs of public accountability and transparency during this reformation era. This study argues that follow up of the audit findings are the major criteria in terms of acting on information. The study recommends a more effective strategy should be adopted to develop profesionalism and
integrity and to improve qualifications of auditors with different educational background, through education, training and development to move from financial auditing to performance auditing in the future. In addition, increasing audit resources in the local regions is necessary. The last recommendation is to provide better communication and discussion about implementing audit
recommendations and following-up audit reports.
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- The journal allow the authors to hold the copyright without restrictions and allow the authors to retain publishing rights without restrictions.
- Authors can enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) before and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
References
Babu, R. 2000. Some Thoughts on Objectives and Effectiveness of Audit. Asian Journal of
Government Auditing.
Barrett, P. 1996. Some Thoughts about The Roles, Responsibility and Future Scope of Auditors-
Genera'. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 55(4):137-46.
Becker, S. and Bryman, A. 2004. Understanding Research for Social Policy and Practice:
Themes, Methods and Approaches. Bristol, England: Policy Press.
Bertsk, J. 2000. Trust in Government Ethics Measures in OECD Countries. Paris: Organization
for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
Bovens, M. 2005. Public Accountability in E. Ferlie, L.E. Lynn and C. Pollitt (eds). The Oxford
Handbook of Public Management. New York: Oxford University Press.
Brooks, R.C. and Pariser, D.B. 1995. Audit Recommendation Follow-up Systems: A Survey of
The States. Public Budgeting & Finance, 15(1):72-83. GOI, 2004b.
Devas, N. 1989. Financing Local Government in Indonesia. Ohio: Ohio University, Center for
International Studies.
Eisenhardt, K.M. 2002. Building Theories from Case Study Research. in A.M. Huberman, and
Mile, M.B. (ed.). The Qualitative Researcher's Companion. London: Sage.
Ferguson, A. and Rafuse, B. 2004. Who Audits The Auditor?: The International Peer
Review of The Office of The Auditor General of Canada. International Journal of
Government Auditing. 31(4):10-15.
Funnell, W. and Cooper, K. 1998. Public Sector Accounting and Accountability in
Australia. UNSW Press, Sydney.
Gauthier, S.J., 2005. Governmental Accounting, Auditing and Financial Reporting, Government
Chicago: Finance Officers Association.
Gray, A., Jenkins, B., and Segsworth, B. 1993. Budgeting, Auditing and Evaluation: Function
and Integration in Seven Governments., New Brunswich, USA and London: Transaction
Publishers.
Healy, P.M. and Palepu, K.G. 2001. Information Asymmetry, Corporate Disclosure, and
The Capital Markets: A Review of The Empirical Disclosure Literature. Journal of
Accounting and Economics, 31(1-3):405-40.
INTOSAI. 1996. News in Brief . International Journal of Government Auditing, 23(2):3-6.
Kaltenbach, E. 1993. The Audit of Secret Expenditures. International Journal of Government
Auditing, 20(3):9-12.
Krishnamoorthy, G., Wright, A. and Cohen, J. 2002. Audit Committee Effectiveness and
Financial Reporting Quality: Implications for Auditor Independence. Australian
Accounting Review, 12(3):3-13.
Larson, J.S. 1983. Fraud in Government Programs: A Secondary Analysis. Southern Review of
Public Administration, 7(3).
Lynn, G. 2005. A Dictionary of Accounting and Auditing: 10.000 + Accounting and
Auditing Terms Currently Used in The USA, UK, Canada, and Australia: One Sentence
Definition, Xlibris. Philadelphia.
Manheim, J.B., Rich, R.C., Willnat, L. and Brians, C.L. 2008. Empirical Political Analysis:
Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methods 7th Edition. New York: Pearson Education
Inc.
Marshall, C. and Rossman, G.B. 2006. Designing Qualitative Research. California: Sage.
Marsidi, 2002. It Is The Right Time For Parliament To Be More Critical. The Audit Forum,
V(3):12-16.
Mazur, J., Révész, J., Vella, B. and Havens, H. 2005. Guidelines on Audit Quality. International
Journal of Government Auditing, 32(2):10-14.
McKernan, J. 1996. Curriculum Action Research: A Handbook of Methods and Resources for The
Reflective Pracititioner, 2nd Edition. London: Routledge.
McNabb, D.E. 2004. Research Methods for Political Science. New York: M.E. Sharpe.
Mulgan, R. 2001. Auditors-General: Cuckoos in The Managerialist Nest?. Australian Journal of
Public Administration, 60(2):24-34.
Nasution, A. 2006. The Role of The Audit Board of The Republic of Indonesia (BPK-RI) in
Promoting Transparency and Accountability of The State Finance. The Audit Forum, IX(2):6-
Nicoll, P. 2005. Audit in Democracy. England: Ashgate Publishing Limited
Nosworthy, B.A. 1999. Role of the Auditor General in Public Accountability: Some Issues,
dissertation.com. Austria.
Patton, M.Q. 2002. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods, 3rd Edition. London: Sage.
Ramos, M.J. 2006. Practitioner's Guide to GAAS 2006. New York: Wiley, Hoboken.
Ritchie, J., and Spencer, L. 2002. Qualitative Data Analysis for Applied Policy Research, in A.M.
Huberman, and Miles, B. (ed.). The Qualitative Researcher's Companion. London: Sage.
Russell, J.P. and Regel, T., 2000. After the Quality Audit: Closing The Loop on The Audit
Process. Milwaukee: American Society for Quality (ASQ) Press.
Santiso, C. 2008. Eyes Wide Shut? Reforming and Defusing Checks and Balances in Argentina.
Public Administration & Development, 28(1):67-84.
Schwartz, R. and Mayne, J., 2005. Quality Matters: Seeking Confidence in Evaluating, Auditing,
and Performance Reporting. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.
Soedibyo. 2003. Problems in Communicating Results of Our Works, The Audit Forum,
VI(3):22-24.
______. 2006. We Still Lack of Professional Auditors, The Audit Forum, IX(1):25-28.
Sproull, N.L. 1988. Handbook of Research Methods: A Guide For Practitioners and Students in
The Social Science. London: The Scarecrow Press, Inc..
Tandon, B.N., Sudharsanam, S. and Sundharabahu, S. 2007. Handbook of Practical Auditing.
New Delhi: S.Chand and Company Ltd.
Taylor, J. 1996. What Should Be The Role of The Auditor General in The Context of Managerialist
Government and New Public Management?. Australian Journal of Public Administration,
(4):147-56.
Thai, K.V. 1992. Government Auditing. in J. Rabin (ed.). Public Administration and Public
Policy: Handbook of Public Budgeting. New York: Maree Dekker.
Tokyo Declaration. 1985. Tokyo Declaration: Guidelines on Public Accountability. 3rd
Assembly and 2nd International Seminar of ASOSAI, Asian Organization of Supreme
Audit Institutions, Tokyo, Japan.
United Nations. 1980. Public Auditing Techniques for Performance Improvement: Report of the
United nations/INTOSAI Seminar on Government Auditing. Department of Technical
Cooperation for Development United Nations, New York.
US GAO. 2003. Government Auditing Standards 2003 Revision. The United States
Government Accountability Office, Washington D.C.
Widodo. 2004. Secrecy and Publicity, The Audit Forum, VII(No.1):19-24.
Surat Kabar Nasional
Kontan, 10 Maret 2007. 'Cukup satu pemeriksa ', Jakarta.
Koran Tempo, 12 March 2007. 'Hasil audit disclaimer (No opinion of audit reports)',
Jakarta.
Peraturan Perundang-undangan
UUD 1945: Naskah Asli dan Perubahannya Edisi Ketujuh. Jakarta: Pusaka Pergaulan.
Undang Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 17 Tahun 2003 tentang Keuangan Negara,
Jakarta.
Undang Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 15 Tahun 2004 tentang Pemeriksaan
Pengelolaan dan Tanggung Jawab Keuangan Negara, Penerbit Pustaka Pergaulan,
Jakarta.
Undang Undang Keuangan Negara: Dalam Satu Paket Edisi Keempat. Jakarta: Tim
Pustaka Pergaulan.
Undang Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 15 Tahun 2006 tentang Badan Pemeriksa
Keuangan, Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan Republik Indonesia, Jakarta. Diakses dari
http://www.bpk.go.id/undang/UU_15_BPK.pdf (3 Maret 2007).
Keputusan Presiden Nomor 103 Tahun 2001 tentang Kedudukan, Tugas, Fungsi,
Wewenang Susunan Organisasi dan Tata Kerja Lembaga Pemerintah Non Departemen,
Jakarta
Peraturan BPK Nomor 1 Tahun 2007 tentang Standar Pemeriksaan Keuangan Negara.
Jakarta: BPK RI.