National Assembly Minority Leader Junet Mohamed has weighed in on the recently released report by the Auditor General for the Financial Year 2023/2024, arguing that it needed parliamentary verification before being made public.
Speaking on the floor of the National Assembly on Thursday, March 6, 2025, Junet stressed that there is an established legal procedure that Auditor General Nancy Gathungu should have followed before publicizing the report to ensure fairness and accuracy.
“The Auditor General reports to the National Assembly, in terms of expenditure of government. Auditing of government expenditure did not start today or yesterday; there is a procedure that is followed whenever auditing is done and the law is very clear,” Junet stated.
The Minority Leader cited Article 226 of the Constitution and the Public Audit Act 412(b), which outline the auditing procedure for government services.
While quoting these provisions, Junet asserted that the Auditor General is required to engage with public servants, conduct audits, and subsequently report her findings to Parliament.
“Parliament is now supposed to verify whether the audit report is correct or not correct. Until that is done and a report is tabled before the House, that audit is still not confirmed,” he explained.
Unwarranted repercussions
Junet raised concerns that publicizing audit findings before parliamentary scrutiny could result in unjust reputational damage or unfair condemnation of civil servants accused of financial malpractice.
“You will see now the Auditor General reports on a matter before it is verified and before it is certified it is all over the country saying that ‘so and so has stolen this, this kind of money has been lost,’” he said.
He noted that even when the Auditor General appears before committees, she often fails to clarify that the findings have not yet been verified by the appropriate House committee.
“The committee of the house is the arbiter of that matter. The public servant who has been accused of malpractice and the Auditor General who is the prosecutor appear before the committee of the house, and everyone brings his or her document before the committee. Unless we have changed our rules and laws on auditing, that is the position as far as I’m concerned,” Junet elaborated.
The lawmaker warned that treating audit findings as final before parliamentary scrutiny could set a dangerous precedent, leading to misinformation and unnecessary panic.
“Now Mr. Speaker, any audit report is a confirmed report before it is brought before the house. That culture will lead to anarchy. That culture will lead to people’s names being destroyed without any recourse,” he cautioned.
Opportunity for explanation
Junet argued that some discrepancies in the report’s findings may stem from delays in document submission by some leaders, stating that civil servants should be given a chance to explain these discrepancies before the findings are made public.
“Why civil servants are given an opportunity to explain what the auditor general has reported is because there might have been a delay in the submission of documents… But if the Auditor General’s word is final, then why report to Parliament? Why can’t the Auditor General do the report and publish and that be the end of the story? That is not what the law says,” he concluded.
