Skip to playerSkip to main content
  • 2 years ago
The case of the Auditor General vs the Ministry of Finance will next come up for hearing in the High Court on May 12th, at which time the Auditor General will present her case against a Cabinet-appointed committee, set up to investigate the Misstatement of Revenue in the 2023 Public Accounts.


Meantime the Privy Council has delivered its written judgement on the matter, noting that the Auditor General has a reasonable prospect of success. Rynessa Cutting has more.
Transcript
00:00In its written judgement, dated January 28th, the Privy Council details its reasons for
00:06granting leave to the Auditor General to seek judicial review of a Cabinet-appointed committee
00:11investigating her claim of a misstatement of revenue in the 2023 public accounts.
00:17The Privy Council says the Auditor General's case is arguable, with a realistic prospect
00:23of success.
00:24In its judgement, the Law Lords question why the state would have attempted to prevent
00:29the ventilation of the matter in court, saying,
00:32It might be thought that public confidence in the appellants would be strengthened if
00:36the allegations are found to be without merit, but if there is no investigation, the allegations
00:42do not simply disappear.
00:44On the contrary, they may simply grow louder in volume.
00:49The Privy Council noted that while the appellants failed to bring forward a good argument for
00:53the Court of Appeals' decision to be reversed, the Auditor General's concern of bias is
00:58reasonable given that the Minister of Finance not only recommended the investigation, but
01:04also selected and recommended the investigation team, said the investigation's terms of reference,
01:10is responsible for remuneration of the investigation team, and has required that the investigation
01:16team report to him.
01:19The Privy Council goes further to note that notwithstanding Minister Inboot's own role
01:23as Minister of the Department responsible for the understatement of revenue, his conduct
01:29is not targeted for investigation in any of the terms of reference, whereas the conduct
01:35of the Auditor General is.
01:37The Privy Council says it is arguable that this has the appearance of a one-sided investigation
01:43seeking to deflect attention or blame away from the Minister.
01:48The Privy Council also points out that while the investigation team is not tasked with
01:52investigating whether the Auditor General should be removed from office, there remains
01:57the possibility that the investigation team's report might be the first step in a sequence
02:02of measures culminating in her removal through other means.
02:07In her argument, the Auditor General also contends that the investigation is unlawful
02:12because it constitutes interference with the independence of her role, a point which the
02:18Privy Council also deemed arguable.
02:20The matter will next be heard at Ohio Court on May 12.
02:24Renassa Katting, TV6 News.
Comments