Judiciary audit an anti-fraud strategy

Chief Justice David Maraga, flanked by members of the Judicial Service Commission, addresses journalists at the Supreme Court on July 24, 2018. PHOTO | FILE | NATION MEDIA GROUP

What you need to know:

  • The auditors are aggressively pursuing others who have failed to conform with the strict policies of zero tolerance to theft and other activities that go against the procedures.

  • A good audit mechanism exists to find out whether the controls are adequate to safeguard the institution’s resources.

Over the past few weeks, the Judiciary’s Audit and Risk Management Directorate has been in the news for all the right reasons.

A good audit mechanism exists to perform two key functions. One, to find out whether the institution’s resources are being used in accordance with the procedures, and two, whether the controls are adequate to safeguard its resources.

Where there is confirmation of revenue loss, the audit department is expected to flag this to the management with clear recommendations about the steps to take against the culpable individuals and suggest controls to put in place with a view to both seeking retribution and plugging of any holes.

The media have lately been reporting about the work of the Judiciary’s Audit Directorate with revelations regarding expenditure questions that are sometimes more than 10 years old.

DISHONESTY

Indeed, we are truly proud of the manner in which the directorate has heeded Chief Justice David Maraga’s declaration of zero tolerance to dishonesty in the Judiciary.

Take the case of the forensic audit at the Milimani Law Courts, Nairobi, for example. The Chief Registrar of the Judiciary instructed that the audit be carried out following suspicions that nefarious activities were going on in the registries.

The audit directorate quickly did its checks and prepared a comprehensive report, which they presented to the Office of the Chief Registrar of the Judiciary last month.

This report, which quickly found its way to the media, revealed that court fees were being lost through the use of parallel receipt books and alteration of receipts at the registries of the Commercial and Tax Division, Civil and Family Divisions and the Environment and Land Court.

Following this discovery, the Judiciary took firm action that included suspending the officers involved and reporting the matter to the Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI) for further investigation, arrest and prosecution.

EVIDENCE

The Judiciary has since met with the DCI investigators for briefing and presentation of evidence pertaining to the matter.

But Milimani is not the only place where the Judiciary has had problems in the cash office.

Outside Nairobi, they found culpable staff at the Makueni Law Courts, who have since been interdicted awaiting prosecution. And in Kitui, somebody is in court over the loss of Sh10 million.

The auditors are aggressively pursuing others who have failed to conform with the strict policies of zero tolerance to theft and other activities that go against the procedures.

All in all, 11 accountants from across the country have been arraigned for theft between 2016 and 2018 to answer to various charges related to economic crimes.

Following these cases, the Judiciary management took a raft of steps to not only ensure there is retribution for the non-conformances but also that similar incidents do not occur.

CASHLESS PAYMENT

The steps include strict enforcement of the cashless payment system, mainly through M-Pesa; already, 94 per cent of the courts have complied.

Besides, there is the roll-out of bold digital solutions to transform the client experience.

For instance, the Commercial Justice Sector Reforms Project, launched by the Chief Justice in May, is already turning around the way business is conducted at the Milimani Commercial Court.

It has ICT solutions that allow lawyers to file cases, pay fees and track cases from the comfort of their offices without physically visiting the courts.

Then there are the Service Charters for every court and administrative unit that spell out the services offered, cost, requirements and estimated waiting time.

A Court Fee schedule has been developed and is in use to reduce individual officers’ discretion and make processes and costs predictable and transparent.

REGISTRY MANUALS

Registry manuals are being enforced to ensure that the guidelines are clear, workflow is documented and individual officers take full responsibility for what happens on their desks.

And to ensure this, regular spot checks and inspections are the order of the day.

What we are saying is that the audit revelations we are reading about are not signs of a growing malady, but the conclusion of a comprehensive operation that will rid the Judiciary of any remnants from the pervasive culture of fraud.

It must be what Kenyans are yearning for in the management of their resources.

Ms Wambui is a deputy director of public affairs and communication at the Judiciary. [email protected]