The findings of an audit on the administration of finances for the government’s response to the Covid-19 outbreak in Haiti have been made public by the Superior Court of Accounts and Administrative Disputes (CSCCA). From March 2020, when the first Covid-19 cases were discovered in the nation, through January 2021, a total of 9.2 billion gourdes were distributed.
Unfortunately, the CSCCA observes in its audit report given to the Ministry of Economy and Finance on June 8, 2022, that many of the costs paid in the context of this pandemic are not justified by the organizations that expended them.
Several governmental and/or independent bodies were engaged to give proper solutions to the health issue. The majority of the expenditures associated with the pandemic’s management have been committed to the organizations listed above.
“The public money allotted to entities mobilized to carry out urgent activities considered required in the battle against the pandemic accounted for 9% of the State’s total operational expenditure in the 2019-2020 fiscal year. In practice, it is the same as the entire amount of expenditures incurred by the Premature and MSPP during the same fiscal year. This audit is especially essential since the money at risk had to be committed swiftly for Haitians to deal with the pandemic’s health and economic effects “, as the Superior Court of Accounts and Administrative Litigation mandated from the start.
Thus, the Ministry of Economy and Finance requested this audit report on the management of the government response to the Covid-19 pandemic, which was carried out by the CSCCA by the constitutional and legal provisions authorizing its controls, wrote the CSCCA in its cover letter to the said report.
According to the administrative court, this is an impartial, objective, and trustworthy evaluation of how the government handled planned operations and related resources, as well as adopted the obligations entrusted to it, particularly in terms of accountability. as part of the healthcare crises’ handling.
According to the Court’s findings in this report, 88 percent of the money authorized was spent during the time under consideration. In terms of spending, the PNH, MSPP, MDE, FAES, and, to a lesser degree, the MTPTC, had the best results. The MENFP, which was in charge of establishing a social benefit for a group of persons immediately impacted by the crisis, had not met the usage criteria of 13 percent of the money granted, according to the CSCCA, which also mentions the MENFP’s inadequate management in this case.
The Court could not evaluate any aspect of the Ministry’s administration in the battle against the Covid-19 epidemic without the required management reports. As a consequence, there is a failure that will hurt public planning. The CSCCA claims to have previously examined the performance of organizations like the MTPTC, MDE, and SNGRS in terms of absorption capacity.
The Court, however, was unable to judge the attainment of results since they had not disclosed their performance, even late, via management reports. For example, the auditors specify, in the case of the MTPTC, which proposed to intervene throughout the national territory, the supporting documents for the expenditure transmitted would suggest that its intervention was limited to the departments of North-West, North-East, and the Artibonite.
The Court evaluated the supporting papers for expenditures made in the administration of the government response during its desk assessment. This investigation discovered that changes in state agency administration may hurt administrative file monitoring. “During the contradictory procedures launched with a view to the official validation of the findings of this audit report, the representatives appointed by certain entities to take part in them showed a real lack of knowledge of the files.
As a consequence, they were unable to engage in a proper manner or honour obligations made in the hopes of transferring particular papers or providing more information,” CSCCA authorities said.
Further on, the Court specified that in addition to the problems linked to the traceability of expenditure, it noted that the list of supporting documents to be attached to the expenditure warrant was not a well-established function.