Abstract
The subject of this study is the evaluation of the change process experienced by the Turkish Court of Accounts. This evaluation is made by i) independence of TCA, ii) change in audit area of the TCA, iii) change in institutional capacity of the TCA, iv) change in relations of the TCA with the GNAT, and v) change in the institutional capacity of the TCA.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Article 105 of Kanun-i Esasi the Court of Accounts is assigned to examine the accounts of those responsible for taking and consuming the state assets and to present the brief examination results and its opinions to Heyet-i Mebusan (Chamber of Deputies in Ottoman Empire) in the form of annual reports, and to submit quarterly reports to the Sultan about the financial situation by means of the President of the TCA. Articles 106 and 107 thereof governed number, appointment, guarantees of the President and members as well as some other issues (Köse 2007, p. 228).
- 2.
According to article 100 of the Constitution of 1924 “A Court of Accounts shall be established as affiliated to Turkish Grand National Assembly to audit government revenues and expenditures in line with a special law”; according to article 101 thereof, “TCS shall submit statement of general conformity within six months at the latest from the date when relevant final account law is presented to the GNAT”.
- 3.
Mentioned Article 127 states, “The TCA is responsible for inspecting all revenues and expenditures as well as assets of the general and annexed-budget administrations on behalf of the Parliament and finalizing the accounts and transactions of those responsible and performing examination, auditing and judgments duties assigned by laws.
Establishment, functioning, audit procedures of TCA, and duties and powers, rights and obligations, qualifications and appointments of its members, other personnel affairs and guarantees of the President and members shall be governed by law.
Procedures for the auditing, on behalf of the GNAT, of state property owned by the Armed Forces shall be regulated by law in accordance with the principles of confidentiality required by national defence services.”
- 4.
TCA (amended provision: general and annexed-budget administrations) shall inspect all revenues, expenditures and assets of the public administrations within the scope of central government budget and social security institutions on behalf of the GNAT and finalize the accounts and transactions of those responsible, and carry out the duties of examination, auditing and finalizing assigned by laws. The relevant parties may make a one-time request for the final decisions of the TCA to be revised within fifteen days of the written notification date. These decisions cannot be referred to the administrative judicial system.
The decisions of the Council of State shall be taken as basis in case of any dispute between the Council of State’s and TCA’s decisions on taxes, similar financial obligations and duties.
(Additional third paragraph: 29/10/ 2005–5428/ 2 art.) The auditing and finalization of accounts and transactions of local administrations shall be performed by TCA.
Establishment, functioning, audit procedures of TCA, and duties and powers, rights and obligations, qualifications and appointments of its members, other personnel affairs and guarantees of the President and members shall be governed by law.
Procedures for the auditing, on behalf of the GNAT, of state property owned by the Armed Forces shall be regulated by law in accordance with the principles of confidentiality required by national defence services (Abolished paragraph: 7/5/2004–5170/ art.10)” (1982 Constitution/art.160).
- 5.
Mentioned changes will be addressed under the sub-headings of the following section, to the extent limited by the scope of this study.
- 6.
According to Article 2 of the Law no. 6085, “Public administration means all administrations, organisations, institutions, associations, enterprises, subsidiaries and companies, regardless of whether they are subject to the provisions of public or private law.”
- 7.
Article 2 of the Law no. 6085 stipulates that the TCA shall audit “joint stock companies established by special laws and some part of whose capital directly or indirectly owned by the public sector and other public administrations”.
- 8.
These requests are; (i) examining the companies/affiliates and enterprises with financial statements large enough to be considered in evaluation out of those 30% of whose capital is, separately or jointly, held by the foundations, associations and funds established under the organization of public administrations; partnership structures, sources of revenue and the relations of these resources with the foundations, associations, funds and the public administrations established under their organization, the connections of their expenditures with their own managers and foundations, associations, funds and the public officers working in public administrations established under their organization, the amount of dividends received in exchange for the funds transferred by foundations, associations and funds established within the organization of public administrations, those liquidated and to be liquidated, material public loss resulting from the inefficient use of the public resources transferred; (ii) examining the allocation of real estates by the public, the conditions and utilisation of these allocations, the transfer to the third party, if any, the conditions of such transfers and the determination of the public loss, if any, arising from such transactions; (iii) examining legal compliance of leasing, operating and making use in other ways the Pension Fund hotels and other real estate and purchase-sale relations between the Pension Fund and Emeksan Foundation and the companies owned by the mentioned Foundation; (iv) audit request by Parliamentary Research Committee which is formed with the aim of investigation of and taking necessary actions against Arbitrary Management, Out-of-purpose Use of Public Resources and Biased Personnel Hiring; (v) Determining the whether the rights allocated to the irrigation associations and irrigation cooperatives are used efficiently and in compliance with the legislation after the water distribution, use, maintenance and repair of the irrigation companies belonging to the General Directorate of State Hydraulic Works (DSİ) are transferred to the irrigation associations and irrigation cooperatives, as well as the performance regarding such services; (vi) Due to the security of Aksaz Naval Base Command, the request for an audit regarding ending the evacuation of the Büyükkaraağaç Neighbourhood of Sultaniye Village, Köyceğiz District, Muğla, within the scope of a second-degree land military prohibited zone (Sayıştay, 2005: 27; Sayıştay 2006: 40; Sayıştay 2008: 48; Sayıştay, 2010: 50).
- 9.
According to ISSAI 100, regularity audit embraces: (a) Attestation of financial accountability of accountable entities, involving examination and evaluation of financial records and expression of opinions on financial statements; (b) Attestation of financial accountability of the government administration as a whole; (c) Audit of financial systems and transactions including an evaluation of compliance with applicable statutes and regulations; (d) Audit of internal control and internal audit functions; (e) Audit of the probity and propriety of administrative decisions taken within the audited entity; and (f) Reporting of any other matters arising from or relating to the audit that the Supreme Audit Institutions considers should be disclosed. (ISSAI 1003- Glossary of Terms to the INTOSAI Financial Audit Guidelines).
- 10.
Additional Article 10 of the Law is, “The TCA is authorized to examine the extent to which the institutions and organizations subject to audit use their resources in a productive, efficient and economic manner. Results of such examination are submitted to the Presidency of the Turkish Grand National Assembly by the First President of the Court of Accounts together with an evaluation report.
These reports and other reports of a general nature provided for in this Law shall be debated in GNAT Plan and Budget Committee, and presented to General Assembly of the GNAT along with the recommendation of the Commission”.
- 11.
These are; (i) Road maintenance, repair and maintenance activities of General Directorate of State Highways Highways (ii) Activities of museums affiliated to the Ministry of Culture, (iii) Fighting and Protecting Pollution Caused by Ships at Sea and Ports, (iv) Activities of Ministry of Public Works and Settlement after Marmara and Duzce Earthquake, (v) How Is İstanbul Prepared against Earthquake, (vi) Supply and Use of Medicines and Treatment Materials in Hospitals affiliated to the Ministry of Health, (vii) Maintenance, Repair and Safety of Historical Artifacts under the responsibility of General Directorate of Foundations (viii) Actions for the Protection of Forests, (ix) Planning and Auditing of the Coastal Use, (x) Performance of Ongoing Activities in the framework of e-Transformation Turkey Project, (xi) Websites of Public Institutions in the context of shifting to E-Government Public Institutions in Transition (Sayıştay 2005: 25, 2006: 13, 2007: 46).
- 12.
These are; (i) Efficiency of Fight Against Hospital Infections, (ii) Performance of Activities for Ensuring Traffic Safety, (iii) Coordination of Infrastructure Operations in Metropolitan Municipalities, (iv) Loans from the Projects Abroad (T. C. Sayıştay Başkanlığı 2006: 38, 2008: 46–47).
- 13.
These are; (i) Management of Drinking Water, (ii) Food Inspection, (iii) R&D Support Provided by TÜBİTAK to Academic Circles, (iv) Deriner Dam and Hydroelectric Power Plant, (v) Light Rail Transportation Systems, (vi) East Black Sea Coastal Highway Project (T. C. Sayıştay Başkanlığı 2006: 45, 46).
- 14.
Accordingly, although the article which defines performance audit in the TCA Draft Law was adopted at the committee as, “..measurement and evaluation of the results of activities with respect to objectives and indicators determined by the administrations and inspecting whether the public resources are used effectively, efficiently and economically”, it was adopted at the General Assembly of the GNAT as, “… measurement of the results of activities with respect to objectives and indicators determined by the administrations”.
- 15.
Official Gazette of 12/7/2012 no. 28351.
- 16.
These are listed as, “When determining public loss; (a) Overpayment of the amount determined in return of the business, goods or services, (b) Making payment without receiving the goods or services, (c) Making overpayment or undue payment regarding the expenditures having the nature of transfer, (d) Having a work done or purchase goods or services at a price higher than its market price, (e) Assessment, accrual or collection of the administrative revenues in a way that is in conflict with the legislation, (f) (Abolished: 22/12/2005–5436/art. 10), (g) Making payment even though it is not stipulated by the relevant legislation”.
- 17.
According to the By-Law; the following are taken as basis when determining public loss, “(i) Overpayment of the amount stated in the relevant legislation or determined in the documents foreseen in the relevant legislation such as decision, approval, contract, etc. in return of the business, goods or services, (ii) Making payment without receiving the goods or services, except for the cases stated in the relevant legislation, (iii) Making overpayment or undue payment regarding the expenditures having the nature of transfer, (iv) Having a work done or purchase goods or services by the commission or persons assigned by the relevant legislation at a price higher than its market price, (v) Leasing, allocation, management, use and disposal of assets belonging to public administrations not carried out in accordance with the legislation, (vi) Movables delivered to the officers getting damaged, (vii) Assessment, accrual or collection of the administrative revenues in a way that is in conflict with the legislation, (viii) failure to fulfil the obligations of the public administrations in compliance with the relevant legislation, resulting in additional financial burden for the public administration such as interest, compensations, delay fines, fines, ix) Making payment even though it is not stipulated by the relevant legislation”.
- 18.
According the TCA Law no. 832, the TCA is assigned with the duty of submitting reports to the GNAT on; (i) the legal arrangements which appear to be jeopardising the interests of the Treasury in respect of meaning, application or consequences (art. 25), ii) Financial transactions, accounting procedures and revenue accrual systems (art. 28), (iii) The issues for which the ministers assume responsibility (art. 32), (iv) The transactions and accounts found, during the examinations and audits, to be in violation of the legislation, which are deemed necessary (art. 88), (v) State properties (art. 87), (vi) Results of the inspections of the accounts of the administrations and institutions kept by their accountants, except for the general budget and annexed-budget administrations (art. 87), (vii) Government debt and receivables (art. 55), (viii) Government revenues (art. 28), (ix) Other issues deemed necessary as a result of the examination of the transactions and accounts of the organisations subject to audit (art. 28), (x) Efficiency and effectiveness evaluation on the resources of the institutions and organisations subject to audit (additional art. 10).
References
Ağcakaya, S. & Ökkeş, Y. (2017). Yargı Denetimi (Sayıştay Denetimi). In K. Tüğen & S. Ağcakaya & Emine Uzunali (Eds), Kamu Mali Yönetimi ve Denetimi (pp. 211–252). Bursa, Türkiye: Ekin Kitabevi.
Akgündüz, A. (2018, January 1). Belgeler Işığında Divan-ı Muhasebat (Sayıştay) Tarihi. Retrieved from https://www.sayistay.gov.tr/tr/Upload/95906369/files/tarihce/Sayistay_Tarihi.pdf#page=17.
Aksoy, M. Geçgel B. & Öz Y. (2008). Sayıştay Hesap Yargısı. Ankara, Türkiye: T.C. Sayıştay Başkanlığı Yayını No. 115.
Akyel, R. (2016). Sayıştay Raporlarının Kamu Mali Yönetimine Katkısı. Amme İdaresi Dergisi, 49(1), 119–145.
Akyel, R. & Baş, H. (2010). Kamu Yönetimi ve Denetimi Bağlamında Sayıştay’ın Anayasal ve Yargısal Konumu. Maliye Dergisi, 158, 374–387.
Bağlı, M. S. (2011). Parlamento-Bütçe İlişkilerinde Stratejik Plan ve Faaliyet Raporlarının Önemi. Yasama Dergisi, 17, 39–80.
Balyemez, A. S. (2018). Sayıştay Performans Denetimlerinin Uygulama ve Sonuçları Üzerine Bir Tartışma. Journal of Business Research Turk, 10(2), 276–311. https://doi.org/10.20491/isarder.2018.430.
Candan, E. (2007). Türk Bütçe Sisteminde Performans Denetimi. Ankara, Türkiye: Maliye Bakanlığı Strateji Geliştirme Başkanlığı Yayını.
Coşkun, A. (1998). Denetimde Yeni Yönelişler: Performans Denetimi. Cumhuriyetin 75. Yılında Kamu Harcamaları ve Denetimi Sempozyumu Bildiriler Kitabı (pp. 85–106). Ankara, Türkiye: Sayıştay Başkanlığı Yayını.
Çağan, N. (1985). Anayasa Çerçevesinde Kamu Maliyesinin Parlamenter Kontrolü. Anayasa Yargısı Dergisi, 2(1), 199–204.
Çetinkaya, Ö. (2017). Türkiye’de Bütçe Dışı Fonlar ve Denetimleri. In K. Tüğen & S. Ağcakaya & Emine Uzunali (Eds), Kamu Mali Yönetimi ve Denetimi (pp. 391–410). Bursa, Türkiye: Ekin Kitabevi.
Çiçek, H. G., Dikmen, S. & Güngören, F. (2014). Yüksek Denetimin Bağımsızlığı: Türk Sayıştayı Örneği. 29. Türkiye Maliye Sempozyumu (16–20 Mayıs 2014) Bildiriler Kitabı (pp. 329–350). Sakarya, Türkiye: Sakarya Üniversitesi Yayını.
Demirbaş, T. (2001). Sayıştaylar Tarafından Gerçekleştirilen Performans Denetimleri ve Türk Sayıştayı Uygulaması. Ankara, Türkiye: Sayıştay Yayınları.
Demirbaş, T. & Engin, R. (2016). Sayıştayın Belediyeler Üzerindeki Performans Denetimlerinde Ulaştığı Bulguların Analizi. Sayıştay Dergisi, 100, 27–60.
Demirel, S. & Keleş, C. (2010). 5018 Sayılı Kamu Mali Yönetimi ve Kontrol Kanununa Göre Kamu Zararı. Dış Denetim Dergisi, 1(1), 180–183.
European Commission-EC. Türkiye 2012 Yılı İlerleme Raporu. (2012). Bruksel. Retrieved from: ab.gov.tr/files/2012_ileleme_raporu_tr.pdf.
European Commission-EC. Türkiye 2015 Yılı İlerleme Raporu , Bruksel. Retrieved from ab.gov.tr/files/2015_ilerleme_raporu_tr.pdf.
European Commission-EC. Türkiye 2016 Yılı İlerleme Raporu, Bruksel. Retrieved from ab.gov.tr/files/2016_ilerleme_raporu_tr.pdf.
European Commission-EC. Türkiye 2018 Yılı İlerleme Raporu, Bruksel. Retrieved from ab.gov.tr/files/2018_ilerleme_raporu_tr.pdf
Feyzioğlu, B. (1987). Sayıştay ve Parlamento. Çağdaş Sayıştay Denetimi Sempozyumu Kitabı (pp. 23–35). Ankara, Türkiye: Sayıştay Yayınları.
Geçgel, B. (2014). Sayıştayın Yargı Yetkisi, Yargısal Görevinin Niteliği ve Yargı Kolları Arasındaki Yeri. Sayıştay Dergisi, 93, 31–42.
INTOSAI ISSAI 300: fundamental principles of performance auditing. (2013). Retrieved from: www.intosai.org.
INTOSAI ISSAI 1: The Lima Declaration of Guidelines on Auditing Precepts, Glossary. (1977). Retrieved from: www.intosai.org.
INTOSAI ISSAI 10: Mexico Declaration on SAI Independence. (2001). Retrieved from: www.intosai.org.
Karakaş, M. (2005). Kamu Mali Yönetiminde Yeniden Yapılanma Aracı Olarak Hesapverme Sorumluluğu ve Saydamlık. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 10(12), 291–305.
Köse, H. Ö. (2007). Dünyada ve Türkiye’de Yüksek Denetim. Ankara, Türkiye: T.C. Sayıştay Başkanlığı Yayını.
Mutluer, K., Erdoğan, Ö. & Coşkun, A. (2015). Sayıştay Hukuku. İstanbul, Türkiye: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayını.
Önder, Ö. & Türkoğlu, İ. (2012). Denetim Anlayışının Değişimi: Yeni Sayıştay Kanunu Üzerine Değerlendirmeler. Uluslararası Yönetim İktisat ve İşletme Dergisi, 8(17), 197–214. https://doi.org/10.11122/ijmeb.2012.8.17.313.
Özekicioğlu, S. (2017). Türkiye’de Dış Denetim Mevzuatı ve Kamu Mali Yönetimine Yansımaları. Marmara Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 39(2), 601–618. https://doi.org/10.14780/muiibd.372675.
Polat, K. (2012). Yüksek Denetimde TBMM’nin Rolü ve Yeni Bir Model Önerisi: Kamu Hesaplarını İnceleme ve Kesin Hesap Komisyonu. Yasama Dergisi, 21, 119–143.
Selen, U. & Taytak, M. (2017). Türkiye’de Bütçenin Yasama Organı Tarafından Denetimi ve Sayıştayın Konumu. Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 19(1), 193–223.
Söyler, İ. & Çolak, M. (2012). Yeni Kamu Mali Yönetim ve Denetim Sisteminde Raporlama. Maliye Dergisi, 162, 145–154.
Taşır, A. (2017). Sayıştayın Anayasal Konumu Üzerinde Tartışmalar. TBB Dergisi, 133, 81–96.
T.C. Dışişleri Bakanlığı. Avrupa Birliği Müzakere Fasılları: Fasıl 32. (2018). Retrieved from: www.ab.gov.tr.
T.C. Sayıştay Başkanlığı Sayıştay Düzenlilik Denetim Rehberi Versiyon No 2018/4. (2018a). Ankara, Türkiye.
T.C. Sayıştay Başkanlığı. sayıştay tarihçesi. (2018b). Retrieved from: https://www.sayistay.gov.tr/tr/Upload/95906369/files/tarihce/Sayistay_Tarihi.pdf#page=17.
T.C. Sayıştay Başkanlığı. Sayıştay 2014 Yılı İdare Faaliyet Raporu. (2015). Ankara, Türkiye.
T.C. Sayıştay Başkanlığı. Sayıştay 2013 Yılı İdare Faaliyet Raporu. (2014b). Ankara, Türkiye.
T.C. Sayıştay Başkanlığı. Sayıştay 2012 Yılı İdare Faaliyet Raporu. (2013). Ankara, Türkiye.
Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Sayıştay Başkanlığı. Sayıştay 2008 Yılı İdare Faaliyet Raporu. (2009). Ankara, Türkiye.
T.C. Sayıştay Başkanlığı. Sayıştay 2009–2013 Stratejik Planı. (2008). Ankara, Türkiye.
T.C. Sayıştay Başkanlığı. Sayıştay 2006 Yılı Faaliyet Raporu. (2006). Ankara, Türkiye.
T.C. Sayıştay Başkanlığı. Sayıştay 1999 Yılı Faaliyet Raporu. (1999). Ankara, Türkiye
T.C. Sayıştay Başkanlığı. Sayıştay 2011 Ylı İdare Faaliyet Raporu. (2012). Ankara, Türkiye
T.C. Sayıştay Başkanlığı. Sayıştay Performans Denetim Rehberi. (2014a). Ankara, Türkiye
T.C. Sayıştay Başkanlığı. Sayıştay 2016 Yılı İdare Faaliyet Raporu. (2017). Ankara, Türkiye
Usta, E. (2011). Mali Reform Süreci ve 5018 Sayılı Kanunun Genel Değerlendirmesi. Kamu Mali Yönetimi Sempozyumu (25–27 Mart 2011) Bildiriler Kitabı (pp. 50–70). İzmir, Türkiye: Ege Üniversitesi Yayını.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Şahin İpek, E.A. (2020). Reforms of Turkish Court of Accounts. In: Akdemir, T., Kıral, H. (eds) Public Financial Management Reforms in Turkey: Progress and Challenges, Volume 2. Accounting, Finance, Sustainability, Governance & Fraud: Theory and Application. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-4226-8_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-4226-8_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-15-4225-1
Online ISBN: 978-981-15-4226-8
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)