In reviewing the budget document of 2006, one can easily gather that that H.E. the Minister of Finance seems to have ignored bluntly that he is the Principal Financial Adviser of the government and thus required to provide answers to questions raised on financial management by the House of Parliament or by the Economic Committee of Parliament on the spot. After all, he is being assisted by Senior Officers who are accountable to him from his Ministry, who actually prepared the document on his behalf without wasting time and effort. The Minister appears to have handle the question raised as if its answers requires an exhaustive research, although as reported by SLD websites the Minister spends most of his time on political campaign activities, so as to achieve the approval of the Budget from Parliament before submitting Final Accounts of previous years and provide answers to the queries raised by the Committee before end of March. It is disappointing to learn that over 4 weeks the Minister is unable to provide information requested on revenues collected, but not included to the revenue estimates presented to Parliament. From this hurdle, it transpires that moneys amounting of Millions of $ collected in cash from tax-payers have been spent before bringing it to government accounting records held by the Accountant General and before appropriations were requested and approved by the House of Parliament in accordance with the constitution and financial regulations of the State.

The budget document did not explain any legal financial regulatory acts or financial policies or accounting procedures that guide the ministry in determining the financial forecasts made in assessing total revenue and expenditure estimates. He did not also report about the reliability of the financial internal control system that is in place. It appears that the culture of one party system over the past 3.7 years made irrelevant or non-existent an effective scrutiny of a legislative body or an independent Auditor Generals’ role of ascertaining that the financial internal controls system are adequate and in place. It appears therefore that the system dependent on the will of rulers and not on the rule of law or policy. In other words the rule of law governing management of public funds was ignored as and when paper-trail which could have lead to an audit-trail has been eliminated. Such a system is a pure and easy robbery which does not require authorization and examination processes. Such a simple mechanism of mismanaging public funds is known to the poorest Somaliland citizens whose daily maintenance is less than $1, because a bold way of raiding taxes collected is done outside government accounting records. In this case Millions$ of physical cash is taken to the offices/premises of the most SENIOR officials of the government by the Managers/Directors of revenue collection entities without any paper trail. Even, if such funds were used on official business, political bribe or to enrich government cronies will appear that disbursements are made in cash paper-trail, since the legal channel has been tress-passed. It may be true also that proceeds from GRANTS received from friendly Countries and International Agencies to finance projects or programs badly needed is squandered like the moneys collected from Somaliland tax-payers.

It is only 29/09/2005 that multi-party system gave birth to a democratically elected Members of Parliament which brought high EXPECTATIONS of improved transparency and accountability in government affairs, in which case the parliament decided to play the role of an scrutinizer in all the Operations undertaken by the Executive as required by Article……..of Somaliland Constitution. This is much different than the out-going Parliament who played the role of a rubber-stamp function rather than shouldering their responsibility of an over-sight role for reasons that have not yet been investigated. Such a collusion of interest between the Legislative and Executive body of the state have encouraged corruptive culture, waste of public funds and embezzlement of Public Funds, blind-justice, land grab and many other types of corruption. I would not like to speculate what will happen in Somaliland as and when this scandal is exposed to the public by the oversight authority, in this case the Parliament. This is a serious financial scandal that requires Senior political officials and senior government civil servants to provide honest answers to Parliament in order demonstrate to that the rule of law prevails and no Somaliland citizens is above the law.

In preparing financial forecasts it is necessary to provide detailed analysis of both revenue and expenditure estimates. In the first place moneys collected as government revenue by tax-payers, but omitted from the revenue estimates should be included (tax on petroleum products, livestock and Somaliland Diaspora…. Etc...) Be included in accordance with the Financial Rules & Regulations of the State. According to the approved accounting procedures and financial regulations, revenues collected by the government can not be expended unless regularized by seeking the enactment of parliament as an appropriation, after the revenue is accounted into the accounting books maintained by the Accountant General through the approved accounting procedures. It should be noted that all revenue expended prior it has been transacted in the accounting books and included in the appropriations act/budget estimates or administered on approved act of parliament is illegal and be regarded as an embezzlement of public funds.

I believe that the following classification and break-down of all taxes, charges and fees raised from the public will make the legislative body understand existing taxation laws and may recommend some changes to certain laws for the good of all.

In the budget document, the minister is obliged to state whether sales taxes collected on behalf of local governments at the entry Point of Custom Posts by the Ministry of Finance is included in the Total revenue estimates of the Central Government for the period 2006 and show in the financial statements as an account payable for amounts collected for L Governments for the period 2005, 2004, 2003 & 2002, incase such debts have not been settled or otherwise, since this item is a significant amount. The

Minister did not explain in the document why the Final Accounts (financial statements) of previous years i.e. 2005, 2004, 2003 & 2002 could not be submitted to Parliament with the budget document and did not explain why it was not prepared and the causes of the problem, He should give an idea when a solution will be sought and financial statements outstanding is for a period of 3.7years. This is a serious omission and may trigger financial crisis, if not resolved without further delay.

Recommendation:

We all know that Corruptive practices are as bad as Kenya, although our government is still on denial mood. It is strongly recommended that an Anti-corruption taskforce be appointed in tackling main types of corruption that seriously hamper the socio-economic development of our poor country and the lively hood of our citizens. It is also recommended that a capacity building program be appraised urgently:

1. Auditor Generals’ Office;

2. Accountant General of the Ministry of Finance;

3. Central Bank;

4. Internal Revenue Office;

5. Comptroller of Customs and Excise.

6. Attorney Generals’ Office’

7. Criminal Investigation Department ( C.I.D)**financial section**.

Written by: Mr. Ahmed M.Gedi (sanjab),

Secretary General, SLD Justice & Welfare Party (UCID).

Home | Contact us | Links | Archives