ABSTRACT
Public budgeting as a
field of study has grown tremendously in recent years. Budgeting is one of the
most important areas in policy making as it sets priorities within overall
spending limit so as to influence the economy and enhance development. The
issue of budget implementation has been a source of concern to the public
considering its importance on economic growth. The study therefore examined how
application of Forensic accounting techniques can help in providing solutions
to the problem of misappropriation, over budgeting, uncompleted projects,
diversion of unutilized funds in Federal government budget implementation.
A descriptive/survey
design was adopted for the research. The elements of the population considered
in this research were staff of Federal Ministries and Parastatals in Federal
Capital Territory, Abuja. Sample representatives included: Federal Ministry of
Finance, Federal Ministry of Education, Federal Ministry of Health, Economic
and Financial Crimes Commission, Independence Corrupt Practices Commission,
Federal Ministry of Statistics, Federal Ministry of Works and Nigerian Prison
Services. A 20 item questionnaire was used to collect information from
respondents.
The data were analyzed
using descriptive and inferential statistics on specified panel regression
model. Five research questions and five hypotheses were tested. Findings
revealed that Investigative and auditing support service, Litigation support
service and Expert witness have collinear effect and movement to solve
identified problems in Federal government budget implementation in Nigeria.
Results revealed that the coefficient of determination was 75.5% which means a
sign of good fit that Investigative and Auditing Support Services, Litigation
Support Services, and Expert Witness have positive relationship in solving the
problem of poor budget implementation.
Based on the findings
it was recommended that Forensic accounting techniques should be
put in place to monitor Federal government budget implementation. Also there should be timely presentation
of budget and approval while periodic report and review on budget
implementation should be addressed by the Executive and Legislative arms of
government so as to curb cases of misappropriation, over budgeting, uncompleted
projects, diversion of unutilized funds and the role of the anti-graft agencies
should not be undermined.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page
Abstract
Table of Contents
List of Tables
CHAPTER ONE:
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the Study
1.2 Statement of the Problem
1.3 Objectives of the Study
1.4 Research Questions
1.5 Hypotheses
1.5.1 Rationale for the Hypotheses
1.6 Significance of the Study
1.7 Justification of the Study
1.8 Scope and Delimitation of Study
1.9 Operationalization of Variables
1.10 Definition of Key Terms
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW
OF LITERATURE
2.1 Conceptual Framework
2.1.1 Concept of Budgeting
2.1.2 Concept of Budgetary Procedure and Implementation in Nigeria
2.1.3 Concept of Forensic Accounting
2.1.4 Crimes in Implementation of Federal Government Projects
2.1.5 Evolution of Antigraft Agencies and their Functions
2.2 Theoretical Framework
2.2.1 Budgetary Theory
2.2.2 Theories of Forensic Accounting
2.3 Empirical Framework
2.3.1 Investigative and Auditing Support Services on Over Budgeting and
Appropriation
2.3.2 Investigative and Auditing Support Services on Misappropriation
of Budgetary Funds
2.3.3 Investigative and Auditing Support Services in Eradication
Uncompleted Projects despite full Disbursement
2.3.4 Litigation Support Services in Improving Efficiency of Anti-Graft
Agencies
2.3.5 Expert Witnessing in Eradicating Diversion of Unutilized
Allocated Funds
2.4 Gaps in the Study
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
3.1 Research Design
3.2 Population
3.3 Sample Size
3.4 Sampling Technique
3.5 Method of Data Collection
3.6 Instrument for Data Collection
3.7 Administration of Research Instrument
3.8 Method of Data Analysis
3.9 Reliability and Validity of Research Instrument
3.10 Ethical Consideration
3.11 Model Specification
3.12 Apriori Expectation
3.13 Model
Evaluation Technique and Test of Significance
CHAPTER FOUR: DATA ANALYSES, RESULTS AND DISCUSSION OF
FINDINGS
4.1 Demographic Characteristics of Respondents
4.1.1 Analysis of Respondents
Profile
4.1.2 Analysis of Respondents Responses/Descriptive Analysis
4.2 Testing of Hypotheses
4.2.1 Test of Hypothesis (H01)
4.2.2 Test of Hypothesis (H02)
4.2.3 Test of Hypothesis (H03)
4.2.4 Test of Hypothesis (H04)
4.2.5 Test of Hypothesis (H05)
4.3 Test of Main Model
4.4 Discussion and Implication of Findings
CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY,
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMEDATIONS
5.1 Summary
5.1.1 Summary of Findings
5.2 Conclusion
5.3 Recommendations
5.4 Limitation of the Study
5.5 Suggestion for Further Study
5.6 Contribution to Knowledge
References
Appendices
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the Study
Public budgeting as a field of study has grown
tremendously in recent years and budgeting is one of the most important areas
in policy making. Budget in the Public sector in Nigeria is a yearly affairs
but with poor results as shown by various scholars. The issue of budget
implementation according to Oke (2012) has long been a source of concern to the
public when one considers its importance on economic growth and development in
the nation. However, he stressed further that budgeting has raised challenges
in the area of preparation, administration, supervision, monitoring among
others, due to change in policy and governance. Ekeocha (2012) opined that
through budget, government indicates what to spend, determines what to borrow,
and sets policy priorities within overall spending limit so as to influence the
economy.
There are various definitions to the term budget but a
few of these definitions are examined in this study. Samuel and Wilfred (2009)
defined budget as a ‘comprehensive document that outlines what economic and
non-economic activities a government wants to undertake with special focus on
policies, objectives and strategies for accomplishment that are substantiated
with revenue and expenditure projections’. Hellriegel, Jackson and Slocum
(1991), also described budgeting as a process of categorizing proposed
expenditures and linking them to goals. According to Stoner, Freeman and
Gilbert (2008) budget is described as ‘a formal quantitative statements of the
resources set aside for carrying out planned activities over stipulated periods
of time’. They asserted that the wide usage attached to it is the fact that it
is stated in monetary terms which makes it easy to compare dissimilar
activities and their profit – loss potentials.
Ojo (2013) posits
that in budgeting, government usually forecast how much can be generated and
the spending pattern from all sources available to them. Omolehinwa and Naiyeju
(2013) observed that budget in the public sector is a document or a collection
of documents that refers to the financial conditions of the government. They further
stressed that budget provides indication of revenue flow and that public sector
budget is used as an instrument to allocate public resources towards achieving
some basic amenities and values. Hence they observed that public decisions must
therefore weigh the cost of action against the worth of the activity to
society.
In spite of budgeting, Nigeria is still at a cross
road in terms of infrastructural development across the states of the
Federation. Ojo (2013) corroborates earlier submission made by Ahmed (2010)
that basic amenities are still lacking in the country in the areas of health,
road, education, transportation, electricity, water etc., thus affecting the welfare
of the citizenry. It is important to note that in spite of the oil boom, many Nigerians
still live in abject poverty, the value of the naira has fallen drastically and
the exchange rate of the dollar to the naira is very high. Ahmed (2010) further
stressed that the effect of poor planning and execution of budget cannot be
ruled out as one of the reasons for the lingering poverty level in the country.
Oke (2013) posited that the issue of budget
implementation has been a source of concern to the public considering the
important impetus of budget implementation on economic growth. Onike (2012) observed
that by half of 2011, the impact of the ₦4.8 trillion budgets was yet to be
felt in the fiscal year because the budget was not up to 75% implementation. He
stressed that capital budget which is a source of funding capital projects has
direct impact on the lives of the citizenry but was not implemented. He stated
further that practically every year the implementation of budget had been a
source of friction between the executive and the legislature.
He stressed further that it is not surprising that the
Federal government did not implement the capital project as expected in 2012.
Oke (2013) on the other hand observed that budgeting and its process remain
problematic in the area of preparation and implementation. He noted that there
is the need for adequate control aimed at improving effective resource
utilization at the budget implementation stage. He reiterated that budget
implementation has significant impact on the performance of the economy. Ugoh
and Ukpere (2009) observed that the poverty level of most Nigerians in both
rural and urban areas is very high. They noted that this might be due to poor
budget implementation and the interference of both Federal and State governments.
Ezeagba and Adigwe (2015) in table 1.1 below observed that budgetary implementation
has dwindled in the country for over a decade. They observed further that an
average implementation percentage of disbursed recurrent and capital
expenditure between year 2004 and 2013 according to the Central Bank of Nigeria
Annual Report varies. The table 1.1 below presents the budget expenditure
allocation and average implementation level between years 2004 to 2013.
Table 1.1: Budget
Expenditure Allocation and Average Implementation Percentage (2004 – 2013) in
Nigeria (N Billions)
|
Budget
|
RE Exp
|
CA Exp
|
Total
|
AI%
|
|
2004
|
568
|
350
|
918
|
50
|
|
2005
|
1000
|
617
|
1618
|
92
|
|
2006
|
1337
|
539
|
1876
|
92
|
|
2007
|
1485
|
782
|
2266
|
60
|
|
2008
|
1819
|
673
|
2492
|
30
|
|
2009
|
2014
|
797
|
2871
|
20
|
|
2010
|
2755
|
1854
|
4609
|
20
|
|
2011
|
2481
|
1005
|
3486
|
*
|
|
2012
|
2472
|
1320
|
3792
|
20
|
|
2013
|
2629
|
1620
|
4249
|
*
|
|
TOTAL
|
18620
|
9556
|
28177
|
|
Source: Central Bank of Nigeria Annual Reports (2014)
as cited in Ezeagba and Adigwe (2015)
Key: RE = Recurrent Expenditure; CA = Capital
Expenditure; AI% = Average Implementation Percentage; *= Not indicated in the
source
One may need to ask the following questions -why was
the budget not totally implemented? What happened to the unexpended money? What
were the reasons for this action or inaction despite full disbursement of
fund? What roles are the anti graft
agencies playing to stop this menace in the country? Given this premise the
issue of budget implementation should be given serious consideration.
Dada (2013)
describes Forensic accounting as the special practice area of accountancy that
describes engagements resulting from actual or anticipated disputes and litigation.
Forensic accounting according to him is based upon scientific detection,
interpretation and communication of evidences through a thorough investigation
of books and records of an accounting system. He stressed further that it is
considered to be an independent professional judgment, which can deliver
findings as to accounts, inventories, or the presentation thereof that is of
such quality and that would be sustainable in some adversarial legal
proceeding, or within some judicial or administrative review. Forensic
accounting according to him focuses on both evidence of economic transactions
and reporting which is as contained within an accounting system, and the legal
framework which allows such evidence to be suitable to the purpose(s) of
establishing accountability and valuation. Forensic accounting according to
Houck, Mary-Jo, Bonnie-Morns, Riley, Robertson, Wells (2006) includes
accounting, auditing and investigative skills to assist in legal matters while
American Institute of Certified Public Accountant (AICPA) cited in Houck et al
(2006) defined forensic accounting as the application of special skills in
accounting, auditing, finance, quantitative method, law and research. They
stressed further that it encompasses litigation support, investigation and
dispute resolution. This implies that forensic accounting is the intersection
between accounting, investigation and the law.
Ribadu (2005) opined that laws relating to economic
and financial crimes, criminal and penal codes are empowered to enforce all the
anti- corruption and anti-money laundering laws which in turn lead to the punishment
prescribed in the EFCC Establishment Act (2000). This ranges from payment of
fine, forfeiture of assets, imprisonment up to five years depending on the nature
and gravity of the offence. The mandate
of ICPC in line with the Act setting it up according to him is to prohibit and
prescribe punishment for corruption, fraud, embezzlement, bribery and forgery
perpetrated by Nigerians.
Ribadu, (2005) further posited that cases of fraud are
prevalent in the Public sector in Nigeria and that every segment of the public
service seems to be involved in one way or the other. Despite all the efforts
of the government and its agencies, it is very clear that the rate of corruption
in Nigeria is very high. Adegbie and Fakile, (2012) posited that Forensic
accounting is found to be the best antidote to combat both economic and
financial crimes in Nigeria.
Scholars such as Omolehinwa (1989), Ughor and Ukpere
(2009), Ezeagba and Adigwe (2015) among others have observed that there has
been poor implementation of budget and diversion of unspent budget disbursement
by government officials in Nigeria. They however noted that if implementation
of budget in the Public sector is properly addressed it will lead to creation
of wealth through employment generation, improvement in citizen’s welfare,
enhancement of price stability and acceleration of the provisions of
infrastructure needed to boost the economy of the nation. Faleti and Myrick
(2012) observed that a number of visible bottlenecks are associated with budget
implementation; they include non-release, partial release or delay in the
release of approved funds for budgeted expenditure. They stressed further that
sometimes funds allocated for a particular quarter are made available only at
the end of that quarter which make budget implementation difficult. The study,
therefore examined the extent to which budget was implemented by the Federal
Government of Nigeria between years 2009 to 2015 and how Forensic accounting
techniques can be used to resolve problems that may arise from poor budget
implementation in the Public sector.
1.2 Statement of the Problem
Budget
implementation is an important tool of a functioning government. The issue of
budget implementation has been of great concern to Nigerians. In the education
sector for instance, Bamiro and Adedeji (2010) observed that the National
Universities Commission (NUC) coordinates the budget of all Federal
Universities based on the template provided by the budget office. The issue of
budget implementation in territory institutions for instance is the
responsibility of the heads of institutions and their governing councils. As
cited in Bamiro and Adedeji (2010), the amount released for capital projects to
Federal Universities, Polytechnics and Colleges of Education between 2006 and
2008. According to them in year 2006, the amount released for capital projects
to the Universities was ₦6,412,015,000, in year 2007 ₦8,285,015,000 was
released while in year 2008 ₦13,958,579,185 respectively. To Polytechnics, in
year 2006 the fund released for capital projects was ₦2,164,746,264, in year
2007 ₦2,424,746,264 was released while in year 2008 ₦3,578,057,860 was released
respectively. To Colleges of Education, in year 2006 ₦3,063,175,000 was
released, in year 2007 ₦4,991,020,000 was released while in year 2008
₦2,883,329,309 was released for capital projects. The amount released for
capital projects according to them amounts to 10.7% of the total allocation to
the tertiary institutions. The amount though too small, yet calls for
questioning. Were capital projects implemented, funds unutilized or diverted
considering the deplorable conditions of our tertiary institutions? This is one
of the issues that this study investigated.
Another issue
that calls for our attention is that of appropriation. Bamiro and Adedeji
(2010) gave the following as the money appropriated for the funding of the
Universities from 2004 – 2008. Between year 2004-2008, the amount budgeted was
not indicated by them but the amount appropriated and amount released to the
Universities were indicated. In year 2004, ₦53,024,557,482.61 was appropriated
but ₦53,466,287,486.01 was released, though with slight difference observed. In
year 2005, ₦62,215,631,536.00 was appropriated but ₦58,275,967,608.72 was
released. The difference observed in the amount appropriated and amount
released was wide but in year 2006, ₦82,376,685,198.00 was appropriated but
₦82,376,684,290.00 was released with very low marginal difference. In year 2007
there was no difference from the amount appropriated and the amount released,
₦90,565,259,337.00 was appropriated but ₦90,565,259,337.00 was released and
equally in year 2008 the amount appropriated was the same as the amount
released which was ₦105,751,671,988.00.
From the
analysis, the actual money budgeted was not known but in years 2004, 2005 and
2006 there were differences between the appropriation and the money released.
One wonders what happened to these funds; were they misappropriated, over
budgeted or unutilized? These were issues of concern that this study also
investigated.
Onuba (2013)
reported that the Federal government released ₦400 billion for capital projects
in the year 2013. He noted that the Finance Minister in that year, Dr Ngozi
Okonjo Iweala reported that ₦497 billion was allocated to key infrastructures,
including Power, Works, Transport, and Aviation, Gas Pipelines, and Federal
Capital Territory (FCT), Human Capital Development while Education and Health
were allocated ₦705 billion and ₦175 billion was allocated to Water resources
and Agriculture. He reiterated further that the Finance Minister then stressed
that “Nigeria’s infrastructure deficit remains one of the binding constraints
to growth in the economy so 2013 budget made provision for aggregation of
expenditure of ₦4.987 trillion.” Onuba (2013) however noted that in spite of
this huge money, it is pathetic to note that the impact of the money was not
felt in the nation’s economy as many Nigerians are still unemployed and
infrastructures needed for growth and development are nothing to write home
about in spite of the former Finance Minister Dr. Ngozi Okonjo Iweala’s
submission during the regime of President Goodluck Jonathan.
The issue of
uncompleted project is another grey area that this nation is suffering from.
Woka and Miebaka (2014) observed that there is incessant and prevalent
abandonment of developmental projects in the country. These they observed is
alarming as it creates negative effects on the economy as a whole. They
highlighted the following as some of the reasons for the uncompleted projects
–improper monitoring and supervision of the projects, poor budget
implementation, improper project timing, inappropriate allocation and
inconsistency in government policy.
Nnodim (2014)
reported that the power sector in the country is facing some challenges. He
noted that ‘‘the contractor handling the three key National integrated power
projects, Messers Rockson Engineering Ltd failed to meet the stipulated targets
that would ensure the commissioning of the plants by the third quarter of
2014’’. This act according to the then chairman of Public Telecommunication
Facility Program (PTFP) Dagogo Jack stated it would make Nigerians “to suffer
short fall in our power supply projection as much as 1.200 MW”. It is not
surprising that Nigerians are still battling with the issue of electricity.
Similarly,
Shaibu (2012) observed that the Niger Delta Development Commission (NDCC) which
took off in 2000 with the intention of enhancing economic activities in the
Niger Delta is bedeviled with issue of uncompleted projects. Developmental
project in the area according to him include road construction, bridges,
classroom blocks, health facilities etc. A tour made to the project sites in
2012 by the Senate Committee on Niger Delta according to him attested that
about ‘‘50% of the projects awarded in 2009 by the commission were at various
stages of completion even years after being awarded. Some of the projects had
only 22% completion according to the commission’’. He stressed further that the
previous Governor of Rivers State, Rotimi Ameachi in 2012 observed that the
entire Niger Delta was replete with uncompleted projects which did not justify
the huge amount of money pumped into the region.
From these
submissions it is obvious that the Federal Government have many uncompleted
projects which may be as a result of poor budgetary implementation, dwindling
revenue from the Federation Allocation due to the drop in the oil revenue, poor
monitoring and supervision among others. Doki, Alhassan and Atonko (2014)
observed that the former FCT Minister – Bala Mohammed, said over ‘‘₦470 billion
is needed to complete some national priority projects in Abuja, many of which
have been long overdue for completion’’. Because of the huge number of
uncompleted projects in the country, Nigeria is faced with various challenges
affecting the nation’s economic growth. The nation is stricken with
underdevelopment, corruption, unemployment among others and the extent to which
budgeted allocated funds are utilized is yet to be ascertained. Given these
problems, the impact of budgetary failure in Nigeria and ways of improving the
anti-graft agencies to ensure successful budget implementation in Public sector
were discussed.
Bode (2009)
observed that in Nigeria, the law stipulates that accountability reports be
produced by public and other persons entrusted with National resources. The
reporting of the accounts is instituted and dictated so that the accounts are
made up as the government would desire, but the extent to which reports are
given on budget implementation calls for our attention as this gives room for
sharp practices in government circle. It is therefore not surprising that
Emechele (2009) and Eme (2010) opined that Nigeria is a corrupt nation, where
the wealth of the nation is being regarded as a national cake and every
official has a target of the amount to steal, thus leading to lots of
irregularities in governance.
In spite of the corruption evident in Public sector and the nation in
general Ribadu (2009) stressed that the EFCC is a remarkable anti-crime organ
in Nigeria and has recorded successes, convicting and sentencing individuals,
including men in high places, who have been involved in economic and financial
crimes. Adegbie and Fakile (2012) observed that the EFCC had convicted 200
people for corruption, money laundering, bank fraud, and advance fee fraud.
Alipius (2009) in Adegbie and Fakile (2012) stated that EFCC efforts to fight
financial crimes proved effective using the 2008 Annual Report of United
Nations office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) to support their claim.
The study
therefore examined the Federal government budget implementation challenges and
the application of forensic accounting techniques in preventing financial and
economic crimes in the budget implementation process in the Public sector.
1.3 Objective of the Study
The main objective of this work is to examine Federal
government budget implementation challenges in Nigeria and the application of
Forensic accounting techniques with a view to providing solutions to the
problems through the implementation of Forensic Accounting Techniques. The
specific objectives are to:-
i.
identify the extent of
investigative and auditing support services on over budgeting and appropriation
in Federal Government budget preparation;
ii.
examine the use of
investigative and auditing support services on misappropriation of budgeted
allocated funds meant for execution of capital and developmental projects in Public
sector;
iii.
examine the application
of investigative and auditing support services on uncompleted capital and
developmental projects despite full disbursement of budgeted allocated funds in
Public sector;
iv.
determine the
application of litigation support services on the enhancement of efficiency of anti-graft
agencies in curbing budgetary failure in Nigeria budgetary system in Public
sector, and
v.
examine the application
of expert witness in litigation in financial crimes on the diversion of
unutilized allocated funds in Public sector.
1.4 Research Questions
ii. How
can investigative and auditing support services be applied to curb
misappropriation of budgeted allocated funds meant for execution of capital and
developmental projects in Public sector?
iii. To
what extent can investigative and auditing support services be applied to stop
uncompleted capital and developmental projects despite full disbursement of
budgeted allocated funds in Public sector?
iv. To
what extent can litigation support services enhance the efficiency of
anti-graft agencies in curbing the impact of budgetary failure in Nigeria
budgetary system and ensuring the success of budget implementation in Public
sector?
v. How
can expert witness in litigation eradicate financial crimes in the diversion of
unutilized allocated funds in Public sector?
1.5 Hypotheses
The following hypotheses
were tested:
H01: Investigative and auditing support services cannot
significantly eradicate over budgeting and appropriation in Federal government
budget preparation.
H02: Investigative and auditing support services cannot
significantly curb misappropriation of budgeted allocated funds for execution
of capital and developmental projects in Public sector.
H03: Investigative and auditing support services cannot
significantly eradicate the issue of uncompleted capital and developmental
projects despite full disbursement of budgeted allocated funds in Public sector.
H04: Litigation
support services cannot significantly enhance the efficiency of anti-graft
agencies in curbing the impact of budgetary failure in Nigeria budgetary system
and ensuring the success of budget implementation in Public sector.
H05: Expert witness in litigation cannot significantly
eradicate financial crimes in the diversion of unutilized allocated funds in Public
sector.
1.5.1 Rationale for the Hypotheses
The examination of the
relationship between Federal government budget implementation and the present
condition of Nigeria’s economy both her reputation and present level of
development analysis, economic crimes associated to the implementation and how
Forensic accounting techniques can help in the reduction of some economic and
financial crimes which can be linked to the implementation of budget have been
done in prior studies. For instance,
Appah and Appiah (2010) opined that accountability reflects the need for
government and its agencies to serve the public effectively in accordance with
the laws of the land. Achua (2009) says “serious consideration is being given
to the need to be more accountable for the amount of investment in resources at
the command of governments, which exercise administrative and political
authority over the actions and affairs of political units of people. Government
spending is a very big business and the public demands to know whether the huge
outlays of money are being spent wisely for public interests.”
Akanbi (2001); Ribadu (2004);
Okoye and Akamobi (2009); Ahmed (2010)
and Ojo (2013) emphasized on the level of corruption in Nigerian economy and
the measures that government has put in place to curb and reduce the effect of
this on the budgetary system of the nation. Achua (2009), Appah and Appiah
(2010) stated that the major problem of economic and financial crimes may be
traceable to some of the enumerated aspects of corruption, like embezzlement,
theft from public funds, abuse of discretion and abuse of public power for
extortion. They stressed that huge amount of money stolen from these sources,
which cannot be legitimately explained as earnings, are siphoned and hidden across
the borders in foreign banks regarded as safe haven. The correct term for
moving money in this manner is money laundering. The New Partnership for
Africa’s Development (NEPAD) (2003) defined money laundering as “the conversion
of criminally obtained money into apparently lawfully obtained money by
re-cycling the tainted money through banks and other legitimate financial
institutions”.
Other researchers such as
Diamond (2004), McGraw & Ladan (2005), Sachs (2007), Tunde (2008), Achua
(2009), Appah and Appiah (2010), Eme (2010), Obara (2013), Oke, (2013),
researched on accountability, transparency, various forms of crimes,
misappropriation of public funds, over budgeting and corruption. On this basis,
the study operationalized the effect of Federal government budgetary
implementation in Nigeria economy in capital and developmental projects, over
budgeting, diversion of unutilized public funds in the country with the use of
Forensic accounting techniques as antidote.
1.6 Significance of the Study
Budget making and budget implementation according to Obara
(2013) involve the process of identification of public needs, goods and
services for the populace through political process bearing in mind the overall
developmental plan of the nation. He stressed further that budget
implementation in Nigeria is far from reality and there is a wide disparity
between budget implementation and the budget despite full disbursement of budgeted
allocated funds. This research will be significant to the office of National
Bureau of Statistics as it could inspire the establishment to facilitate the
collection of statistical data on Federal government budget implementation of
capital and developmental projects in the Public sector. This will in turn show
the true position of the economic growth and development of the nation.
This research could be useful to the Budget office and Audit
departments in the Public sector through the employment of Forensic accounting techniques,
which could help the Federal government of Nigeria to know what is disbursed
and how it is expended. Forensic accounting could therefore help to provide a
lasting solution to the problem of poor budget implementation in the nation
through the investigative and auditing support services. This research could be
useful as it could throw light into how investigative and auditing support
services could be a useful tool in eradicating over budgeting and appropriation
in Federal government budgetary system. It is also hoped that the study could
shed light on how to curb misappropriation of allocated funds meant for the
execution of capital and developmental projects and to stop the lingering
problem of uncompleted projects in the Public sector.
Findings from the study could provide useful information on
how litigation support services can enhance efficiency of anti-graft agencies
in eradicating the issue of budget failure due to poor budget implementation in
Federal government budgetary system. The research could also enhance the
anti-graft agencies in the early detection of over budgeting, misappropriation
of budgeted funds despite full disbursement and other financial crimes related
to budget implementation and be able to apply appropriate sanctions to erring
officials.
The study could provide empirical data to researchers on Federal
government budget implementation using Forensic accounting techniques to curb
crimes and corruption in the Federal government budgetary system in the Public
sector.
It is also hoped that the research could throw light on how
expert witness can eradicate budgetary fraud in the Public sector. Similarly,
the study could further predispose the Budget office, policy makers,
administrators, establishments, institutions and agencies in the Public sector
among others to take cognizance of budgeting and budget implementation as a
vital tool for economic growth in the nation. The outcome of this research could
guide the Federal government of Nigeria to be able to readdress the issues
relating to budgetary implementation fraud in Public sector and to put a stop
to it. This could in turn help the citizens of the country to make proper
decision when determining the performance of the government.
Finally, if the findings of this research are implemented,
Nigerians could benefit as it could lead to economic growth and development, employment
generation, improvement in citizen’s welfare, improved infrastructures needed
to boost the nation’s economy and reduction in poverty level.
1.7 Justification of the Study
The motivation behind this research was brought out when the researcher
came across a journal titled ‘Theory of Government Accounting’ by Omolehinwa & Naiyeju, (2013) where the researcher cited
the Corruption Perception Index rating, released by Transparency International
(TI) which showed that Nigeria failed to achieve any improvement over the past
years. Transparency International (TI) which is concerned with compiling an
annual global Corruption Perception Index (CPI), which base their work on
extensive surveys and measures public opinion about corruption on government
level, revealed that in 2008, she came 121st out of 150 countries, in
2009 Nigeria came 130th out of 150 countries, in year 2010 Nigeria came
134th out of the 178 countries that were assessed. This shows a declining trend
and should be a serious concern to a developing economy like Nigeria.
It was on this premise the researcher decided to
research into the corruption associated with the Federal government budgetary
implementation right from the preparatory stage of the budget, with a view to
finding antidote to this problem. Wolf and Hermanson (2004) observed that for
any fraud to have a lead way, perpetrators must be capable to perform the act.
This made the researcher to investigate Federal government budget
implementation pitfalls using Forensic Accounting Techniques with the aim of
combating the situation.
1.8 Scope of the Study
This study
focused on the examination of Federal government budget implementation and
application of forensic accounting techniques.
The population considered for the study were the staff of Finance and
Accounts units, Budget Unit, Audit unit, legal and Prosecution unit, General
Investigative unit, Financial Intelligence unit and Forensic unit in the
Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Abuja, in the Office of the Accountant General
for the Federation, the Federal Ministry of Finance, Federal Ministry of
Education, Federal Ministry of Health, Economic and Financial Crimes Commission
(EFCC), Independent Corrupt Practices and other Related Offences Commission (ICPC),
Federal Ministry of Statistics and Federal Ministry of Works and the Nigerian
Prisons Services. The targeted population in this study was all the junior and
senior staff in the Federal Ministries and parastatals listed.
The samples were selected from the Federal Ministries and parastatals
listed above. In all, the total number
of staff sampled was 150. Of the total number of staff sampled, 25 were top
management staff, while the senior staffs were 67 and the junior staffs were 58
respectively. The actual number of staff for each of the Ministries and
Parastatals used for the study is not known as this statistical detail was not
released to the researcher and the time frame of this study was between 2014
-2015.
Inadequate access to
available statistical information was a major challenge which formed the major
limitation to the study. Also some of the materials that were available on the
internet were not recent. Adequate statistical figures on Federal government budget
for Federal Ministries and Parastatals on capital and developmental projects
were not readily available.
================================================================
Item Type: Project Material | Attribute: 102 pages | Chapters: 1-5
Format: MS Word | Price: N3,000 | Delivery: Within 30Mins.
================================================================
No comments:
Post a Comment