Audit and Investigations

Presentation at RIAS, Vienna, 2007

Principal synergies/differences
Audits are system-oriented, aiming at testing the controls.
Investigations are directed at identifying whether an
individual violated the rules and committed wrongdoing.
Audits are based on documentary review, investigations
adduce evidence and their results have to stand the legal
test of standards of proof.
Audits are indicating areas of improvement to management
whereas investigations collect the facts for administrative,
disciplinary or prosecutorial action by administrative or
judicial bodies.
Both are mutually complementary oversight tools,
enhancing integrity within the Organization.




UNITED NATIONS NATIONS UNIES

Both Audits and Investigations have a pro-
active and re-active perspective.
Audits ensure that systems and controls are
functioning and being observed.
Proactive Investigations address areas of risk of
malfeasance.
Reactive Investigations are based on reports
received.


Pro-active and re-active roles of
audit and investigations
UNITED NATIONS NATIONS UNIES
Cooperation between Audit and
Investigations

OIOS Investigators support smaller organizations (audi-
gators) with investigative expertise.
Auditors provide expertise in areas of financial misconduct,
potential fraud.
Investigation Task Force in Kosovo investigates misconduct
that benefited from weaknesses identified by Audit reports.
In certain cases ID and IAD cross over and send multi-
disciplinary teams on mission.


UNITED NATIONS NATIONS UNIES
Way forward
Complex fraud schemes demand united and
combined effort of Auditors and Investigators
to detect violations of UN regulations and rules
and sanction those who violate them.
Internal oversight is critical, Audit and
Investigation efforts should be complementary.
Both professions provide recommendations to
guide the Secretary-General in reform of
Organization

UNITED NATIONS NATIONS UNIES