Suchergebnisse

Abstract
The audit recommendations of the Indonesian supreme audit institution (Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan, BPK) acquired new significance after the collapse of the authoritarian state in 1998 and constitutional amendments in 1999–2002 that reformed the regulation and institutional governance of public sector audit in Indonesia. However, while the reform of public sector audit regulation was carried out through a strong adoption of private sector audit standards and the Westminster SAI model, the BPK retained some of its Napoleonic legacy. This syncretic organisation led to confusion about the BPK's role and position in the Indonesian legal system. Using a historical and case study approach, this paper analyses the relationship between the BPK's audit recommendations and the Indonesian legal system. It argues that it is important for the BPK to develop auditing standards that take full account of higher rules, administrative law, and national interests, or at least not to adopt and abolish auditing standards that are counterproductive to its judicial function – not merely to accommodate private international law instruments developed by private non-state actors operating outside the legal framework of a sovereign state.