Word count
This Post has 7163 Words.
This Post has 55414 Characters.
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the Study
The public accountant plays a pivotal role in the financial management of government organizations, serving as a steward of public funds and a guardian of financial integrity. In the federal civil service, public accountants are responsible for a wide range of functions including budget preparation and execution, financial recording and reporting, internal control design and implementation, compliance with financial regulations, and the prevention and detection of financial irregularities. The public accountant ensures that government revenues and expenditures are properly accounted for, that financial transactions comply with applicable laws and regulations, and that accurate and timely financial information is available for decision-making by management, oversight bodies, and the public. Without competent and ethical public accountants, accountability, probity, and transparency in government cannot be achieved (Premchand, 2019; Mellett, 2019).
Accountability in the public sector refers to the obligation of public officials to account for the use of public resources, explain their actions and decisions, and accept responsibility for any failures or irregularities. Accountability has two dimensions: answerability (the duty to provide information and explain decisions) and enforceability (the ability to impose sanctions for misconduct or poor performance). Probity refers to the quality of having strong moral principles, integrity, and honesty in the conduct of public business. It involves adherence to the highest ethical standards, avoidance of conflicts of interest, and the rejection of fraud, corruption, and other forms of financial misconduct. Transparency refers to the openness and accessibility of government operations and financial information to public scrutiny. It involves the timely disclosure of budgets, expenditures, procurement contracts, audit reports, and other financial information in formats that are understandable to citizens and oversight bodies (Chan, 2018; Romzek and Dubnick, 1987).
The Federal Civil Service of Nigeria is the administrative machinery of the federal government, responsible for implementing government policies, delivering public services, and managing public resources. The civil service is organized into ministries, departments, and agencies (MDAs), each headed by a permanent secretary (accounting officer) who is personally responsible for the financial management of the MDA. The federal civil service has faced persistent challenges in accountability, probity, and transparency, including: (a) weak internal controls, (b) inadequate financial record-keeping, (c) unauthorized expenditures, (d) procurement irregularities, (e) payroll fraud (ghost workers), (f) asset mismanagement, (g) delays in financial reporting, (h) weak internal audit, and (i) corruption. These challenges have led to significant waste of public funds, poor service delivery, and erosion of public trust (Ogbeifun, 2019; Oyo-Ita, 2019).
The Federal Ministry of Education is one of the key ministries of the federal government, responsible for formulating and implementing education policies, managing federal educational institutions (universities, polytechnics, colleges of education), and administering education sector programs and projects. The ministry has a substantial budget, with funds allocated for personnel costs (salaries of teachers and administrative staff), overhead costs (utilities, maintenance, travel), capital projects (construction of classrooms, laboratories, libraries), and special programs (scholarships, teacher training, curriculum development). The Eastern Zone of the ministry comprises federal education offices and institutions in the South-East and South-South regions of Nigeria. Effective financial management in this zone requires competent public accountants who can ensure accountability, probity, and transparency in the use of public funds (Federal Ministry of Education, 2022; Adebayo and Oyedokun, 2020).
The public accountant in the federal civil service operates within a complex legal and regulatory framework. Key instruments include: (a) the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (1999, as amended) – which establishes the legal basis for public financial management, (b) the Financial Regulations – detailed rules for budgeting, accounting, expenditure control, and reporting, (c) the Treasury Circulars – supplementary instructions from the Accountant-General of the Federation, (d) the Public Procurement Act (2007) – governing procurement of goods, works, and services, (e) the Fiscal Responsibility Act (2007) – establishing principles of fiscal discipline, (f) the Audit Act – governing the audit of public accounts, (g) the Public Service Rules – regulating civil service conduct, including financial misconduct, and (h) the Code of Conduct for Public Officers – requiring asset declaration and prohibiting conflicts of interest. Public accountants must be well-versed in these regulations and ensure compliance in all financial transactions (Ogbeifun, 2019; Adebayo and Oyedokun, 2019).
The role of the public accountant in implementing accountability includes: (a) budget preparation and control – ensuring that budget estimates are realistic, based on actual needs, and aligned with government priorities; monitoring actual expenditures against budget and reporting variances; preventing unauthorized spending. (b) financial recording and reporting – maintaining accurate, complete, and timely records of all financial transactions; preparing periodic financial reports (monthly, quarterly, annually) for management and oversight bodies; ensuring that reports are submitted on time. (c) internal control – designing and implementing internal controls to safeguard assets, prevent errors and fraud, and ensure compliance; conducting regular control self-assessments; recommending improvements. (d) procurement management – ensuring that procurement follows the Public Procurement Act (competitive bidding, contract award, goods receipt verification); preventing procurement fraud (inflated invoices, phantom contracts, kickbacks). (e) payroll management – ensuring that payroll is accurate, that ghost workers are eliminated, and that deductions (taxes, pensions) are properly remitted. (f) asset management – maintaining asset registers, conducting physical verification, and ensuring that assets are properly safeguarded. (g) internal audit support – cooperating with internal audit, implementing audit recommendations, and ensuring that audit queries are resolved (Premchand, 2019; Mellett, 2019).
The role of the public accountant in implementing probity includes: (a) ethical conduct – adhering to the highest standards of integrity, honesty, and professionalism; avoiding conflicts of interest; rejecting bribery, kickbacks, and other corrupt practices. (b) whistleblowing – reporting suspected financial irregularities to appropriate authorities (internal audit, anti-corruption agencies) without fear of retaliation. (c) asset declaration – complying with Code of Conduct requirements to declare assets annually, enabling verification and detection of illicit enrichment. (d) due diligence – verifying the authenticity and accuracy of all financial documents before processing payments; questioning suspicious transactions. (e) transparency – ensuring that financial information is accessible to authorized stakeholders (management, board, auditors, anti-corruption agencies) and that there is no concealment of information. Probity is not just about following rules; it is about having the moral courage to do the right thing even when no one is watching (Chan, 2018; Oyo-Ita, 2019).
The role of the public accountant in implementing transparency includes: (a) open budgeting – ensuring that budget estimates and actual expenditures are publicly available (on ministry websites, through Freedom of Information requests); (b) procurement disclosure – publishing procurement plans, tender notices, contract awards, and contract performance reports; (c) financial reporting – publishing audited financial statements and making them accessible to citizens and civil society; (d) asset disclosure – maintaining public asset registers and responding to public inquiries about government assets; (e) open data – making financial data available in machine-readable formats to enable analysis by civil society and media; (f) whistleblower protection – ensuring that those who report financial irregularities are protected from retaliation, encouraging reporting of misconduct. Transparency enables external oversight by citizens, media, civil society, and the legislature, which supplements internal controls (Ogbeifun, 2019; Nwankwo and Okeke, 2020).
The challenges facing public accountants in implementing accountability, probity, and transparency in the federal civil service are significant. Political interference: public accountants may face pressure from political appointees or senior officials to approve unauthorized expenditures, ignore irregularities, or suppress adverse information. Inadequate resources: public accountant offices are often underfunded, understaffed, and lack modern technology (computers, accounting software), limiting their ability to perform duties effectively. Inadequate training: many public accountants lack training in modern accounting techniques (IPSAS, GIFMIS), forensic accounting, and fraud detection. Weak enforcement: even when irregularities are detected, sanctions are often weak or not applied, reducing deterrence. Bureaucratic delays: the financial management system is often slow and cumbersome, leading to frustration and temptation to bypass controls. Poor record-keeping: historical records may be incomplete or missing, making it difficult to verify transactions or establish accountability. Resistance to change: efforts to strengthen financial management may be resisted by those who benefit from weak controls (Adebayo and Oyedokun, 2020; Eze and Nwafor, 2019).
The adoption of the Government Integrated Financial Management Information System (GIFMIS) has been a major reform to improve financial management in the federal civil service. GIFMIS integrates budgeting, accounting, procurement, and reporting into a single computerised system, with built-in controls (budget limits, approval workflows, audit trails). Public accountants play a key role in implementing GIFMIS, including data entry, reconciliation, report generation, and user training. However, challenges remain: system downtime, inadequate user training, data migration issues, and resistance to change. The Eastern Zone of the Federal Ministry of Education is expected to use GIFMIS for its financial operations, but the effectiveness of implementation varies (Okafor and Udeh, 2020; OAGF, 2018).
The role of the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation (OAGF) is central to public accounting in the federal civil service. The Accountant-General is the chief accounting officer of the federation, responsible for maintaining government accounts, implementing financial management systems, and ensuring compliance with financial regulations. The OAGF issues Treasury Circulars, conducts training for public accountants, and oversees the operation of GIFMIS. Public accountants in MDAs report to the Accountant-General through their respective accounting officers (permanent secretaries). The effectiveness of the OAGF in supporting public accountants in the Eastern Zone is an important factor (OAGF, 2018; Adebayo and Oyedokun, 2019).
The role of the Office of the Auditor-General of the Federation (OAuGF) is complementary. The Auditor-General audits the accounts of all federal MDAs, including the Federal Ministry of Education, and issues audit opinions and management letters. Audit findings highlight weaknesses in accountability, probity, and transparency, and provide recommendations for improvement. Public accountants are responsible for implementing audit recommendations and responding to audit queries. The relationship between public accountants and auditors is critical; a cooperative relationship leads to better financial management, while an adversarial relationship may hinder improvement (Oyo-Ita, 2019; Nwankwo and Okeke, 2020).
Finally, this study focuses on the Federal Ministry of Education, Eastern Zone, as a case study because it represents a federal MDA with significant financial operations and accountability challenges. By examining the impact of the public accountant on accountability, probity, and transparency in this zone, the study can provide insights applicable to other MDAs in the federal civil service. The findings will contribute to the literature on public financial management and provide practical recommendations for strengthening the role of public accountants in achieving accountability, probity, and transparency (Yin, 2018; Creswell and Creswell, 2018).
1.2 Statement of the Problem
The Federal Ministry of Education, Eastern Zone, like other federal MDAs, is entrusted with significant public funds for the delivery of education services, including personnel costs, overheads, capital projects, and special programs. The public accountant in the zone is expected to play a critical role in ensuring accountability (proper use of funds, accurate reporting), probity (ethical conduct, prevention of fraud), and transparency (open disclosure of financial information). However, evidence suggests significant challenges: (a) persistent audit queries related to unauthorized expenditures, inadequate documentation, and procurement irregularities, (b) weak internal controls leading to financial losses, (c) delays in financial reporting, (d) inadequate implementation of GIFMIS, (e) lack of transparency in procurement and expenditure disclosure, (f) alleged cases of fraud and corruption, and (g) weak enforcement of sanctions against erring officials. It is unclear to what extent the public accountant has been effective in addressing these challenges and implementing accountability, probity, and transparency. Furthermore, factors limiting the public accountant’s effectiveness (political interference, inadequate resources, lack of training, weak enforcement) are not well understood. There is a lack of recent, systematic, empirical research that examines the impact of the public accountant on accountability, probity, and transparency in the Federal Ministry of Education, Eastern Zone. Therefore, this study is motivated to investigate the impact of the public accountant in the implementation of accountability, probity, and transparency in the federal civil service, using the Federal Ministry of Education, Eastern Zone, as a case study.
1.3 Objectives of the Study
The specific objectives of this study are to:
- Examine the roles and responsibilities of the public accountant in the Federal Ministry of Education, Eastern Zone, in implementing accountability, probity, and transparency.
- Assess the effectiveness of the public accountant in ensuring accountability (budget control, financial reporting, audit compliance) in the zone.
- Evaluate the public accountant’s role in promoting probity (ethical conduct, fraud prevention, internal controls) in the zone.
- Assess the public accountant’s contribution to transparency (disclosure of financial information, open procurement, public access to records) in the zone.
- Identify the challenges facing the public accountant in implementing accountability, probity, and transparency and propose recommendations for improvement.
1.4 Significance of the Study
This study is significant for several stakeholders. First, public accountants in the Federal Ministry of Education and other MDAs will benefit from a systematic assessment of their roles and challenges, enabling them to improve their performance and advocate for needed support. Second, the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation (OAGF) will gain insights into the challenges faced by public accountants in the Eastern Zone, informing training programs, system improvements, and resource allocation. Third, the Office of the Auditor-General of the Federation (OAuGF) will benefit from understanding the systemic weaknesses affecting accountability, probity, and transparency, informing audit planning and recommendations. Fourth, the Federal Ministry of Education (headquarters) will gain insights into the financial management challenges in the Eastern Zone, informing oversight and support. Fifth, the Federal Civil Service Commission and the Bureau of Public Service Reforms will benefit from understanding capacity gaps and reform needs. Sixth, anti-corruption agencies (EFCC, ICPC) will gain insights into the vulnerabilities in public financial management, informing investigations and prevention strategies. Seventh, the National Assembly (Public Accounts Committee) will benefit from evidence on accountability challenges in the education sector, supporting oversight hearings and recommendations. Eighth, civil society organizations focused on governance and anti-corruption will gain evidence for advocacy for stronger financial management in the federal civil service. Ninth, international development partners (World Bank, DFID/UKAID) will gain insights into public financial management challenges in Nigeria, informing technical assistance. Tenth, academics and researchers in public financial management, public administration, and accountability studies will benefit from the study’s contribution to the literature. Finally, Nigerian citizens will benefit indirectly as improved accountability, probity, and transparency lead to more efficient use of public funds and better education services.
1.5 Hypotheses
The following hypotheses are formulated in null (H₀) and alternative (H₁) forms:
Hypothesis One
- H₀: The public accountant has no significant impact on accountability (budget control, financial reporting, audit compliance) in the Federal Ministry of Education, Eastern Zone.
- H₁: The public accountant has a significant impact on accountability (budget control, financial reporting, audit compliance) in the Federal Ministry of Education, Eastern Zone.
Hypothesis Two
- H₀: There is no significant relationship between the public accountant’s internal control activities and the prevention of fraud and financial irregularities in the Eastern Zone.
- H₁: There is a significant relationship between the public accountant’s internal control activities and the prevention of fraud and financial irregularities in the Eastern Zone.
Hypothesis Three
- H₀: The public accountant’s transparency practices (disclosure, open procurement) do not significantly affect stakeholder trust in the financial management of the Federal Ministry of Education, Eastern Zone.
- H₁: The public accountant’s transparency practices (disclosure, open procurement) significantly affect stakeholder trust in the financial management of the Federal Ministry of Education, Eastern Zone.
Hypothesis Four
- H₀: Challenges such as political interference, inadequate resources, lack of training, and weak enforcement do not significantly affect the public accountant’s effectiveness in implementing accountability, probity, and transparency.
- H₁: Challenges such as political interference, inadequate resources, lack of training, and weak enforcement significantly affect the public accountant’s effectiveness in implementing accountability, probity, and transparency.
1.6 Scope and Limitations of the Study
Scope of the Study
This study focuses on the impact of the public accountant in the implementation of accountability, probity, and transparency in the federal civil service, using the Federal Ministry of Education, Eastern Zone, as a case study. Geographically, the research is limited to the Eastern Zone of the Federal Ministry of Education, which comprises federal education offices and institutions in the South-East and South-South regions of Nigeria. The zone includes states such as Enugu, Anambra, Imo, Abia, Ebonyi, Rivers, Cross River, Akwa Ibom, Bayelsa, and Delta (specific coverage based on the ministry’s zonal structure). Content-wise, the study examines the following areas: roles and responsibilities of the public accountant; accountability (budget control, financial reporting, GIFMIS implementation, audit compliance); probity (ethical conduct, internal controls, fraud prevention, Code of Conduct compliance); transparency (disclosure of financial information, open procurement, access to records, FOI compliance); and challenges (political interference, resources, training, enforcement). The study targets public accountants, finance officers, internal auditors, management staff (Permanent Secretary, Directors), audit officials, and anti-corruption agency officials. The time frame for data collection is the cross-sectional period of 2023–2024. The study does not cover other MDAs (except for comparative context), nor does it cover other zones of the Federal Ministry of Education, nor the private sector.
Limitations of the Study
This study acknowledges several limitations. First, the study is limited to the Eastern Zone of the Federal Ministry of Education; findings may not be generalizable to other zones or other MDAs. Second, the study relies on information from public accountants, management, and auditors; responses may be subject to social desirability bias (respondents may overstate compliance with regulations). Third, access to certain financial records may be restricted due to confidentiality or security concerns. Fourth, the study does not include a quantitative analysis of financial data (e.g., audit queries over time) due to data availability constraints. Fifth, the study is cross-sectional (a snapshot in time); the impact of the public accountant over a longer period is not fully captured. Sixth, the study does not include a comparative analysis with other countries’ public accounting systems. Seventh, the study does not examine the role of technology (GIFMIS) in depth. Despite these limitations, the study aims to provide robust, meaningful insights into the impact of the public accountant on accountability, probity, and transparency in the federal civil service.
References
Adebayo, K. and Oyedokun, G. (2019). Public financial management reforms in Nigeria: The role of the accountant-general. Nigerian Journal of Public Administration, 14(2), 45-68.
Adebayo, K. and Oyedokun, G. (2020). Accountability and transparency in the Nigerian federal civil service. West African Journal of Fiscal Studies, 8(1), 33-50.
Chan, J. L. (2018). Public sector accountability and transparency: Concepts and practices. Public Money and Management, 28(4), 227-234.
Creswell, J. W. and Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Sage Publications.
Eze, N. and Nwafor, O. (2019). Challenges of public financial management in Nigerian federal ministries. Enugu Journal of Public Administration, 7(1), 22-40.
Federal Ministry of Education. (2022). Annual report and financial statements 2021. Federal Ministry of Education Publications.
Mellett, H. (2019). Accountability and financial management in the public sector. Financial Accountability and Management, 15(3), 201-216.
Nwankwo, I. and Okeke, C. (2020). Legislative oversight and financial accountability in Nigerian federal MDAs. Nigerian Journal of Legislative Studies, 7(2), 44-61.
OAGF. (2018). GIFMIS implementation handbook. Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation.
Ogbeifun, M. (2019). Public financial management in Nigeria: Principles and practice. University of Lagos Press.
Okafor, E. and Udeh, S. (2020). Internal controls and fraud prevention in Nigerian federal ministries. African Journal of Public Sector Financial Management, 5(2), 33-50.
Oyo-Ita, I. (2019). Audit and accountability in the Nigerian federal civil service. Nigerian Accountant, 52(4), 12-28.
Premchand, A. (2019). Public expenditure management: A handbook. International Monetary Fund.
Romzek, B. S. and Dubnick, M. J. (1987). Accountability in the public sector: Lessons from the Challenger tragedy. Public Administration Review, 47(3), 227-238.
Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). Sage Publications.
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Literature Review
The literature on public sector accounting, accountability, probity, and transparency is extensive, reflecting the global importance of effective public financial management. Scholars have examined the role of public accountants in ensuring that government resources are used efficiently, effectively, and in accordance with legal and regulatory requirements. In Nigeria, the literature has focused on the challenges of public financial management, the impact of reforms such as the Treasury Single Account (TSA), the Government Integrated Financial Management Information System (GIFMIS), and the International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS), and the persistent issues of corruption, inefficiency, and weak accountability. However, few studies have specifically examined the impact of the public accountant on accountability, probity, and transparency at the zonal level of a federal ministry. This study aims to fill that gap by focusing on the Federal Ministry of Education, Eastern Zone (Adebayo and Oyedokun, 2019; Okafor and Udeh, 2020).
The literature identifies several factors that influence the effectiveness of public accountants in promoting accountability. These include: (a) legal and regulatory framework – clear, enforceable laws and regulations provide the foundation for accountability, (b) institutional capacity – adequate staffing, training, and resources enable public accountants to perform their duties effectively, (c) leadership and management support – when accounting officers (permanent secretaries) prioritize accountability, public accountants are empowered, (d) technology – modern financial management information systems (e.g., GIFMIS) enhance accuracy, timeliness, and control, (e) oversight – effective internal and external audit, legislative oversight, and civil society monitoring strengthen accountability, (f) political will – when political leaders commit to accountability and transparency, public accountants are supported, (g) ethical culture – a culture of integrity and zero tolerance for corruption promotes probity (Chan, 2018; Premchand, 2019).
The literature also highlights persistent challenges. Political interference remains a major obstacle; public accountants may be pressured to approve unauthorized expenditures or ignore irregularities. Inadequate funding for public accountant offices limits their ability to hire qualified staff, provide training, and invest in technology. Weak enforcement of sanctions means that even when irregularities are detected, there are few consequences, reducing deterrence. Complexity of regulations can lead to unintentional non-compliance, while some officials may deliberately exploit loopholes. Lack of transparency in procurement and budgeting provides opportunities for corruption. Poor record-keeping undermines the ability to track transactions and establish accountability. These challenges are particularly acute at the zonal and state levels, where oversight may be weaker than at the federal level (Ogbeifun, 2019; Oyo-Ita, 2019).
2.2 Introduction of Accounting
Accounting is the systematic process of identifying, recording, classifying, summarizing, and communicating financial information to users for decision-making. In the public sector, government accounting is the process of recording, analyzing, classifying, summarizing, and reporting financial transactions of government entities. Government accounting is distinct from private sector accounting in several key respects. The primary objective of private sector accounting is to determine profit or loss and the financial position of the entity for the benefit of owners and investors. The primary objective of government accounting is to ensure accountability for public funds, demonstrate compliance with budgets and regulations, and provide information for fiscal planning and control (Premchand, 2019; Mellett, 2019).
Government accounting in Nigeria has evolved over time. Historically, the government used cash-based accounting, where transactions were recorded when cash was received or paid. While cash accounting is simple and provides information about cash flows, it does not capture liabilities (e.g., unpaid bills, pension obligations) or assets (e.g., infrastructure, equipment), providing an incomplete picture of the government’s financial position. In recent years, Nigeria has transitioned to accrual accounting under the International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS). Accrual accounting records transactions when they occur, regardless of when cash is received or paid, providing a more complete and accurate picture of the government’s assets, liabilities, revenues, and expenses. The public accountant plays a central role in this transition, ensuring that transactions are properly recorded and that financial statements comply with IPSAS (IPSASB, 2021; IFRS Foundation, 2021).
The key principles of government accounting include: (a) budgetary control – expenditures must not exceed approved budget appropriations, (b) legal compliance – all transactions must comply with the Constitution, Financial Regulations, Treasury Circulars, and other applicable laws, (c) accountability – public funds must be accounted for, and officials must be answerable for their use, (d) transparency – financial information must be accessible to stakeholders, (e) materiality – all significant transactions must be disclosed, and (f) consistency – accounting policies must be applied consistently from period to period. Public accountants are responsible for ensuring adherence to these principles (OAGF, 2018; Adebayo and Oyedokun, 2019).
The Government Integrated Financial Management Information System (GIFMIS) is a key tool for government accounting in Nigeria. GIFMIS is an information technology system that integrates budgeting, accounting, procurement, and reporting functions. It is designed to: (a) improve the timeliness and accuracy of financial information, (b) strengthen internal controls (e.g., budget limits, approval workflows, audit trails), (c) facilitate compliance with financial regulations, (d) enable real-time monitoring of budget execution, and (e) support the preparation of IPSAS-compliant financial statements. Public accountants in the Federal Ministry of Education, Eastern Zone, use GIFMIS for financial transactions, reporting, and reconciliation. However, challenges such as system downtime, inadequate user training, and data migration issues have affected implementation (OAGF, 2018; Okafor and Udeh, 2020).
2.3 Meaning of Accountability, Transparency and Probity
Accountability in the public sector refers to the obligation of public officials to account for the use of public resources, explain their actions and decisions, and accept responsibility for any failures or irregularities. Accountability has two dimensions: answerability (the duty to provide information and explain decisions) and enforceability (the ability to impose sanctions for misconduct or poor performance). In the context of the federal civil service, accountability means that public accountants, accounting officers, and other officials must: (a) ensure that public funds are used only for authorized purposes, (b) maintain accurate and complete financial records, (c) submit timely financial reports to oversight bodies (Accountant-General, Auditor-General, National Assembly), (d) respond to audit queries and implement audit recommendations, (e) appear before the Public Accounts Committee to explain financial management, and (f) accept sanctions (recovery of funds, suspension, prosecution) for financial irregularities (Romzek and Dubnick, 1987; Mellett, 2019).
Accountability is enforced through multiple mechanisms: (a) internal accountability – within the MDA, through hierarchical supervision and internal audit, (b) external accountability – to the Accountant-General, Auditor-General, and National Assembly, (c) social accountability – to citizens, civil society, and the media through transparency and public disclosure, and (d) legal accountability – through anti-corruption agencies (EFCC, ICPC) and the courts. The public accountant is a key actor in all these mechanisms, providing the financial information that enables accountability. Without accurate, timely, and complete financial records, accountability cannot be enforced (Chan, 2018; Oyo-Ita, 2019).
Probity refers to the quality of having strong moral principles, integrity, and honesty in the conduct of public business. Probity involves: (a) integrity – adherence to moral and ethical principles, (b) honesty – truthfulness and sincerity in financial dealings, (c) fairness – impartiality and absence of bias in decision-making, (d) responsibility – taking ownership of decisions and their consequences, (e) transparency – openness about actions and decisions, and (f) accountability – willingness to answer for actions. In the context of public financial management, probity means that public accountants and other officials must: (a) avoid conflicts of interest, (b) reject bribery, kickbacks, and other corrupt practices, (c) declare their assets annually as required by the Code of Conduct, (d) report suspected financial irregularities (whistleblowing), (e) ensure that procurement is fair, competitive, and transparent, (f) reject favoritism and nepotism in financial decisions, and (g) act in the public interest, not personal interest (Ogbeifun, 2019; Adebayo and Oyedokun, 2020).
Probity is essential for public trust. When citizens believe that public officials are honest and act with integrity, they are more likely to comply with tax obligations, support government policies, and trust public institutions. When probity is lacking (corruption, fraud, nepotism), public trust erodes, tax evasion increases, and governance becomes more difficult. The public accountant, as a steward of public funds, has a special responsibility to demonstrate probity in all financial transactions. This includes not only avoiding outright fraud but also avoiding actions that could be perceived as improper (e.g., awarding contracts to relatives, accepting gifts from contractors) (Chan, 2018; Premchand, 2019).
Transparency refers to the openness and accessibility of government operations and financial information to public scrutiny. Transparency involves: (a) disclosure – proactively releasing financial information (budgets, expenditures, procurement contracts, audit reports) without waiting for requests, (b) accessibility – ensuring that information is available in formats that are understandable to citizens (plain language, summaries, visualizations), (c) timeliness – releasing information while it is still relevant (e.g., real-time or near-real-time expenditure data), (d) completeness – providing full information, not selective disclosure, (e) comparability – enabling comparison across periods and across MDAs, and (f) feedback mechanisms – allowing citizens to ask questions, provide input, and report irregularities (Chan, 2018; Ogbeifun, 2019).
Transparency serves several purposes: (a) deterrence – when officials know that their actions are visible to the public, they are less likely to engage in misconduct, (b) accountability – transparency provides the information needed for citizens, media, and civil society to hold officials accountable, (c) public trust – transparent governments are trusted more by citizens, (d) efficiency – transparency can reduce waste by revealing inefficiencies, and (e) participation – citizens can participate in budget decisions when information is available. In the federal civil service, transparency is promoted through: (a) the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act (2011), which gives citizens the right to access government records, (b) Open Budget initiatives, where budgets are published online, (c) Open Contracting, where procurement notices and contract awards are published, (d) publication of audit reports, and (e) citizen feedback mechanisms (e.g., complaint hotlines). The public accountant plays a key role in implementing transparency by ensuring that financial information is accurate, complete, and accessible (Nwankwo and Okeke, 2020; Okafor and Udeh, 2020).
2.4 Importance of Government Accounting to the Economy
Government accounting is critically important to the Nigerian economy for several reasons. First, fiscal discipline and macroeconomic stability – accurate and timely government accounting enables the government to monitor revenue collection and expenditure execution, ensuring that fiscal targets are met. When government accounts are inaccurate or delayed, the government cannot effectively manage the budget, leading to fiscal slippages (unplanned deficits) that can fuel inflation, increase borrowing costs, and undermine macroeconomic stability. The public accountant’s role in producing reliable financial information is essential for fiscal discipline (Premchand, 2019; CBN, 2021).
Second, resource allocation and efficiency – government accounting provides information on the cost of government programs and services, enabling policymakers to allocate resources to the most effective programs. Without accurate cost data, resources may be wasted on ineffective programs while high-impact programs remain underfunded. Government accounting also reveals inefficiencies (e.g., high operating costs per unit of output), enabling corrective action. For the education sector, government accounting helps determine the cost per student, cost per teacher, and cost per classroom, informing budget decisions (World Bank, 2018; IMF, 2020).
Third, accountability and anti-corruption – government accounting provides the audit trail needed to detect and deter corruption. When financial records are accurate, complete, and timely, it is easier to identify unauthorized expenditures, inflated invoices, and other irregularities. The public accountant’s role in maintaining these records is a frontline defense against corruption. Corruption diverts resources from public services, undermines economic growth, and erodes public trust. Effective government accounting is essential for anti-corruption efforts (Ogbeifun, 2019; Oyo-Ita, 2019).
Fourth, investor confidence and access to capital – international investors, development partners (World Bank, IMF, African Development Bank), and credit rating agencies rely on government financial statements to assess Nigeria’s fiscal health, creditworthiness, and risk. Accurate, transparent, and timely financial statements (prepared under IPSAS) enhance investor confidence, lower borrowing costs, and facilitate access to international capital markets. Poor-quality financial statements (delayed, inaccurate, opaque) undermine confidence and increase borrowing costs. The public accountant’s role in producing high-quality financial statements is essential for Nigeria’s economic development (IMF, 2020; Okafor and Udeh, 2020).
Fifth, public trust and legitimacy – citizens are more willing to pay taxes and comply with government policies when they trust that their money is being used properly. Government accounting provides the transparency needed to build and maintain public trust. When citizens can see how funds are spent (e.g., through open budgets and expenditure tracking), they are more likely to support government initiatives. When accounting is weak or opaque, tax evasion increases, and government legitimacy erodes. The public accountant’s role in ensuring transparency is essential for social contract and governance (Chan, 2018; Mellett, 2019).
Sixth, planning and budgeting – government accounting provides historical data on revenues and expenditures, which is essential for preparing realistic budgets. Without accurate historical data, budgets may be based on unrealistic assumptions, leading to budget deficits, unfunded mandates, or wasteful spending. Government accounting also provides mid-year and year-end reports that enable budget revisions and corrective action. For the Federal Ministry of Education, accurate accounting enables the ministry to plan effectively for teacher salaries, infrastructure projects, and scholarship programs (Adebayo and Oyedokun, 2019; Premchand, 2019).
Seventh, performance management – government accounting provides the financial data needed to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of government programs. Performance budgeting links budget allocations to outputs and outcomes, requiring accurate cost data. Government accounting also supports value for money audits, which assess whether resources are used economically, efficiently, and effectively. The public accountant’s role in providing accurate cost data is essential for performance management (IPSASB, 2021; Behn, 2003).
Eighth, debt management – government accounting provides information on government liabilities, including domestic and external debt. Accurate debt records are essential for debt sustainability analysis, repayment planning, and negotiations with creditors. Poor accounting can lead to missed payments, default, or unnecessary borrowing. The public accountant’s role in recording and reporting liabilities is critical for debt management (World Bank, 2018; CBN, 2021).
Ninth, intergovernmental fiscal relations – Nigeria operates a federal system with revenue sharing between the federal, state, and local governments. Government accounting provides the data needed to determine revenue allocations (e.g., from the Federation Account) and to monitor the use of transferred funds. Accurate accounting at the federal level ensures that states and local governments receive their correct allocations. The public accountant’s role in federal accounting is essential for fiscal federalism (Premchand, 2019; Adebayo and Oyedokun, 2020).
Tenth, international reporting and compliance – Nigeria is a member of international organizations (UN, AU, ECOWAS) and a signatory to international agreements (Sustainable Development Goals, Paris Agreement on climate change). These organizations require financial reporting and may provide funding conditional on transparent accounting. Government accounting enables Nigeria to meet its international reporting obligations and access development assistance. The public accountant’s role in preparing these reports is essential for Nigeria’s international standing (IPSASB, 2021; IMF, 2020).
2.5 Problems of Accounting in Nigeria
Despite the importance of government accounting, the Nigerian public sector faces persistent problems that undermine accountability, probity, and transparency. These problems affect the Federal Ministry of Education, Eastern Zone, and other MDAs.
1. Inadequate funding for accounting functions: Public accountant offices are often underfunded, leading to: (a) shortage of qualified staff, (b) lack of modern technology (computers, accounting software), (c) inadequate training for existing staff, (d) poor working conditions (lack of office space, furniture, supplies), and (e) inability to conduct regular financial inspections of subordinate units. Underfunding is a chronic problem that limits the effectiveness of public accountants (Ogbeifun, 2019; Okafor and Udeh, 2020).
2. Shortage of qualified public accountants: The federal civil service faces a shortage of professionally qualified accountants (e.g., ICAN, ANAN certified). Many accounting positions are filled by staff with limited training in public financial management. The shortage is due to: (a) low salaries compared to private sector, (b) limited career advancement opportunities, (c) poor working conditions, (d) lack of training and CPD opportunities, and (e) brain drain (qualified accountants leaving for private sector or international organizations). The shortage of qualified staff undermines the quality of accounting (Eze and Nwafor, 2019; Adebayo and Oyedokun, 2020).
3. Weak internal controls: Many MDAs have weak internal controls, including: (a) inadequate segregation of duties (one person may authorize, record, and pay for transactions), (b) poor documentation (missing receipts, incomplete records), (c) lack of physical controls over assets (unsecured stores, unrecorded assets), (d) inadequate approval limits (unauthorized expenditures), (e) lack of regular reconciliations (bank, suspense accounts), and (f) weak internal audit. Weak internal controls create opportunities for error and fraud (Okafor and Udeh, 2020; Oyo-Ita, 2019).
4. Political interference: Public accountants may face pressure from political appointees (ministers, commissioners) or senior civil servants (permanent secretaries) to approve unauthorized expenditures, ignore irregularities, or manipulate records. Political interference undermines the independence and objectivity of public accountants. In some cases, public accountants who resist pressure are transferred, demoted, or harassed, creating a culture of compliance rather than integrity (Ogbeifun, 2019; Nwankwo and Okeke, 2020).
5. Inadequate technology and GIFMIS challenges: While GIFMIS has been implemented to improve financial management, challenges remain: (a) system downtime (servers unavailable, network failures), (b) inadequate user training (staff not fully competent to use the system), (c) data migration issues (historical records not properly transferred), (d) integration challenges (GIFMIS not fully integrated with other systems), (e) user resistance (staff revert to manual processes), and (f) inadequate technical support. These challenges undermine the effectiveness of GIFMIS (OAGF, 2018; Okafor and Udeh, 2020).
6. Delays in financial reporting: Many MDAs submit financial reports late (months or even years after the end of the fiscal year). Delays are caused by: (a) slow processing of transactions, (b) inadequate record-keeping, (c) staff shortages, (d) lack of timely bank reconciliations, (e) approval bottlenecks, and (f) lack of accountability for delays. Late reporting undermines the usefulness of financial information for decision-making and oversight (Premchand, 2019; Oyo-Ita, 2019).
7. Poor record-keeping: Many MDAs have poor record-keeping practices, including: (a) missing vouchers, receipts, and supporting documents, (b) incomplete registers (asset register, store ledger), (c) disorganized filing systems, (d) lack of document retention policies, and (e) loss of records due to poor storage or disasters. Poor record-keeping makes it difficult to verify transactions, conduct audits, or establish accountability (Eze and Nwafor, 2019; Adebayo and Oyedokun, 2020).
8. Weak audit follow-up: Even when internal and external audits identify weaknesses and make recommendations, management often fails to implement them. Audit recommendations are ignored, and audit queries remain unresolved for years. Weak follow-up is due to: (a) lack of management commitment, (b) inadequate tracking systems, (c) lack of consequences for non-implementation, (d) high turnover of accounting officers, and (e) political interference. Without effective follow-up, audits have limited impact (Ogbeifun, 2019; Oyo-Ita, 2019).
9. Corruption and fraud: Despite legal and regulatory frameworks, corruption and fraud remain persistent problems. Common schemes include: (a) procurement fraud (inflated invoices, phantom contracts, kickbacks), (b) payroll fraud (ghost workers, inflated salaries), (c) theft of assets (cash, supplies, equipment), (d) unauthorized expenditures, (e) diversion of funds, and (f) bribery of public accountants to ignore irregularities. Corruption diverts resources from public services and undermines public trust (Nwankwo and Okeke, 2020; Okafor and Udeh, 2021).
10. Lack of transparency: Despite legal requirements, many MDAs do not proactively disclose financial information. Budgets, expenditure reports, procurement contracts, and audit reports are not always published or accessible to citizens. Lack of transparency limits social accountability (citizen oversight) and enables corruption. The Freedom of Information (FOI) Act is not fully implemented, and many public officials resist disclosure (Chan, 2018; Adebayo and Oyedokun, 2019).
11. Complexity of regulations: The financial regulatory framework is complex, with multiple documents (Financial Regulations, Treasury Circulars, Procurement Act, Fiscal Responsibility Act, IPSAS). Public accountants may struggle to keep up with changes, leading to unintentional non-compliance. Complexity also creates loopholes that can be exploited by those seeking to evade controls (Premchand, 2019; Okafor and Udeh, 2020).
12. Inadequate training and capacity building: Many public accountants lack training in modern accounting techniques (IPSAS, GIFMIS), forensic accounting, fraud detection, and risk management. Training programs are infrequent, underfunded, or not targeted to the needs of public accountants. Without continuous professional development, public accountants cannot keep pace with changes in standards and technology (Eze and Nwafor, 2019; Adebayo and Oyedokun, 2020).
13. Poor remuneration and motivation: Public accountants in the federal civil service are often poorly paid compared to their counterparts in the private sector and international organizations. Low salaries, delayed promotions, and limited career advancement opportunities reduce motivation and increase vulnerability to corruption (bribery to supplement income). Some qualified accountants leave the civil service for better-paying opportunities (brain drain) (Ogbeifun, 2019; Okafor and Udeh, 2020).
14. Weak oversight by the legislature: The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) of the National Assembly is responsible for reviewing audit reports and holding accounting officers accountable. However, PAC effectiveness is limited by: (a) lack of technical expertise among members, (b) political interference (PAC members may protect allies), (c) inadequate resources for committee staff, (d) late submission of audit reports, and (e) weak follow-up on recommendations. Weak legislative oversight reduces accountability (Nwankwo and Okeke, 2020; Oyo-Ita, 2019).
15. Lack of political will: Ultimately, many of the problems of accounting in Nigeria stem from lack of political will to enforce accountability, probity, and transparency. When political leaders tolerate or engage in corruption, public accountants are powerless to enforce rules. Political will is essential for resource allocation (funding for accounting functions), enforcement (sanctions for misconduct), and cultural change (promoting integrity). Without political will, even the best regulations and systems will fail (Ogbeifun, 2019; Adebayo and Oyedokun, 2020).
References for Chapter Two
Adebayo, K. and Oyedokun, G. (2019). Public financial management reforms in Nigeria: The role of the accountant-general. Nigerian Journal of Public Administration, 14(2), 45-68.
Adebayo, K. and Oyedokun, G. (2020). Accountability and transparency in the Nigerian federal civil service. West African Journal of Fiscal Studies, 8(1), 33-50.
Behn, R. D. (2003). Why measure performance? Different purposes require different measures. Public Administration Review, 63(5), 586-606.
CBN. (2021). Annual economic report 2020. Central Bank of Nigeria.
Chan, J. L. (2018). Public sector accountability and transparency: Concepts and practices. Public Money and Management, 28(4), 227-234.
Eze, N. and Nwafor, O. (2019). Challenges of public financial management in Nigerian federal ministries. Enugu Journal of Public Administration, 7(1), 22-40.
IFRS Foundation. (2021). IAS 1: Presentation of financial statements. International Accounting Standards Board.
IMF. (2020). Fiscal monitor: Supporting the recovery. International Monetary Fund.
IPSASB. (2021). Handbook of International Public Sector Accounting Standards. International Public Sector Accounting Standards Board.
Mellett, H. (2019). Accountability and financial management in the public sector. Financial Accountability and Management, 15(3), 201-216.
Nwankwo, I. and Okeke, C. (2020). Legislative oversight and financial accountability in Nigerian federal MDAs. Nigerian Journal of Legislative Studies, 7(2), 44-61.
OAGF. (2018). GIFMIS implementation handbook. Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation.
Ogbeifun, M. (2019). Public financial management in Nigeria: Principles and practice. University of Lagos Press.
Okafor, E. and Udeh, S. (2020). Internal controls and fraud prevention in Nigerian federal ministries. African Journal of Public Sector Financial Management, 5(2), 33-50.
Okafor, E. and Udeh, S. (2021). Public sector accounting challenges in Nigeria. Journal of Public Financial Management, 6(1), 55-73.
Oyo-Ita, I. (2019). Audit and accountability in the Nigerian federal civil service. Nigerian Accountant, 52(4), 12-28.
Premchand, A. (2019). Public expenditure management: A handbook. International Monetary Fund.
Romzek, B. S. and Dubnick, M. J. (1987). Accountability in the public sector: Lessons from the Challenger tragedy. Public Administration Review, 47(3), 227-238.
World Bank. (2018). Public financial management: A guide to principles and practice. World Bank Publications.
