The Effectiveness of BPKP Fraud Audit Finding on Determining the Level of Corruption in Indonesian Provinces
Keywords:
Keywords, government auditing, fraud, corruption, BPKPAbstract
Abstract
This study aims to investigate the role of government auditing to restrain corruption. Hereby, it focuses on the effectiveness of performance of the Indonesian Finance and Development Supervisory Agency, known as Badan Pengawasan Keuangan dan Pembangunan (BPKP) as the internal auditor institution of the Indonesian President. The results show that BPKP fraud audit finding of irregularities has a positive relationship with the corruption level in Indonesian provinces. Data are used from provincial-level governments over the period 2012-2015 which produces 128 province-year observations. The study result shows that the irregularities found by BPKP fraud audit influence the level of corruption in the Indonesian provinces.
References
Ali, A.M. and H.S. Isse. (2003). Determinants of Economic Corruption: A Cross-Country Comparison. Canto Journal 22 (3), pp. 449-466.
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). (2002). SAS 99: Consideration of Fraud in Financial Statement Audit. New York, NY: AICPA.
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). (2003). AICPA Practice Aid Series, Fraud Detection in a GAAS Audit: SAS No. 99 Implementation Guide. New York, NY.
Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE). (2002). 2002 Report to the Nation: Occupational Fraud and Abuse.
Battacharyya, S. and Raghbendra Jha. (2013). Economic Growth, Law and Corruption: Evidence from India. Comparative Economic Studies 55, pp. 287-313.
Braun, Miguel and Rafael Di Tella. (2004). Inflation, Inflation Variability and Corruption. Economics & Politics 16 (1), pp. 77-100.
DeAngelo, L.E. (1981). Auditor Size and Audit Quality. Journal of Accounting and Economics 3, pp. 183-199.
Ekasani, Puti Widya. (2016). Pengaruh desentralisasi fiskal dan akuntabilitas laporan keuangan terhadap tingkat korupsi pada pemerintah daerah di Indonesia. Master Thesis. Faculty of Economics and Business of Universitas Indonesia.
Elder, Randal J et al. (2013). Jasa Audit dan Assurance, Pendekatan Terpadu (Adaptasi Indonesia) Buku 1. Jakarta: Salemba Empat.
Finance and Development Supervisory Agency. (2013). Dukungan Pemberantasan Korupsi dari Semua Lini. Jakarta: Badan Pengawasan Keuangan dan Pembangunan. Accessed through http://www.bpkp.go.id/berita/read/11300/0/Dukungan-Pemberantasan-Korupsi-dari-Semua-Lini.bpkp at 10 January 2017.
Fisman, R. and R. Gatti. (2002). Decentralization and Corruption: Evidence Across Countries. Journal of Public Economics 83, pp. 325-345.
Gatti, R. (2004). Explaining Corruption: Are Open Countries Less Corrupt? Journal of International Development 16, pp. 851-861.
Gray, Dahli. (2008). Forensic Accounting and Auditing: Compared and Contrasted to Traditional Accounting and Auditing. American Journal of Business Education – Fourth Quarter 2008 1 (2), pp. 115-126.
Gujarati, D.N. (2003). Basic econometrics (4th ed.). New York: MaGraw-Hill.
Gujarati, D.N & Porter, D.C (2009). Basic econometrics. 5th. New York. McGrow-Hill.
Hayes et al. (2005). Principles of Auditing: An Introduction to International Standards on Auditing. Pearson: England.
Hayes, et al. (2014). Principles of Auditing: An Introduction to International Standards on Auditing. Pearson: England.
Huang, R.B. and Y.T. Wang. (2010). The Empirical Study on Provincial Government Audit Quality (2002-2006). Accounting Research 6, pp. 70-76.
Indonesia Corruption Watch (ICW). (2016). ICW: korupsi 2015 rugikan negara Rp31,077 triliun. Jakarta: Antara News. Accessed through http://www.antaranews.com/berita/546929/icw-korupsi-2015-rugikan-negara-rp31077-triliun at 27 February 2017.
Indonesia Corruption Watch (ICW). (2017). ICW: Ini Urutan Pelaku Korupsi di Indonesia. Jakarta: Republika News. Accessed through http://nasional.republika.co.id/berita/nasional/hukum/17/01/12/ojnn25335-ini-urutan-pelaku-korupsi-di-indonesia at 3 August 2017.
Indonesian Law. (1999). Undang-Undang Nomor 31 Tahun 1999 tentang Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Korupsi. Jakarta.
Indonesian Law. (2004). Undang-Undang Nomor 15 Tahun 2004 tentang Pemeriksaan Pengelolaan dan Tanggung Jawab Keuangan Negara. Jakarta.
Indonesian Law. (2004). Undang-Undang Nomor 32 Tahun 2004 tentang Pemerintah Daerah. Jakarta.
Indonesian Presidential Instruction. (2014). Instruksi Presiden Nomor 9 Tahun 2014 tentang Peningkatan Kualitas Sistem Pengendalian Intern. Jakarta.
Indonesian Presidential Regulation. (2014). Peraturan Presiden Nomor 192 Tahun 2014 tentang Badan Pengawasan Keuangan dan Pembangunan. Jakarta.
Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi (KPK). (2016). Statistik Tindak Pidana Korupsi. Jakarta: KPK. Accessed through http://acch.kpk.go.id/statistik-tindak-pidana-korupsi at 10 January 2017.
Kotera, Go, Keisuke Okada, and Sovannroeun Samreth. (2012). Government Size, Democracy, and Corruption: An Empirical Investigation. Economic Modelling 29, pp. 2340-2348.
Liu, Jin and Bin Lin. (2012). Government Auditing and Corruption Control: Evidence from China’s Provincial Panel Data. China Journal of Accounting Research 5, pp. 163-186.
Maravic, Patrick Von. (2007). Decentralized Corruption in Germany. Public Administration Quarterly Winter 2007, pp. 440-478.
Masyitoh, Rizki Diyah (2014). Pengaruh opini audit, temuan audit dan tindak lanjut audit terhadap persepsi korupsi pada Pemerintah Daerah tingkat II periode 2008-2010. Master Thesis. Faculty of Economics and Business of Universitas Indonesia.
Monika, Prima. (2015). Pengaruh Opini Audit terhadap Kinerja Pemerintah Daerah dengan Tingkat Korupsi sebagai Variabel Moderasi (Pengujian Sub Sampel Berdasarkan Kualitas Kepala Daerah). Master Thesis. Faculty of Economics and Business of Universitas Indonesia.
Neu, Dean, et. al. (2013). Accounting and Networks of Corruption. Accounting, Organizations and Society 38, pp. 505-524.
Olken, B.A. (2007). Monitoring Corruption: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Indonesia. Journal of Political Economy 115 (2), pp. 200-249.
Othman, Rohana, et. al. (2015). Fraud Detection and Prevention Methods in the Malaysian Public Sector: Accountants’ and Internal Auditors’ Perception. Procedia Economics and Finance 28, pp. 59-67.
Petrascu, Daniela and Alexandra Tieanu. (2014). The Role of Internal Audit in Fraud Prevention and Detection. Procedia Economics and Finance 16, pp. 489-497.
Pradiptyo, Rimawan. (2016). Politician, private businesspeople main actors of corruption, study reveals. Jakarta: The Jakarta Post. Accessed through http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2016/04/07/politicians-private-businesspeople-main-actors-of-corruption-study-reveals.html at 3 August 2017.
Rahman, Ibrahim Kamal Abdul, et. al. (2015). Management Accounting Best Practices Award for Improving Corruption in Public Sector Agencies. Procedia Economics and Finance 31, pp. 503-509.
Rinaldi, T., Purnomo, M., Damayanti, D., & Bank Dunia. (2007). Memerangi korupsi di Indonesia yang terdesentralisasi : Studi kasus penanganan korupsi pemerintahan daerah. Jakarta: Justice for the Poor Project, Bank Dunia.
Rosyadi, Chekat Fahmy. (2017). The Influence of Government Fraud Audit Efforts on Corruption Level in Indonesian Provinces. Master Thesis. School of Business and Economics of Vrije Univesiteit Amsterdam.
Salleh, Kalsom and Rozainun Ab Aziz. (2014). Traits, Skills and Ethical Values of Public Sector Forensic Accountants: an Empirical Investigation. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 145, pp. 361-370.
Setyaningrum, Dyah. (2015). Kualitas Auditor, Pengawasan Legislatif dan Pemanfaatan Hasil Audit dalam Akuntabilitas Pengelolaan Keuangan Daerah. Doctoral Dissertation. Faculty of Economics and Business of Universitas Indonesia.
Singleton et al. (2006). Fraud Auditing and Forensic Accounting, 3rd Edition, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Singleton, Tommie E., and Aaron J. Singleton. (2007). Why Don’t We Detect More Fraud? The Journal of Corporate Accounting & Finance, May/June, pp. 7-10.
Transparency International. (2017). Corruption Perception Index 2016. Transparency Internation. Accessed through http://www.transparency.org/news/feature/corruption_perceptions_index_2016#regional at 27 February 2017.
Treisman, D. (2000). The Causes of Corruption: a Cross-National Study. Journal of Public Economics 76, pp. 399-457.
Treisman, D. (2007). What have we learned about the causes of corruption from ten years of cross-national empirical research? Annual Reviews Political Science 10, pp. 211-244.
Tuanakotta, M. Theodorus. (2007). Akuntansi Forensik dan Audit Investigatif. Jakarta: Lembaga Penerbit FE Universitas Indonesia.
Vanasco, Rocco R. (1998). “Fraud Auditing.” Managerial Auditing Journal 13 (1), pp. 4-71.
Wei, D.H., Z.Y. Qin, and S.Q. Tang. (2010). Research on the Relation between the Efficiency of Government Audit and the Security of Financial Fund: Some Evidence from the Data of National Audit Yearbook. Auditing Research 3, pp. 9-14.
Wu, Y.P., and M. Rui. (2010). Regional Corruption, Marketization and Economic Growth in China. Management World 11, pp. 10-17.
Zhao, J.S. (2005). An Analytical Framework for Government Audit Quality Characteristics in China. Auditing Research 4, pp. 65-68.
Zhou, L.A., and J. Tao. (2009). Government Size, Market Development and Corruption. Economic Research Journal 1, pp. 58-69.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Open Access Principles- The Journal of Society and Governance (JSG) is committed to real and immediate open access for academic work. All of the JSG’s articles and reviews are free to access immediately from the date of publication.
- There are no author charges prior to publication, and no charge for any reader to download articles and reviews for their own scholarly use.
- The JSG does not, therefore, operate either a Gold or Green model of open access, but is free to all at any time and in perpetuity.
- To maintain the Open and Free access, the JSG depends upon the financial support provided by the Faculty of Social and Political Science, Hasanuddin University, the goodwill of its editorial team and advisory board, and the continuing support of its network of peer reviewers.
Licensing
A Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 (CC BY-ND 4.0) license applies to all contents published in JSG. While articles published on JSG can be copied by anyone for noncommercial purposes if proper credit is given, all materials are published under an open-access license with authors retaining full and permanent ownership of their work. JSG retains a perpetual, non-exclusive right to publish the work and to include it in other aggregations and indexes to achieve broader impact and visibility.
Authors are responsible for and required to ascertain that they are in possession of image rights for any and all photographs, illustrations, and figures included in their work or to obtain publication or reproduction rights from the rights holders.
Contents of the journal will be registered with the Directory of Open Access Journals and similar repositories. In submitting their work for publication in JSG, authors agree to the terms set above. Authors are free and encouraged to store their work elsewhere, for instance in institutional repositories or websites such as academia.edu, researchgate.com, mendeley.com, etc., to increase circulation (see The Effects of Open Access). Authors are also able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal. JSG does not charge any reprint fees and it is not necessary to contact JSG for permission.
