Tema broja

ČLANCI I STUDIJE

REVIZORI KAO NADZIRAČI RADA JAVNE UPRAVE: NACIONALNI I NADNACIONALNI NIVO

Sažetak

Rad analizira u kojoj meri revizorske institucije mogu da delotvorno nadziru kvalitet rada javne uprave na nacionalnom i nadnacionalnom nivou vlasti i posredno podstaknu dosledno poštovanje etičkih standarda. Autor je težište analize stavio na polje nadležnosti, ovlašćenja i prakse organa revizije i sa namerom da utvrdi strukturne slabosti delovanja revizora kao mehanizma spoljne kontrole rada javnih službenika. Analiza je ograničena na odabrani uzorak postindustrijskih poliarhija (SAD, Velika Britanija, Francuska, Nemačka i nordijske zemlje), Sud revizora EU kao primer nadzirača delovanja nadnacionalne administracije, te na Srbiju kao postkomunističku zemlju koja tek gradi standarde i praksu u ovoj oblasti. Nalazi istraživanja pokazali su da vrhovne revizorske institucije – jednako na nacionalnom i nadnacionalnom nivou vlasti – sprovode nadzornu ulogu posredno i to posredstvom pružanja tehničke ekspertize drugim institucijama i prosleđivanja sistematizovane činjenične građe o postojanju prakse zloupotreba javnih ovlašćenja.

Ključne reči:

Reference

    1. “Auditor General Act”, S.C., 1985, c. A-17, Last amended on 26 June 2011, Canada, http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/A-17.pdf.
    2. “Auditor-General Act 1997”, Act No. 151 of 1997 as amended up to Act No. 25 of 2012, Australia, www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2012C00445/a1bcb830-373b-4492-b253-393010d3333 5.
    3. Azuma, Nobuo, “The Role of the Supreme Audit Institutions in New Public Management (NPM): Тhe Trend of Continental Countries”, Government Auditing Review, Vol. 12, March 2005, рр. 69–82.
    4. Clarke, John, “Scrutiny through inspection and audit”, in: Tony Bovaird and Elke Löffler (eds), Public Management and Governance, Routledge, London and New York, 2003.
    5. Dye, Kenneth M., “Corruption and Fraud Detection by Supreme Audit Institutions”, in: Anwar Shah (ed.), Performance Accountability and Combating Corruption, International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and World Bank, Washington D.C., 2007.
    6. Gregory, Robert, “New Public Management and the Ghost of Max Weber: Exorcized or Still Haunting?”, in: Tom Christensen and Per Lægreid (eds), Transcending New Public Management: The Transformation of Public Sector Reforms, Ashgate, Aldershot, 2007.
    7. “Guidance Document: Assisting Countries in Preparing a National Profile to Assess the National Legal Infrastructure for Sound Financial Management”, United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR), 1998–1999, www.unitar.org/dfm/General_Info/CapacityBuilding/ guidance1/docs/Section%203/section33.htm.
    8. „Извештај о раду Државне ревизорске институције за 2012. годину”, Државна ревизорска институција, март 2013, www.dri.rs/images/pdf/gipdf.
    9. Кораћ, Срђан, Интегритет наднационалног службеника Европске уније, Институт за међународну политику и привреду, Београд, 2011.
    10. Laffan, Brigid, “The Court of Auditors”, in: Alex Warleigh (ed.), Understanding European Union Institutions, Routledge, London and New York, 2002.
    11. Nugent, Neil, The Government and Politics of the European Union, Palgrave, Basingstoke, 2002.
    12. Peterson, John and Shackleton, Michael (eds), The Institutions of the European Union, Palgrave, Basingstoke, 2002.
    13. Shafritz, Jay M., Russell, Edward W., and Borick, Christopher P., Introducing Public Administration, Pearson Longman, New York, 2008.
    14. Shead, Bob, “Auditing”, in: David Schultz (ed.), Encyclopedia of Public Administration and Public Policy, Facts On File Inc., New York, 2004.
    15. Stapenhurst, Rick, “The Legislature and the Budget”, in: Rick Stapenhurst, Riccardo Pelizzo, David M. Olson, and Lisa von Trapp (еds), Legislative Oversight and Budgeting: A World Perspective, The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and The World Bank, Washington D.C., 2008.
    16. Travers, Max, The New Bureaucracy: Quality Аssurance and its Critics, The Policy Press, University of Bristol, Bristol, 2007.
    17. “Trust in Government: Ethics Measures in OECD Countries”, OECD, Paris, 2000, www.irpa.eu/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/8.-OECD_ethic-measures-case-studie_00.pdf.
    18. „Закон о државној ревизорској институцији”, Службени гласник РС, бр. 101/2005, измене и допуне: бр. 54/2007, бр. 36/2010.
    19. Zyl, Albert van, Ramkumar, Vivek, and Renzio, Paolo de, “Responding to challenges of Supreme Audit Institutions: Can legislatures and civil society help?”, U4 Issue, 2009/1, U4 Anti-Corruption Resource Centre, Chr. Michelsen Institute, www.u4.no/publications/responding-to-the-challenges-of-supreme-audit-institutions-can-legislatures-and-civil-society-help/.

     

PERIODIKA Administracija i javne politike 1/2015 УДК 35.072.6:657.63 81-102
ç