Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

JUDGEMENT STATE AUDITOR ON AUDIT OPINION FOR GOVERNMENT FINANCIAL STATEMENT WITH PERSPECTIVE HERMENEUTIC PHENOMENOLOGY Susanto, Dwi Setiawan; Sudarma, Made; -, sutrisno; -, rosidi
The International Journal of Accounting and Business Society Vol 27, No 2 (2019): The International Journal of Accounting and Business Society
Publisher : Accounting Department,

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.21776/ub.ijabs.2019.27.2.2

Abstract

Background. The Audit Act no 15, 2004 stated that audit opinion is based on 4 (four) criterias, which are accounting standard, compliance on law and regulation, effectivity internal control system and full disclosure. Public accountability quality of financial statement that audited by BPK RI should be based on State Finance Audit Standard (SPKN) and audit system or guidelines to attest the truth and fairness of the judgement. State finance auditor will make audit judgement for audit opinion based on all material of financial statement, not only in quantitative but also qualitative manner of significance financial information as part of public accountability. However, audit process is not only depends on structured standard system approach but also influenced by individual (auditor) subjectivity. Auditor subjectivity is difficult to be avoided during the audit process and may play a role in the audit judgement and final audit opinion.Objective. Our study aims to analyze the role of BPK RI auditor subjectivity during audit judgement in government institution and in making final audit opinion, using interpretive hermeneutic phenomenology.Methods. Our study analyzed audit judgement with interpretive process hermeneutic and phenomenology perspective.Results. We conducted in-depth interviews with BPK audit opinion signing auditors and analyzed how auditor interpreted audit data, in regards with the basic principles of public accountability, audit standard, law and regulation, internal control and complexity organization in the auditee institution. Our study found differences among auditors in interpreting audit data based on different perspective and understanding of standard system, law and regulation and complexity of organization, mostly because they did not use basic principles of public accountability during the process and making audit judgement and final audit opinion.Conclusion. Our results came to understanding that auditors should be using basic principles of public accountability when interpreting audit data, audit standard, law and regulation to improve quality of audit judgement. Auditors of BPK as supreme audit institution in Indonesia should combine all aspects in auditing process and making final audit judgment.Key words : Audit Opinion, Public Accountability, Audit Judgement, Hermeneutic Phenomenology.
Evaluasi Metode Audit Penghitungan Kerugian Keuangan Negara pada Badan Pengawasan Keuangan dan Pembangunan Situmeang, Unjur Marroha; Susanto, Dwi Setiawan
Owner : Riset dan Jurnal Akuntansi Vol. 8 No. 3 (2024): Artikel Research July 2024
Publisher : Politeknik Ganesha Medan

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.33395/owner.v8i3.2209

Abstract

This research aims to evaluate the audit method for Calculating State Financial Losses (PKKN) by the Financial and Development Supervisory Agency (BPKP). PKKN audit results by BPKP are still not accepted or corrected by the Court. This research method is qualitative, with an evaluation approach using case studies at BPKP. The primary data used in this research are the results of interviews with BPKP auditors who have carried out PKKN audits and are experts in court. The trial decision document will be mapped based on case description themes, PKKN methods, and PKKN values. The secondary data used is a copy of the court decision on a criminal corruption case that was finalized and downloaded from the official website of the Supreme Court (MA). The implementation of the PKKN audit by BPKP is evaluated using a fraud theory approach, the REAL Tree concept, and applicable laws and regulations. The provision of expert testimony in court will be considered using the Daubert test. The results of this research are that the PKKN audit by BPKP does not follow the fraud theory approach because it does not create and test hypotheses. There is a PKKN method that differs from the REAL Tree concept because BPKP auditors apply the criteria for real and definite state financial losses (actual loss) without considering compelling interest as a time value of money concept. Providing expert information by BPKP auditors is different from the Daubert test because BPKP does not require monitoring and evaluating court decisions and does not carry out peer reviews of PKKN methods.