By Sahid Bangura

SLE2, 435,887,

SLE8, 388,291,

SLE8, 388,291,

SLE17, 278,475,

SLE1, 231,382,

SLE1, 177,210.90,

SLE54, 171.10

In an effort of combating corruption in all the public sectors, the Audit Service Sierra Leone has exposed the Njala University of mismanaging Billions of Leones.

According to the audit report, a total amount of SLE2,435,887 was disclosed as the total PAYE in the University’s Financial Statements, however, the said amount which was reported as the current liabilities as at the 31st December 2022, was not paid to the NRA.

In respect to the deducted PAYE, the Management of the University responded that the highlighted deducted amount would be settled when funds are available, “especially when the GoSL honour our Sierra Leone Government Grants-In-Aid receivables.” The management continued that a committee had been set up by the Ministry of Finance, which is charged with the responsibility of “off-setting” that debt as source from the long outstanding Sierra Leone Government Grants-In-Aid receivables.

The Auditor General, who recommended that “The Finance Director, VC&P and the Registrar should ensure that the outstanding employees’ PAYE deducted are payed to the NRA and receipts submitted to the ASSL,” commented that the response of the University Management were not supported by any evidence to prove that the outstanding employees’ PAYE would be paid to NRA, hence, the issues were unresolved.

In an effort of confirming the existence of the 45 bank accounts of the University and their balances as at 31st December, 2022, the audit service made a request through the Vice-Chancellor and Principal and Finance Director to five of the University’s bankers, but received bank confirmation replies from only two bankers. Thus, in respect to the unconfirmed accounts, it was revealed that the reported bank balances in the Financial Statements amounted to SLE8, 388,291.

The University Management responded that since the confirmation letters were sent to the identified banks by the audit service, it is the responsibility of the audit team to do a follow-up on the letter, as usual responsibility. The management continued that they had instructed the respective banks in written form to act upon the confirmation letters, soonest, and promised to do a follow up with the said banks and revert to the audit service.

In relations that, the Auditor General commented that out of the 45 disclosed bank accounts of the University, they received a confirmation for only nine bank accounts, with a difference of 36 accounts with a total Cashbook balance of SLE8, 388,291 that was unconfirmed.

The Auditor General continued, ” the total cash and bank balances of SLE17,278,475, reported in the Statement of Financial Position of the revised financial statements, was under-reported by SLE1,231,382; due to the bank overdraft in the Main Operating Account that was net off from the cash and bank balances as recorded in Note 8 of the Financial Statements. That overdraft, according to the audit service, should had been reported under current liabilities as required by the reporting framework, the International Financial Reporting Standard, therefore, the service reported that the issues were unresolved.

In respect of the University monthly bank reconciliation statements, the audit service reported that the Finance Director of the University failed to submit the bank reconciliation statements; as a result, according to the report, the service was not able to verify the accuracy and correctness of the cash and bank balances reported in the Financial Statements for the year ended 31st December, 2022.

Response from the University’s management noted that “the reconciliation statements were alongside the cashbooks submitted for audit as a worksheet next to the cashbooks. “Noting that they would make the statement available again for audit verification. However, the Auditor General, in its comment noted that the bank reconciliation statements were submitted, but their review of the statement in regards with the Main Operating Account, “showed an overdraft cashbook balance of SLE1, 177,210.90; whiles the overdraft recorded in Note 8 of the Financial Statements was SLE1, 231,382; leading to a difference of SLE54, 171.10,” and concluded that the issues was partly resolved.