Former A-G stands by Tabung Haji audit decisions

 Madinah Mohamad says she issued two 'emphasis of matter' to the fund in 2017 and that issuing a qualified audit opinion would significantly impact stakeholders’ confidence.

Madinah Mohamad, who served as auditor-general from 2017 to 2019, said she issued an unqualified audit opinion with two ’emphasis of matter’ to TH in July 2017. (Bernama pic)

PETALING JAYA:

Former auditor-general Madinah Mohamad has defended her decisions concerning Tabung Haji (TH) following the release of a royal commission of inquiry (RCI) report into the pilgrims’ fund, saying she prioritised national interests at the time.

In the RCI report, the commission criticised the national audit department for failing to adopt a firmer stance in auditing TH’s financial statements between 2014 and 2017.

The commission noted that while the department issued a clean audit opinion for 2017 despite highlighting an “emphasis of matter” (EOM), it later admitted in a written response to the prime minister that it had avoided issuing a qualified opinion partly due to concerns over its potential impact on depositor sentiment.

Madinah, who served as auditor-general from 2017 to 2019, said she issued an unqualified audit opinion with two EOMs to TH in July 2017.

She said issuing an EOM means that the financial statements require attention.

“At the time, I exercised professional judgement in issuing the EOM to draw attention to two material matters identified during the audit, and I carried out my duties to the best of my ability,” she was quoted as saying by Berita Harian.

She added that the decision to issue the EOMs was based on audit evidence and International Standards on Auditing.

“If a qualified audit opinion was issued without meeting the requirements of the standards, it would not only undermine the integrity of the auditing process but could also have major implications for stakeholders’ confidence,” she said.

Madinah said that under the Audit Act 1957, the auditor-general is responsible for conducting audits independently and professionally in the public interest.

She also claimed that she was denied the opportunity to be heard as she was not called to testify during the RCI’s proceedings despite being ready to face the panel.

She said she was already at the Islamic development department’s (Jakim) office when the proceedings were held, but her name was never called.

“I went there on the appointed day and at the designated time at Jakim. I waited for more than 30 minutes but was disappointed when I was not called.

“My right to be heard was denied when I was not called to testify, despite turning up and waiting there,” she said. - FMT