The latest audit report has put the Office of the Attorney General on the spot for failure to remit to the exchequer Sh188 million collected as revenue.
The report, for the year ended June 2018 tabled in Parliament on Tuesday, indicates that the State Law Office failed to prove that the money had been transferred to the exchequer.
According to the Auditor-General’s report, the Sh188 million includes Sh168 million collected from Huduma centres, Sh1 million from public trustees and Sh18 million from Kenya Commercial Bank.
“No explanation has been provided as to why revenue totalling Sh188 million was not remitted to the exchequer as at June 2018. In the circumstances, the accuracy, validity and completeness of the balance carried forward could not be confirmed,” reads the report.
The State Law Office is also on the spot over Sh55 million collected from its regional offices, as it did not provide a summary of documents auditing as provided by law.
Section 65 (1) of the Public Finance Management Act requires a receiver or collector of revenue to prepare a quarterly report not later than the 15th day after the end of a quarter of the financial year.
“No analysis of revenue collected from regional offices was availed for verification and auditing. In the circumstances, it was not possible to confirm the completeness and accuracy of the revenue balance of Sh55 million collected in regional offices,” reads Mr Edward Ouko’s report.
Another audit report tabled in the Senate last week also cast the State Law Office in bad light over financial misappropriation.
In the report for the 2017/18 financial year, Mr Ouko revealed that the office could not account for Sh394.8 million used as legal fees for six international law firms that represented Kenya at the International Court of Justice over its maritime boundary dispute with Somalia.
According to the report, the payment was highly inflated and taxpayers may not have got value for their money.
Mr Ouko questioned how the State Law Office single-handedly determined the legal fees paid to the lawyers, noting that the procurement procedure was flawed.