An Evaluation of the Relevance of Forensic Accounting on Fraud Detection in the Nigerian Public Sector: A Case Study of Bayelsa State, Nigeria

An Evaluation of the Relevance of Forensic Accounting on Fraud Detection in the Nigerian Public Sector: A Case Study of Bayelsa State, Nigeria

Hawal Olayiwola Dalegan, Abdullahi Omogbolahan Ishola
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-8754-6.ch010
OnDemand:
(Individual Chapters)
Available
$37.50
No Current Special Offers
TOTAL SAVINGS: $37.50

Abstract

The increasing sophistication of fraud has necessitated the use of forensic accounting tools to facilitate successful investigation. Perpetuation of fraud in the Nigerian public sector has reached alarming levels. This problem motivated the discussion on whether forensic accounting can facilitate detection and prevention of fraud in Nigeria. This chapter evaluates the relevance of forensic accounting on fraud detection in Nigerian public sector using a case study of Bayelsa state. This chapter finds that forensic accounting enhances fraud detection. The chapter consequently recommends that professional accounting bodies should constantly conduct forensic accounting training for accountants, and there is a need for the inclusion of forensic accounting in the syllabus of all the tertiary institutions offering accountancy in Nigeria. Further, the services of forensic accountants should be engaged more in Nigeria.
Chapter Preview
Top

Introduction

Government spending has always been of significance but more so in current times where the government budget runs in to trillions of naira (or hundreds of billions of USD) (Akinlo, 2013; Aregbeyen & Kolawole, 2015). This spend is so massive today and largely being funded by debts that the Nigerian public through its legislators is demanding to know whether the huge outlays of funds are being judiciously spent or whether they should be spent at all. Officials and employees who manage public sector activities are by virtue of that duty, required to render accounts of their activities to the public. Despite this, the incidence of fraud continues to increase across public sector organizations and across nations. Although fraud is a universal problem that no nation is immune to, developing countries such as Nigeria however tend to suffer more from fraud in the public sector as it directly hampers the growth of the economy (Okoye & Gbegi, 2013; Abdullahi & Mansour, 2018).

Fraudulent practices and corruption have resulted in poor infrastructural development, poor investment in security, poor development of health and education, weak citizen empowerment and job creation which all contribute to the state of insecurity present in Nigeria currently (Adebisi & Gbegi, 2015; Nwankwo, 2014; Page, 2018). The menace of fraud in the Nigerian public sector dates back to the colonial era when administrators were deployed to govern different areas of the country and they instead used their newfound powers to enrich themselves (Abdullahi & Mansor, 2015; Owolabi, 2007). The problem however continued to persist after the country gained independence due to different corrupt military regime ruling one after the other (Abdullahi & Mansor, 2015; Owolabi, 2007). The first democratic administration took over in 1999 under the leadership of General Olusegun Obasanjo (a retired army general and former head of state during the military regime) and marked the beginning of Nigeria’s fight against fraud and corruption.

The Nigerian government has since taken several steps to address the evil of fraud and corruption in the society for example the enactment of legislations to criminalize all corrupt conducts including unjust enrichment. Several laws were enacted including Independence corrupt practices commission (ICPC) Act, 2000, Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) Act, 2004, Money laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2004, Public Procurement Act, 2007, Fiscal Responsibility Act, 2007. The ICPC Act 2000 and the EFCC Act 2004 formed these respective bodies who are charged with the investigation and prosecution of fraud in Nigeria. Although they have enjoyed some success, the menace of fraud nonetheless prevails (Ngwube & Okoli, 2013).

Forensic accounting evolved in response to growing fraud related cases as a brief of all other investigation related areas in uncovering fraud. The increasing sophistication of fraud requires that forensic accounting be added to the tools necessary to bring about the successful investigation and prosecution of those individuals involved in criminal activities (Moduga & Anyaduba, 2013). For instance, the scandals that recently rocked the corporate world with classical examples being the oft cited Enron and WorldCom cases have highlighted the need for forensic accounting. The extent of the incidence of fraud has made traditional auditing and investigation inefficient and ineffective in detecting fraud (Oyerogba, 2021). Forensic accounting is a rapidly growing field of accounting that describes the engagement that results from actual or anticipated dispute or litigations (Amake & Ikhatua, 2016). The word forensic translates to being suitable for use in a court of law, and accountants generally operate to that standard (Crumbley, Heitger, & Smith, 2005). Forensic Accounting therefore is an investigative style of accounting used to uncover the incidence of illegal financial activities.

Key Terms in this Chapter

Skimming: The removal of physical cash belonging to another party before it is recorded. For example, if an employee sells an item for $100 but only record $80 and keep $20 then they have committed skimming.

Larceny: The unlawful possession or taking of something that belongs to another party. This can be likened to theft albeit without the use of forceful actions against the victim.

Cheque Tampering: The forging or altering of a cheque drawn on the account of another party.

Financial Statement Fraud: The deliberate misrepresentation of the financial statement of an entity to show a different picture from the reality.

Computer-Assisted Audit Tools (CAATs): The use of computer technology to aid the execution of audit exercise. It facilitates efficient and effective processing of large volume of data.

Asset Misappropriation: The diversion of funds kept in one’s care to purposes beyond what they were allocated for.

Ratio Analysis: The measurement of the relationship between two items of the financial statements using ratios.

Payroll Scheming: The manipulation of the payroll to derive benefits for oneself. One of the most common examples is the creation of fictitious staff (ghost workers).

Complete Chapter List

Search this Book:
Reset