The Audit Office embarrasses ERC after the attacks over the DGAIA case

On May 28, former directors of DGAIA during the years of the alleged corruption scandals appeared before Parliament. Several of them followed the same strategy, which consisted of attacking the Audit Office. This is the independent body that prepared the report from which all the dirt emerged.

The attacks in this regard are unusual since the Audit Office is an independent body that ensures the proper functioning of institutions. 

The individuals who attacked the Audit Office were Ricard Calvo, Josep Ginesta, and Oriol Amorós. ERC deputy Ester Capella joined the smear campaign against the body. This shows that Esquerra is feeling cornered by this scandal.

The Republicans first tried, together with PSC and Comuns, to block the hearings in the parliamentary committee. When they failed, they wanted to use the hearings to discredit the Audit Office and suggest that it's a campaign against separatism. The Audit Office hasn't stood idly by and has replied.

Audit Office's response

The Audit Office expresses disagreement with the statements made in the Social Rights Committee on May 28. Statements such as: "I'm surprised that an ombudswoman appointed by a pro-separatism party points the finger here, but anyway, you know whom you appoint."

The Audit Office responds that it is "a statutory body" that "is organically dependent on Parliament," and that it has "full organizational, functional, and budgetary autonomy." It recalls that it is the "auditing" entity of the accounts, economic management, and financial control of the Generalitat.

It emphasizes that its members "do not represent any political party" and that "they have been appointed by an agreement that requires a qualified majority" of Parliament. It asserts that they have carried out an "effective and independent audit," in favor of quality and transparency in the management of the public entity. In this case, DGAIA.

The Audit Office defends its report

The individuals questioned the strength of the report, as did ERC deputy Ester Capella. The Audit Office recalls that "the reports are prepared by a team of auditors specialized in public auditing under the direction of the ombudsman." It recalls that the report is based on "objective facts" in the analyzed period and is accompanied by documentary evidence.

It insists that it doesn't take into account the political party leading the government. In addition, the report follows a parliamentary process that allows for allegations and modifications. "The draft report must incorporate the allegations verbatim," based on which the final report is prepared before being submitted to the plenary session.

The Audit Office exposes ERC: "The report presented in the Audit Office Committee is not a report of one ombudsman but of the entire plenary of the Audit Office."

The "Report on public procurement and awarding of the child and adolescent care service 2016-2020" was prepared by direct mandate of Parliament and approved by the plenary of the Audit Office by unanimous vote of its members. It is based on objective and documentary-supported facts. The Audit Office "works rigorously and rejects the use of the institution for interests unrelated to the functions entrusted to it."