There is no doubt that the resignation of Mr Anand Goolsarran as the Auditor General represents a severe loss to the ongoing effort to bring the public accounts of the country up to unimpeachable standards and to ensure transparency and accountability.
When he began his tenure in 1990 the public accounts of the country were in their sorriest state ever - the result of the shockingly negligent and reckless approach by the then PNC government to public accounting. No annual report on the public accounts had been produced for more than a decade spawning a now entrenched culture of unaccountability and malpractice in government agencies. Today that gap period remains a vast sinkhole that indubitably veils much wrongdoing and malfeasance which will never be unravelled.
In this mass of confusion Mr Goolsarran set about restoring a semblance of order in the public accounts and there were progressive improvements in public accountability each year. His annual reports became encyclopaedias of the accounting failures of each agency, department and ministry. At first these shortcomings were mostly ignored by the errant subjects but over time there has been a perceptible shift in attitudes and a serious attempt by accounting officers to correct deficiencies. This has been stimulated in part by the scrutiny of the Public Accounts Committee of Parliament.
Mr Goolsarran was able to push through these changes even though he faced the daunting problems that encircle many public and private enterprises: demotivated staff, low pay, high turnover, bureaucratic hindrances and the brain drain. He also lobbied for and succeeded in having new laws passed to improve the ability of his office to perform its mandate as set out in the Constitution.
Just as important, he was not averse to stepping on toes to protect his constitutionally enshrined turf from attempts to trespass. In the worst years of the Burnham dictatorship, many public servants in important positions like Goolsarran's sacrificed their professional principles because they were cowed or simply just wanted to toe the paramountcy line. Mr Goolsarran did not fall into this category but perhaps his last run in with the PPP/C administration might have been the final salvo in what had become a fierce battle of wills.
Though he has not lent any credence to suggestions that his sudden resignation was related to heated correspondence in October between him and the President, the layman having read the allegations from both quarters would arrive at the conclusion that there is a nexus.
The exchange of correspondence between Mr Goolsarran and President Jagdeo had its genesis in the ill-advised attempt by the Head of the Presidential Secretariat, Dr Luncheon to interfere with Mr Goolsarran's decision to revisit the report that had been produced by the Audit Office on the dolphin exports and the Wildlife Division. Dr Luncheon had been one of a number of high government officials at the centre of the investigation. Mr Goolsarran then called the President and complained about Dr Luncheon's interference but was not happy with the President's response and so he followed this up with a letter setting out his concerns. The President responded by way of a letter signed by the Permanent Secretary in the Office of the President, Ms Jennifer Webster.
Both pieces of correspondence were released to the public by the Office of the President and from the tenor of the exchanges it was clear that an untenable state of affairs had arisen. Mr Goolsarran accused the President of interfering in his work and the President in turn via Ms Webster accused Mr Goolsarran of egoism, doing shoddy work and being unprofessional.
At the age of 55 and faced with a hostile administration it might have been that Mr Goolsarran felt this was the best time to make an exit from the state audit office and to take up an available position with the United Nations. What his unfortunate departure will, however, do is to send a message to public servants and those in constitutional agencies that there is a price to pay for standing up to the government and taking independent positions. That is the last thing Guyana needs; public servants who will kowtow to the administration and abdicate their professional responsibilities.
Perhaps Mr Goolsarran should simply have registered his concerns in writing about Dr Luncheon with both President Jagdeo and the Public Accounts Committee of Parliament and left it there. Matters have already come to a head and Mr Goolsarran will demit office shortly. The country owes him a debt of gratitude for the work that he has done and it is to be hoped that his replacement, as chosen by the Public Service Commission, will seek to emulate his work.
The clash between the executive and this constitutional agency should also set the Public Accounts Committee and constitutionalists thinking about how the Office of the Auditor General can be further insulated from any pressure or possible attempt at interference.