Funny and Tragic: Why the Results of the Accounting Chamber Competition Demand Cancellation

“We must always reform.” This was the response given by a candidate applying for a position when asked about the necessity for changes in the Accounting Chamber’s operations. This seems to reflect the standpoint of most candidates involved in the competition.

Despite warnings from both the public and international partners, the Verkhovna Rada proceeded to vote on December 21 to designate four new members to the Accounting Chamber.

The primary change in the renewed competition for these roles was the public broadcast of candidate interviews conducted by members of the Parliamentary Budget Committee. This not only ensured its transparency but also helped to highlight the shortcomings of the current competitive selection procedure.

Currently, the entire procedure for the Accounting Chamber member position fits within a single paragraph of the Law “On the Rules of Procedure of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine”.

As per the procedure, the Parliamentary Budget Committee reviews candidates’ submitted documents, pre-discusses their compliance with Accounting Chamber member requirements, and presents a decision with individual candidate assessments to the Verkhovna Rada for consideration.

This procedure undermines the established principles of transparency, competition, objectivity, and impartiality that must form the foundation for appointing leaders or members of collective public bodies. Instead, it allows only a formal assessment of professionalism and compliance of candidates with the requirements that are provided for the Accounting Chamber members.

A total of 25 candidates took part in interviews for four positions of the Accounting Chamber members. Despite over half of them having work experience within or related to the Accounting Chamber, and the interview questions being broad, candidates demonstrated an exceptionally low understanding of the body’s powers, organization, and procedural aspects of its functioning.

The most popular reform of the Accounting Chamber, among those announced by the candidates, was the implementation of international audit standards in its operations. But in the end, approximately 80% of candidates could not clearly name those standards or are not familiar with the methodologies adopted and approved by the Accounting Chamber for implementing those standards in daily procedures.

The situation is similar with proficiency in one of the Official Languages of the Council of Europe, a compulsory criterion for candidates applying for positions of Accounting Chamber members. Only a few candidates demonstrated fluency at the interview. Simultaneously, numerous participants in the selection process indicated an inadequate and considerably overestimated proficiency level in a foreign language in their submitted documents. When asked, “Would you like to answer my question in English or not?” one candidate replied, “Or not.”

Testing to screen out candidates lacking adequate knowledge is a widely accepted practice that removes subjective bias from result assessment. However, the existing law does not incorporate this stage into the competition process.

Primarily, the candidates’ inadequate level of training gives rise to another issue: the absence of criteria or methodologies to assess them. They are not provided for by law, and they were not developed and made public before the competition was held. Therefore, the Parliamentary Budget Committee which conducted interviews and must propose as many as 9 candidates to the Parliament for possible appointment, still has room for making unjustified decisions. Also, the involvement of current parliamentary assistants in the competitive selection further raises concerns about potential bias in selecting candidates for the Accounting Chamber.

Another equally significant drawback of competitive selection is the absence of candidate evaluations regarding their alignment with integrity and professional ethics criteria. In the interview, certain candidates sought to display commitment to the commission’s parliamentary members, while some openly expressed readiness to adhere to leadership directives that contradicted their official duties. Moreover, throughout the three days of interviews, the commission members never raised queries about the legality of the origins of candidates’ assets, the consistency of candidates’ or their family members’ living standards with their declared income, or the correspondence between candidates’ lifestyles and their status.

Collectively, these identified issues illustrate that the current pseudo-competitive process falls short in selecting capable, impartial, and ethically sound candidates for positions within the Accounting Chamber.

In a recent report, European Commission experts emphasized the necessity of enhancing the independence of the Accounting Chamber as the foremost audit institution, while G7 ambassadors advised against hastily making new appointments.

In mid-December, a working group operating under the Parliamentary Budget Committee commenced its efforts to reform the Accounting Chamber. RISE Ukraine coalition representatives are the part of the working group. Both the public, members of parliament, and international experts have raised concerns about the inadequacy of the existing competitive procedure for selecting candidates for the Accounting Chamber and have called for a new competition after necessary amendments are made to it.  

We firmly believe that the results of the selection process for the positions of members or Chairman of the Accounting Chamber must be canceled. The announcement of a new selection should only occur after legislative amendments are implemented, guaranteeing an open and transparent competition that assesses candidates for their adherence to criteria of professional competence and integrity.