Is a court of accounts the real change that Colombian fiscal control requires?

Abstract

This article analyzes the parliamentary proposal to reform fiscal control through the implementation of a new model: the court of accounts, highlighting the advantages and disadvantages. To this end, it is proposed to differentiate between a jurisdictional court of accounts, an administrative body of fiscal responsibility and a judicial co urt of fiscal responsibility. In addition, the question will be addressed as to whether this new model would be the only one to intervene in the public sphere as an auditing and/or adjudicating entity, or whether it would coexist with the Contraloría General, the territorial comptrollers and the Auditoría General, who would continue to carry out the investigations on the auditing component of accounts review and fiscal oversight. Or, on the contrary, it would be the same court that would carry out such basic action to prescribe the fiscal responsibility in trial. Although the mere existence of a court with powers of “jurisdictional administrative fiscal responsibility control” does not in itself guarantee an effective administration of justice, the creation of a body with an adversarial structure, where one party accuses and the other defends itself, could strengthen the fiscal justice system. In this scenario, an impartial and objective third party, such as a court, could play a fundamental role in resolving conflicts and ensuring a fairer and more efficient tax control.