The Control on Judicial Judgments of the Court of Auditors

Abstract

The court of auditors is considered as the supreme supervisory body in charge of full control over state’s public finance. In order to execute its functions, it was provided with two kinds of competencies: administrative and judicial.
 The court of auditors is not considered as judicial bodies of general jurisdiction, since it has not been stipulated in the constitution’s chapter on judicial power, but it had been stated in the section on control. Hence, it is regarded as a public entity has jurisdiction i.e. it has the authority to issue judicial judgments in the area of control over public funds. This requires the need for control over it, and enabling stakeholders the possibility to appeal against it before 
 This control can be arbitrary unless it is equipped with rules and procedures that guarantee its transparency and integrity so as to protect public funds, safeguarding the rights of litigants and embodying the law-based state.
 The court of auditors is not considered as judicial bodies of general jurisdiction, since it has not been stipulated in the constitution’s chapter on judicial power, but it had been stated in the section on control. Hence, it is regarded as a public entity has jurisdiction i.e. it has the authority to issue judicial judgments in the area of control over public funds. This requires the need for control over it, and enabling stakeholders the possibility to appeal against it before competent authorities.
 On this basis, the court of auditors’ law has devoted measures of control over its acts and judgments of the court of auditors represented in: review, appeal and apply for cassation; which is regarded as judicial remedies with special features depending upon the judicial nature for the council’s work, on the one hand, and because it doesn’t belong to the judicial power, on the other hand.