Introduction

There exist only two agents responsible for the handling of state funds when it comes to public accounting law and litigation. These agents are known as the certified accountants. These certified public accountants are the authorising officer and the accounting officer work independently. As a result, any person who takes upon himself to handle or manage state fund is a de facto manager or accountant. Here in this topic, we shall be discussing the ‘’de facto management’’. We shall look at it from; the mechanisms of de facto management, the circumvention of the public accounting rules, the jurisdiction of the audit bench of the supreme court over de facto management, possibility of criminal liability for de facto management.

De facto management is simply the act or situation by which a person, who is not a certified accountant, takes upon him to or because of their link with the administration handle state funds without having the locus standi to do so. This is usually caused by ignorance or lack of awareness of the principle of separation of powers between the certified public accountants. Our entire work shall focus more on the law No. 2003/005 of 21 April 2003 laying down the organisation, functioning and jurisdiction of the audit bench of the Supreme Court. This is as a result to the fact that be it the authorise/ certified public accountant or a de facto accountant, they are all subject to audit by the supreme audit bench of the supreme court when it comes to the management of state funds. This is as a result of section 7 of law No. 2003/005 of 21 April 2003 laying down the organisation, functioning and jurisdiction of the audit bench of the Supreme Court^[1].