Yüksek Denetim Sürecinin Güçlendirilmesi: Katılımcılık Esaslı Denetim

Year 2023, , 9 - 42, 13.06.2023

Abdulkerim Eroğlu

https://doi.org/10.52836/sayistay.1225010

Abstract

Vatandaşların kamu yönetiminde etkin bir rol almasına imkân sağlayan katılımcılık anlayışı 1970’li yıllardan itibaren birçok kamu kurumunun dikkatini çekmeye başlamıştır. 2000’li yıllardan itibaren de yüksek denetim kurumlarında (YDK’larda) katılımcılığın sağlanmasına yönelik politika önerileri geliştirilmiş ve sınırlı düzeyde uygulamalar yürürlüğe sokulmuştur. Bu çalışmanın amacı, birçok fonksiyonun yanında, kamu fonlarını kullanma yetkisini alan yürütmenin denetlenmesi gibi önemli bir görevi yerine getiren YDK’lardan katılımcılık esasını benimseyen ülke örneklerinin incelenmesidir. Bu ülkeler incelenirken sadece hukuki mevzuatlarıyla sınırlı kalınmamış, bununla birlikte uluslararası kuruluşların ilgili raporları da dikkate alınmıştır. 2000’li yıllardan itibaren uygulamaya sokulan düzenlemeler incelendiğinde; katılım düzeyinin ve katılım odağının ülkeler arasında farklılık arz ettiği, bazı ülkelerde ise katılımcılık esaslı denetim etkinliğinin farklı uygulamalar nedeniyle azaltıldığı sonucuna varılmıştır.

Keywords

Yüksek Denetim, Katılımcılık, Hesap Verebilirlik

References

• Acar, E. (2019). Katılımcı Demokrasilerde Baskı Gruplarının İşlev ve Yöntemleri. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 61, 235-249.
• Afridi, F. ve Iversen, V. (2014). Social Audits and MGNREGA Delivery: Lessons from Andhra Pradesh. The Institute for the Study of Labor, Discussion Paper No: 8095.
• Akyel, R. ve Baş, H. (2010). Kamu Yönetimi ve Denetimi Bağlamında Sayıştayın Anayasal ve Yargısal Konusu. Maliye Dergisi, (158), 374-387.
• Akyel, R. ve Köse, H. Ö. (2011). Kamu Mali Yönetiminde İyi Yönetişim İçin Sayıştayların İletişim Kapasitesinin Güçlendirilmesinin Önemi. Sayıştay Dergisi, 82, 3-21.
• Akyel, R. ve Köse, H. Ö. (2013). Auditing and Governance: Importance of Citizen Participation and the Role of Supreme Audit Institutions to Enhance Democratic Governance. Journal of Yaşar University, 8(32), 5495-5514.
• ASE Puebla (2023). Historial de Auditores Externos Autorizados. https://www. auditoriapuebla.gob.mx/sujetos-de-revision-2/auditores-externos-autorizadosofs/ category/historial-de-auditores-externos-autorizados, Erişim: 25.01.2023.
• ASE Puebla (2015). Portal de Transparencia. http://www.auditoriapuebla.gob.mx/ mecanismos-de-participacion-ciudadana, Erişim: 10.11.2022.
• Aziz, H. ve Shah, N. (2021), Participatory Budgeting: Models and Approaches. Pathways Between Social Science and Computational Social Science: Theories, Methods, and Interpretations. (Eds.) Rudas, T. ve Peli, G., Switzerland: Springer.
• BAI (2023). Audit Request System. The Board of Audit and Inspection of Korea, https:// www.bai.go.kr/bai_eng/others/request, Erişim: 03.02.2023.
• Baimyrzaeva, M. ve Kose, H. O. (2014). The Role of Supreme Audit Institutions in Improving Citizen Participation in Governance. International Public Management Review, 15(2), 77-90.
• Bayra, A. E. (2022). Liberal Demokrasinin Meşruiyet Krizine Bir Çözüm Önerisi Olarak Demokrasi: Değeri ve Ulusal Ölçekte Uygulanabilirliği. Sakarya Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, 10(2), 659-689.
• Berthin, G. (2011). A Practical Guide to Social Audit as a Participatory Tool to Strengthen Democratic Governance, Transparency, and Accountability. UNDP Regional Centre for Latin America and the Caribbean, Panama.
• Bertot, J. C., Jaeger, P. T. ve Grimes, J. M. (2010). Using ICTs to Create a Culture of Transparency: E-Government and Social Media as Openness and Anti-Corruption Tools for Societies. Government Information Quarterly, 27, 264-271.
• Boztepe Taşkıran, H. (2019). Kamu Yönetiminde Vatandaş Katılımı ve Şeffaflığın Sağlanmasında Dijital İletişim Uygulamalarının Rolü. Amme İdaresi Dergisi, 52(1), 117-144.
• Budget Monitor (2022). Citizen’s Page. https://budgetmonitor.ge/en/citizen, Erişim: 20.10.2022.
• Cabannes, Y. (2004). Participatory Budgeting: A Significant Contribution to Participatory Democracy. Environment and Urbanization, 16(1), 27-46.
• Canıkalp, E. ve Ünlükaplan, İ. (2015). Yönetişim Kalitesi ve Yönetişimin Ölçülebilirliği. Çukurova Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 19(1), 81-100.
• Contraloria General (2022). Ministry of Audit and Control. https://www.contraloria.gob.cu/ index.php/en/nuestra-historia/ministry-audit-and-control, Erişim: 25.09.2022.
• Council of Europe (2017). Georgia: Handbook on Transparency and Citizen Participation. https://rm.coe.int/georgia-handbook-on-transparency-and-citizen-participationen/ 168078938d, Erişim: 12.10.2022.
• Demirkıran, Ö., Eser, H. B. ve Keklik, B. (2011). Demokrasinin Tabana Yayılması, Yönetimde Şeffaflık ve Hesap Verebilirlik Bağlamında Bilgi Edinme Hakkı Kanunu. A.Ü. Uluslararası Alanya İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi, 3(2), 169-192.
• Dikmen, S. ve Çiçek, H. G. (2019). Yasama Organının Bütçe Gözetim İşlevi ve Mali Saydamlık Arasındaki İlişkinin Ekonometrik Bir Analizi. SİYASAL: Journal of Political Sciences, 28(2), 181-205.
• Dye, K. (2009). Working with the Media to Maximize the Impact of Your Audit Work. International Journal of Government Auditing, 36(1), 8-12.
• Dwiputrianti, S. (2011). How Effective is the Indonesian External Public Sector Auditing Reports Before and After the Audit Reform for Enhancing the Performance of Public Administration?. International Conference on Public Organization (ICONPO): Challenge to Develop a New Public Organization Management Era of Democratization, January 21-22, Yogjakarta, Indonesia.
• EUROSAI (2017). A Roadmap for Reaching Supreme Audit Institution Communication Goals, https://www.eurosai.org/handle404?exporturi=/export/sites/eurosai/. content/documents/strategic-plan/goal-team-1/Roadmap-for-Reaching-SAICommunication- Goals.pdf, Erişim: 27.12.2022.
• Frederickson, H. G. (1982). The Recovery of Civism in Public Administration. Public Administration Review, 42(6), 501-508.
• Frederickson, H. G. (2008). The Recovery of Civism in Public Administration. The Age of Direct Citizen Participation. (Ed.) Roberts, N. C., New York: Routledge.
• GIFT (2017). Budget Monitor in Georgia. https://fiscaltransparency.net/budget-monitor-ingeorgiahttp- budgetmonitor-ge-en/, Erişim: 19.11.2022.
• GIFT (2016), Citizen Participation in the Audit Process in Argentina, https://fiscaltransparency. net/citizen-participation-in-the-audit-process-in-argentina/.
• Glasser, M. A., Yeager, S. J. ve Parker, L. E. (2006). Involving Citizens in the Decision of Government and Community: Neighborhood-Based vs. Government-Based Citizen Engagement. Public Administration Quarterly, 30(1/2), 177-217.
• Gonzalez-Diaz, B., Garcia-Fernandez, R. ve Lopez-Diaz, A. (2012). Communication as a Transparency and Accountability Strategy in Supreme Audit Institutions. Administration & Society, 45(5), 583-609.
• INTOSAI (2010). How to Increase the Use and Impact of Audit Reports: A Guide for Supreme Audit Institutions. UK National Audit Office. http://iniciativatpa.org/wp-content/ uploads/2014/05/Increase-impact-of-audit-reports.pdf, Erişim: 22.08.2022.
• INTOSAI (2013). Communication and Promoting the Value and Benefits of SAIs. https:// www.eurosai.org/en/databases/products/Communicating-and-Promoting-the- Value-and-Benefits-of-SAIs/, Erişim: 10.08.2022.
• INTOSAI (2017). Guidance on Supreme Audit Institutions’ Engagement with Stakeholders. https://www.idi.no/elibrary/well-governed-sais/sais-engaging-withstakeholders/ 697-idi-sais-engaging-with-stakeholders-guide/file, 02.09.2022.
• INTOSAI (2019a). The Value and Benefits of Supreme Audit Institutions – Making a Difference to the Lives of Citizens. https://www.issai.org/pronouncements/intosai-p-12-thevalue- and-benefits-of-supreme-audit-institutions-making-a-difference-to-thelives- of-citizens/, Erişim: 07.09.2022.
• INTOSAI (2019b). Mexico Declaration on SAI Independence. INTOSAI-P 10. https://www. intosai.org/fileadmin/downloads/documents/open_access/INT_P_1_u_P_10/ INTOSAI_P_10_en_2019.pdf, Erişim: 13.09.2022.
• Javeline, D. ve Lindemann-Komarova, S. (2010). A Balanced Assessment of Russian Civil Society. Journal of International Affairs, 63(2), 171-188
• Kalu, K. N. (2003). Of Citizenship, Virtue, and the Administrative Imperative: Deconstructing Aristotelian Civic Republicanism. Public Administration Review, 63(4), 418-427.
• Karabacak, H. (2021). Kurumsal İletişimde İyi Uygulama Örneği Olarak Sayıştay Başkanlığının İletişim Stratejisi. Sayıştay Dergisi, 32(121), 9-37.
• Kassen, M. (2021). Understanding Decentralized Civic Engagement: Focus on Peer-to-Peer and Blockchain-Driven Perspectives on E-Participation. Technology in Society, (66), 1-15.
• Khan, M. A. ve Chowdhury, N. (2012). Public Accountability, Corruption Control and Service Delivery: Governance Challenges and Future Options. New York: UNPAN.
• Kim, S. (2010). Collaborative Governance in South Korea: Citizen Participation in Policy Making and Welfare Service Provision. Asian Perspective, 34(3), 165-190.
• Kim, S. (2015). Side by Side with People: Korea’s Experience on Participatory Auditing, Public Participation in the Budget and Audit Process (PPBA). World Bank, Learning Note, No: 1.
• Kweit, R. W. ve Kweit, M. G. (1980). Bureaucratic Decision-Making: Impediments to Citizen Participation. Polity, 12(4), 647-666.
• Lazarevic, M., Orza, A., Djindjic, M., Djukovic, S. ve Lazarevic, N. (2013). Civil Society and Citizens in the External Audit Process: Comparative Study of International Practices with Recommendations with Recommendations for Serbia. Belgrade: European Policy Centre.
• Mendiburu, M. (2020). Citizen Participation in Latin America’s Supreme Audit Institutions: Progress or Impasse?. Accountability Working Paper, No: 6, Accountability Research Center.
• Mendiburu, M. (2021). Citizen Participation in Auditing in Latin America: The Future Agenda. Accountability Research Center, No: 5.
• Moynihan, D. P. (2003). Normative and Instrumental Perspectives on Public Participation. American Review of Public Administration, 33(2), 164-188.
• Nino, E. (2010). Access to Public Information and Citizen Participation in Supreme Audit Institutions (SAI): Guide to Good Practices. World Bank Institute, Governance Working Paper Series, No: 80758.
• OSBRASIL (2022), Observatorio Social do Brasil. https://osbrasil.org.br/, Erişim: 01.10.2022.
• OECD (2011). Good Practices in Supporting Supreme Audit Institutions. Paris: OECD.
• OECD (2016). Open Government in Costa Rica, OECD Public Governance Reviews. Paris: OECD Publishing.
• OECD (2017). Mexico’s National Auditing System: Strengthening Accountable Governance, OECD Public Governance Reviews. Paris: OECD Publishing.
• OECD (2021a). Preventive and Concomitant Control at Colombia’s Supreme Audit Institution: New Strategies for Modern Challenges. OECD Public Governance Reviews. Paris: OECD Publishing.
• OECD (2021b). Public Governance in Costa Rica. https://www.oecd.org/governance/costarica- public-governance-evaluation-accession-review.pdf. Erişim: 06.11.2022.
• OECD (2022). Recommendation of the Council on Public Integrity. OECD/LEGAL/0435.
• OLACEFS (2016). On the Promotion of Citizen Participation in the Monitoring and Control of Sustainable Development Goals – 2030 Agenda. Declaration of Punta Cana. https://www.intosai.org/fileadmin/downloads/focus_areas/SDGs_and_SAIs/ regions_reports_activities_sdgs/SDGs_act_OLACEFS_Declaracion_PuntaCana_ EN.pdf, Erişim: 09.08.2022.
• Open Government Partnership (2017). Philippine Open Government Partnership (PH-OGP) National Action Plan 2017-2019: Co-Creating Governance Outcomes with the Filipino People. https://www.opengovpartnership.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/ Philippines_-Action-Plan_2017-2019_updated.pdf, Erişim: 10.12.2022.
• Özer, M. A. (2006). Yönetişim Üzerine Notlar. Sayıştay Dergisi, 63, 59-89.
• Pekkonen, A. ve Sadashiva, M. (2010). Social Audits. https://www.civicus.org/documents/ toolkits/PGX_H_Social%20Audits.pdf, Erişim: 22.11.2022.
• Pustu, Y. ve Aksüt, K. (2018). Başkanlık Rejiminde Yüksek Denetim: Güney Kore Örneği. Sayıştay Dergisi, 110, 29-61.
• Pyun, H.B. (2006). Denetim ve Sivil Toplum: Kore Deneyimi. (Çev.) Musa Kayrak. Sayıştay Dergisi, 61, 139-143.
• Riksrevisjonen (2021). Office of the Auditor General of Norway Annual Report 2020. https:// www.riksrevisjonen.no/contentassets/1855de07d48f4292a8d9b28fd8795af6/ annualreport2020.pdf, 01.12.2022.
• Romzek, B. S. ve Dubnick, M. J. (2000). Accountability. Defining Public Administration: Selections from the International Encyclopedia of Public Policy and Administration. (Ed.) Shafritz, J. M., Colorado: Westview Press. Publishing.
• Sarıbay, A. Y. (1996). Siyasal Sosyoloji. Ankara: Gündoğan Yayınları.
• Sintomer, Y., Herzberg, C. ve Röcke, A. (2008). Participatory Budgeting in Europe: Potentials and Challenges. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 32(1), 164- 178.
• Tan, M. G. P. (2019). Citizen Participatory Audit in the Philippines – Pilot Phase I (2012-2014). World Bank, Learning Note, No: 3.
• TESEV (2008). İyi Yönetişim El Kitabı. TESEV Yayınları, Ankara.
• Transparency International (2022). Corruption Perceptions Index 2021. https://images. transparencycdn.org/images/CPI2021_Report_EN-web.pdf, Erişim: 24.11.2022.
• Tribunal Superior de Cuentas (2022). Participacion Ciudadana. https://www.tsc.gob.hn/ web/participacion_ciudadana.html, Erişim: 09.12.2022.
• UN (2013). Citizen Engagement Practices by Supreme Audit Institutions. https:// publicadministration.un.org/publications/content/PDFs/Compendium%20of%20 Innovative%20Practices%20of%20Citizen%20Engagement%202013.pdf, Erişim: 21.09.2022.
• UN (2015). Promoting and Fostering the Efficiency, Accountability, Effectiveness and Transparency of Public Administration by Strengthening Supreme Audit Institutions: Resolution/Adopted By The General Assembly. https://digitallibrary. un.org/record/787478?ln=en, Erişim: 30.09.2022.
• UN (2022). United Nations E-Government Survey 2022: The Future of Digital Government. https://desapublications.un.org/sites/default/files/publications/2022-09/ Web%20version%20E-Government%202022.pdf, Erişim: 10.11.2022.
• Uysal Şahin, Ö. (2014). Vatandaş Odaklı Yönetim İçin Vatandaş Odaklı Denetim. Sayıştay Dergisi, 92, 35-63.
• Yaman, F. T. (2017). Katılımcı Demokrasi: Kapsam ve Unsurlar. Trakya Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 6(2), 136-160.
• Wampler, B. (2012). Participarory Budgeting: Core Principles and Key Impacts. Journal of Public Delibration, 8(2), 1-13.
• World Bank (2021). Supreme Audit Institutions Independence Index. Washington DC.
• World Bank (2022). Citizen Engagement Practices by Supreme Audit Institutions: Tools and Methods. https://www.e-participatoryaudit.org/module-02/citizen-participationin- the-audit-process.php, Erişim: 20.12.2022.