Independent oversight sits at the heart of any healthy democracy. Supreme Audit Institutions (SAIs) play a central role in this system: auditing how public resources are used, assessing the performance of public programmes, and providing assurance to citizens that governments are acting in the public interest. When these institutions are strong and independent, they contribute directly to transparency, trust, and accountability. This is further reinforced by Transparency International’s 12 pillars of a healthy public financial management system, which highlight the importance of independent assurance functions within a broader accountability system.
Yet independence is not a static concept. In recent years, shifts in political dynamics, constraints on public finances, and declining trust in institutions have highlighted the limits of relying on formal safeguards alone.
The OECD–IDI Global Project on SAI Independence (a joint initiative between the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the INTOSAI Development Initiative (IDI)) responds directly to this challenge, offering a timely and practical re-examination of what independence really means in practice. Launched in late May, the report provides an important opportunity to reflect on how SAIs, and other stakeholders in the accountability system can strengthen independence in today’s evolving governance context.
Looking beyond the law
Traditionally, SAI independence has been framed through legal and constitutional protections, notably the principles set out in the Mexico Declaration on SAI Independence. These principles are internationally recognised, including through United Nations General Assembly Resolution A/66/209, reinforcing that SAI independence is a cornerstone of effective public governance. Many countries have made progress in embedding these principles in legislation. However, the Global Project highlights a critical gap: legal frameworks do not always translate into real-world independence.
Drawing on global research, the OECD and INTOSAI Development Initiative (IDI) emphasise the importance of “informal factors” - the relationships, norms, perceptions, and institutional cultures that shape how SAIs operate day to day. These include interactions with the executive and legislature, public and media expectations, and the broader accountability ecosystem. The findings suggest that effective independence is as much influenced by these informal factors, as how independence is reflected in law. Even in jurisdictions with strong legislative protections, SAIs can face challenges such as limited financial and personnel autonomy, restricted access to information, or undue political influence.
By examining these dynamics across countries and regions, the Global Project moves the conversation from a compliance-based view of independence to a more nuanced understanding of institutional resilience and credibility.
The SAIs role in trust in the Accountability Ecosystem
A central insight emerging from the project is the concept of trust in institutions. The reputation of SAIs as fair, transparent, and credible organisations is not a by-product of their independence – it is a key enabler of it.
When SAIs are trusted by Parliament, the public, and other stakeholders, their findings are more likely to be acted upon, and their independence is more likely to be respected in practice. Conversely, when trust is weak, even well-designed safeguards can be undermined.
This highlights the importance of relationships. Independence does not mean isolation; rather, it requires SAIs to engage constructively with other institutions while maintaining professional distance. The Global Project underscores that transparent engagement across the accountability system, including with civil society and the media, is critical to sustaining independence over time.
Why this matters for New Zealand
New Zealand’s public sector is often regarded as having robust systems of accountability, supported by an independent Auditor-General and a tradition of transparent public administration.
However, the Global Project serves as a useful reminder that independence cannot be taken for granted. As global trends show, pressures can emerge from evolving political expectations, fiscal constraints, and changing public trust dynamics. Maintaining independence depends on ongoing attention to culture, behaviour, and institutional integrity, not just formal rules. Australasian Council of Auditors-General (ACAG) has highlighted challenges to auditor independence in its recent report on independence across Australian jurisdictions, underscoring that even well-established systems are not immune to pressure.
Recent engagement across the New Zealand and Pacific audit community, including integrity-focused discussions and webinars, reflects this broader perspective. These forums recognise that strengthening independence requires a shared commitment across parliaments, executives, auditors, and civil society.
Sustaining momentum in the Pacific
The publication of the OECD–IDI report is not an endpoint but a starting point. Across the Pacific, there is strong recognition that sustaining and strengthening SAI independence will require continued effort, collaboration, and practical follow-through.
For the Pacific Association of Supreme Audit Institutions (PASAI), this aligns closely with its long-term vision of promoting transparency, accountability, and integrity across the region. Strengthening SAI independence is a central part of this agenda, particularly in contexts where institutions operate with limited resources and face complex governance challenges.
Looking ahead, maintaining momentum will depend on embedding these lessons into everyday practice. This includes supporting SAIs to develop independence strategies, strengthening engagement with key stakeholders, and reinforcing the capabilities and cultures that underpin effective, credible institutions.
Ultimately, the Global Project reinforces a simple but powerful message: independence is not secured by law alone. It is sustained through trust, relationships, and a shared commitment to accountability. For New Zealand and the Pacific alike, this provides both a challenge and an opportunity - to ensure that the institutions designed to safeguard public resources remain strong, and resilient in the face of an evolving governance landscape.
