Internal Control System Weakness and Non-Compliance to the Provision of Legislation in Practicing Audit of Local Government in Indonesia
ABSTRACT
This study developed a statistical model of non-compliance reporting provisions of law and control of the system of internal control findings BPK. BPK is abbreviation for Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan, the Supreme Audit Agency in Republic of Indonesia. The purpose of this study was to analyze the factors that affect the outcome of the Supreme Audit Agency audit opinion received by the local government. This study has selected 371 samples to the local government for the year 2012. Research uses financial statement data in the form of government in 2012 soft copy of the Supreme Audit Agency and other publications. The results showed that non-compliance reporting provisions of low and system of internal control weakness has significant effect on the administration of the BPK audit opinion.
This study developed a statistical model of non-compliance reporting provisions of law and control of the system of internal control findings BPK. BPK is abbreviation for Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan, the Supreme Audit Agency in Republic of Indonesia. The purpose of this study was to analyze the factors that affect the outcome of the Supreme Audit Agency audit opinion received by the local government. This study has selected 371 samples to the local government for the year 2012. Research uses financial statement data in the form of government in 2012 soft copy of the Supreme Audit Agency and other publications. The results showed that non-compliance reporting provisions of low and system of internal control weakness has significant effect on the administration of the BPK audit opinion.
KEYWORDS
Agency Theory, The System of Internal Control, Compliance on the Implementation and BPK Audit Opinion
Agency Theory, The System of Internal Control, Compliance on the Implementation and BPK Audit Opinion
Cite this paper
Prasetyaningsih, E. , Yuhalifiyah, G. and Susanto, H. (2014) Internal Control System Weakness and Non-Compliance to the Provision of Legislation in Practicing Audit of Local Government in Indonesia. Open Journal of Political Science, 4, 257-264. doi: 10.4236/ojps.2014.44028.
Prasetyaningsih, E. , Yuhalifiyah, G. and Susanto, H. (2014) Internal Control System Weakness and Non-Compliance to the Provision of Legislation in Practicing Audit of Local Government in Indonesia. Open Journal of Political Science, 4, 257-264. doi: 10.4236/ojps.2014.44028.
References
[1] Abdullah, A. H. S. (2012). Hubungan dan Masalah Keagenan Di pemerintah Daerah (Sebuah Peluang Penelitian Anggaran dan Akuntansi). [2] Abdullah, S. H. A. (2005). Pengaruh Dana Alokasi Umum (DAU) dan Pendapatan Asli Daerah (PAD) terhadap Belanja Pemerintah Daerah: Studi Kasus Kabupaten/Kota di Jawa dan Bali. Proceeding Simposium Nasional Akuntansi VI, Surabaya, 16-17 Oktober 2003, 1140. [3] Arens, A. A., Elder, R. J., & Beasley, M. S. (2003). Auditing dan Pelayanan Verfikasi. Jakarta: PT Indeks. [4] Feyi, A. S. (2012). Evaluation of Financial Accountability in the Public Sector: A Necessary Concept For Good Governance. Global Conference on Business & Finance Proceedings, 7.1, 698-710. [5] Hapsari, S. I. et al. (2013). Penentu Jumlah Temuan BPK atas Sistem Pengendalian Intern dan Kepatuhan (Internal Control Compliance Comments) Pemerintah Daerah di Indonesia. Simposium Nasional Akuntansi XVI, Manado, 25-28 September 2013. [6] Ikatan Akuntan Indonesia (IAI) (2004). Standar Profesional Akuntan Publik. Jakarta: Salemba Empat. [7] Jensen, M., & dan Meckling, W. (1976). Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Cost and Ownership Structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3, 305-360.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X [8] Lane, J.-E. (2000). The Public Sector—Concepts, Models and Approaches. London: SAGE Publications. [9] Moe, M. T. (1984). The New Economics of Organization. American Journal of Political Science, 28, 739-777.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2110997 [10] Peraturan Pemerintah (PP) Nomor 60 Tahun 2008 tentang Sistem Pengendalian Intern Pemerintah (SPIP). [11] Peraturan Pemerintah (PP) Nomor 8 Tahun 2006 tentang pelaporan keuangan dan kinerja instansi pemerintah. [12] Pramono, R. (2007) Pengaruh Profesionalisme Auditor Terhadap Pertimbangan Tingkat Materialitas dan Proses Pengauditan Laporan Keuangan. Skripsi UNNES (Diakses 1 Mei 2012).
www.google.com [13] Republik Indonesia (2004). Undang-Undang Nomor 15, Tahun 2004 tentang Pemeriksaan Pengelolaan dan Tanggung JawabKeuangan Negara. Jakarta. [14] Republik Indonesia (2004). Undang-Undang Nomor 32, Tahun 2004 tentang Pemerintahan Daerah. Jakarta. [15] Republik Indonesia (2006). Undang-Undang Nomor 15, Tahun 2006 tentang Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan. Jakarta. [16] Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2013). Research Methods for Business. United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons Ltd. [17] Setiawan, W. (2012). Pengaruh Akuntabilitas Laporan Keuangan Pemerintah Daerah (LKPD) Terhadap Tingkat Korupsi Pemerintah Daerah Di Indonesia, Skripsi Program Sarjana Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Diponegoro Semarang.
[1] Abdullah, A. H. S. (2012). Hubungan dan Masalah Keagenan Di pemerintah Daerah (Sebuah Peluang Penelitian Anggaran dan Akuntansi). [2] Abdullah, S. H. A. (2005). Pengaruh Dana Alokasi Umum (DAU) dan Pendapatan Asli Daerah (PAD) terhadap Belanja Pemerintah Daerah: Studi Kasus Kabupaten/Kota di Jawa dan Bali. Proceeding Simposium Nasional Akuntansi VI, Surabaya, 16-17 Oktober 2003, 1140. [3] Arens, A. A., Elder, R. J., & Beasley, M. S. (2003). Auditing dan Pelayanan Verfikasi. Jakarta: PT Indeks. [4] Feyi, A. S. (2012). Evaluation of Financial Accountability in the Public Sector: A Necessary Concept For Good Governance. Global Conference on Business & Finance Proceedings, 7.1, 698-710. [5] Hapsari, S. I. et al. (2013). Penentu Jumlah Temuan BPK atas Sistem Pengendalian Intern dan Kepatuhan (Internal Control Compliance Comments) Pemerintah Daerah di Indonesia. Simposium Nasional Akuntansi XVI, Manado, 25-28 September 2013. [6] Ikatan Akuntan Indonesia (IAI) (2004). Standar Profesional Akuntan Publik. Jakarta: Salemba Empat. [7] Jensen, M., & dan Meckling, W. (1976). Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Cost and Ownership Structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3, 305-360.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X [8] Lane, J.-E. (2000). The Public Sector—Concepts, Models and Approaches. London: SAGE Publications. [9] Moe, M. T. (1984). The New Economics of Organization. American Journal of Political Science, 28, 739-777.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2110997 [10] Peraturan Pemerintah (PP) Nomor 60 Tahun 2008 tentang Sistem Pengendalian Intern Pemerintah (SPIP). [11] Peraturan Pemerintah (PP) Nomor 8 Tahun 2006 tentang pelaporan keuangan dan kinerja instansi pemerintah. [12] Pramono, R. (2007) Pengaruh Profesionalisme Auditor Terhadap Pertimbangan Tingkat Materialitas dan Proses Pengauditan Laporan Keuangan. Skripsi UNNES (Diakses 1 Mei 2012).
www.google.com [13] Republik Indonesia (2004). Undang-Undang Nomor 15, Tahun 2004 tentang Pemeriksaan Pengelolaan dan Tanggung JawabKeuangan Negara. Jakarta. [14] Republik Indonesia (2004). Undang-Undang Nomor 32, Tahun 2004 tentang Pemerintahan Daerah. Jakarta. [15] Republik Indonesia (2006). Undang-Undang Nomor 15, Tahun 2006 tentang Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan. Jakarta. [16] Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2013). Research Methods for Business. United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons Ltd. [17] Setiawan, W. (2012). Pengaruh Akuntabilitas Laporan Keuangan Pemerintah Daerah (LKPD) Terhadap Tingkat Korupsi Pemerintah Daerah Di Indonesia, Skripsi Program Sarjana Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Diponegoro Semarang.