Lebanese

Through history, the role and tasks of the state have been closely linked to political thought. At first, this role, as a result of the liberal doctrine that did not limit the individual's work and activities, was restricted to matters of public security, justice, defense and foreign relations. This political ideology, however, evolved under the influence of new philosophies, urging the state, in order to better serve its citizens, to focus not only on its traditional role but also on the economic, social, and cultural aspects.

As a result, the life of the citizens was put almost entirely in the hands of the state, which shifted from a guardian state to a welfare state.

Inevitably, these changes resulted in a significant increase in public expenditures which, in turn, led to levying higher taxes.

In light of this new evolution, public authorities realized that it was necessary to administer public funds with the greatest caution and integrity, in accordance with specific rules and regulations. For this purpose, Lebanon, following the example of developed countries, established a financial control entity, as stipulated in Article 87 of the Lebanese Constitution :

"The final yearly accounts of the Administration must be submitted to the Parliament for approval before the promulgation of the budget of the following year. A special law regarding the establishment of an Audit Court shall be enacted"

Financial control takes various forms: an internal control exercised from inside the executing units, and an external control undertaken by authorities from outside the executive system; a control prior to the commitment of the expenditure, and another following the execution, There are two kinds of control: the administrative and the judicial. In addition to the judicial, which aims at ascertaining the conformity of execution to established law, there is an economic control which focuses on the efficiency of spending, as measured by established criteria and standards.

The concept of budget has changed. As a result, we have an operational budget and a development budget. Similarly, the concept of budget control has changed. It goes beyond examining the legality of transaction to encompass the economic efficiency of using public resources and the achievement of their goals.

Aware of the importance of its role in the control of public funds, the Lebanese Audit Court is proud to present this official guide to all those interested in public affairs.

It contains an overview of the Court's history and development, in addition to the most important amendments to its regulations. It defines the goats to be achieved and the methods of control to be followed. Also, this guide includes a description of the relations of the Court with public authorities and with other control boards of the State, the scope of its activities in training and computerization, and its cooperation with regional and international financial control organizations.

The Court is intending to develop its administrative and financial rules so that they would follow the evolution of its work.

For this purpose, it will seek the enactment of a new organizational law, the enhancement of its own performance, and the adoption of an advanced system of computerization and programming, in addition to focusing on the improvement of its human resources through up-to-date training.

Ultimately, the goal of the Court is to chart a new path of discipline and behavior that would make civil servants entrusted with public funds feel and act as if they were managing their own funds. For this purpose they should consider their work not only a professional activity but also, and above all, as a public service. There is no doubt that the Audit Court will have to play a specific role in consolidating such values in public life.

Beirut, May 12,1997
President of the Audit Court
First President
Judge AFIF MOKADDEM

Establishment of the Audit Court

The establishment of the Audit Court was stipulated by Article 87 of the Lebanese Constitution, promulgated on May 23, 1926, but the Court did not come into being before 1951. It was constituted by virtue of Article 223 of the Public Accountancy Act, promulgated on January 16, 1951, which stipulates that:

Since its establishment, the Audit Court has been reorganized by many legislative acts, which represent, over a forty-five-year period, five main turning points:

1 - In 1952, the Audit Court was reorganized by Decree-Law No. 9 of 21/11/1952. In addition to the authority of posterior control, the Court was empowered to exercise a prior control, including the assessment of appropriateness.

2 - Decree-Law No. 9 of 23/12/1954 abrogated the Court's control over appropriateness, restricting its prior control to the legality of transactions.

3 - Decree-Law No. 118 dated June 12, 1959 restructured the Court. A law enacted by Decree No. 7366 was promulgated on August 18, 1961, repealing the Court's authority to approve the appointment of civil servants. This matter, and all other matters pertaining to the professional status of civil servants, came under the authority of the Civil Service Board.

4 - The Audit Court was reorganized by Decree-Law No. 82 dated September 16, 1983 which created for the first time the position of an account auditor. This legislation was amended by decree-law No. 5 dated March 23, 1985 which reestablished some of the provisions of Decree-Law No. 118 dated June 12, 1959, and later by Law No. 132 dated April 14, 1992, which enlarged the Court's permanent staff.

5 - Act No. 133 dated April 14, 1992 created a Financial Law Department at the Institute of Judicial Studies and required that the judges of the Court, including the councillors and the public prosecutor's assistants, be appointed from the graduates of this institute.

The Public Prosecution at the Audit Court

Pursuant to Article 25 of the Audit Court Organization Act, the public Prosecution at the Court represents the Government. It is headed by the Public Prosecutor, with assistant prosecutors assuming the same function under his supervision.

1 - To be informed of financial offenses, and to investigate and prosecute the violators before the Audit Court.

2- To submit written opinions on financial inspection reports referred by the President of the Central Inspection Administration, and to request the latter to perform any inspection or investigation required by public interest.

3 - To submit written opinions on the reports of the Judges of the Court, when these are related to the reconsideration of a case, the determination of jurisdiction, or to charging, discharging, or imposing fines.

4 - To request the concerned Chamber of the Court to reconsider an administrative decision taken within the framework of prior control or to reconsider a judicial decision.

6- To request the Public Prosecution at the Court of Cassation to prosecute any civil servant suspected of having committed or participated in any crime which may be detrimental to the public administration, the public funds, or the Treasury funds. To be initiated, the criminal prosecution needs no authorization from the relevant administrative authority.

It is within the authority of the Public Prosecutor to request the concerned administration to provide him with any needed document, explanation, or information. He may also request the controllers and auditors under his authority to conduct any on-site investigation, and he may listen, when required, to the statements of civil servants or witnesses.

The Administrations subjected to the Control of the Audit Court

Pursuant to Article 2 of the Audit Court Organization Act, the following administrations are subjected to the control of the Court:

2 - The municipalities of Beirut, Tripoli, Mina, Burj Hammoud, Saida, Zahleh - Al-Moallakah, and all other municipalities subjected to the control of the Court, and those which will be, in the future, subjected to its control by decree of the Council of Ministers.

3 - The public enterprises that are under the authority of the State or of municipalities subjected to the control of the Audit Court.

4- The control bodies which represent the State in the institutions under its authority, or to which the State guarantees a minimum profit.

5- The institutions, associations and all other bodies and corporations which have, through participation, assistance or credit, a financial relationship with the State or with municipalities, or with public enterprises under the authority of the State or municipalities.

The scope and procedures of control over the institutions, associations, bodies, and corporations, specified in paragraphs 4 and 5 above, are determined by a decree of the Council of Ministers, upon proposal by the competent minister and after consultation with the Audit Court. Until such a decree is issued, the provisions of Decree No. 13615 dated August 21, 1963, regarding the Court's control over certain institutions and associations, remain in effect.

It is to be noted, however, that a number of public administrations, such as the Beirut Harbor Authority and the State-owned Administration of Tobacco and Tombac (Regie), are still not subjected to the control of the Audit Court, although they are public enterprises of prime financial importance, with big budgets. We hope that, in the near future, they will be subjected to the Court's control like other public bodies and administrations.

Jurisdiction and Procedures of the Audit Court

I - JURISDICTION

1- A prior control, which covers both revenues and expenditures that exceed a specified amount, according to the nature of the transaction. This control aims at verifying the legality of the transaction, and its conformity to the Budget and to established laws and regulations. The Audit Court Organization Act considers this control as essential; it requires from public entities subjected to the prior control of the Court to obtain its consent before making any commitment with a third party. The law stipulates that any transaction violating this requirement cannot be put into effect, and that penalties will be imposed on the responsible officer, pursuant to Article 60 of the said Act.

2 - A posterior control, established by Article 45 of the said Act, which requires the evaluation of financial transactions from the time the spending is committed to the time of their execution and entry into the accounts.

1 - Control over the accounts, which are submitted by public accountants. It aims at controlling the legality of collection operations and their conformity to collection laws, and of the legality of payment documents and accounts,

2 - Control over financial officers, who manage public funds, Its objective is to penalize the violators of financial laws and regulations.

Public entities subjected to the control of the Audit Court may request its advice on financial matters

The Audit Court controls the documents of appointment of civil servants, and rules on their conformity to laws and regulations.

Paragraph 5: Control over any civil servant who uses his authority or influence to hinder or delay the application of a State Council decision.

"The Administration shall abide by the ruling of the State Council. Administrative authorities must comply with the legal situations described in the said rulings.

At the risk of liability, the moral person recognized by Public Law must execute the ruling of the State Council within a reasonable period, In case the execution is delayed with no valid reason, the wronged person may request the imposition of a Coercive fine to be determined by the State Council. This fine remains effective until the ruling is implemented Any civil servant using his authority or influence, directly or indirectly, to hinder or delay the enforcement of the ruling referred to in the preceding paragraph, shall be fined by the Audit Court for an amount not less than a 3-month salary and not more than a 6-month salary".

It is worth noting that there are, in some other countries, high supervisory agencies which exercise a simultaneous control, in parallel with the implementation process. The Lebanese Audit Court hopes that, in the future, it will be entrusted with such a control, which is considered as an efficient tool in supervising the implementation process, and examining its conformity to the terms and conditions of the contract, and to technical specifications.

II - PROCEDURES

Regarding revenues, the Audit Court examines the transactions referred by the competent authorities. Regarding expenditures, the Court examines the transactions referred by the controllers of spending committments at various ministeries and by the general controllers of municipalities. The rulings of the Court are given by administrative decisions.

The Audit Court exercises this control through conformity statements, an annual report, and special reports submitted to the President of the Republic, the Speaker of the Chamber of Deputies, the Prime Minister, and other concerned parties. These reports include the results of the Court's control and its recommendations. This is essentially a control over performance, a control that the Court could not previously exercise, due to a lack of technical staff.

The Audit Court examines the submitted accounts and rules on them through temporary or final decisions whereby the controller is considered a creditor, quit, or liable.

The Audit Court has jurisdiction over financial violations, either spontaneously during the verification of documents or through referral by the public prosecution at the Court, the Central Inspection Board, or competent authorities of the Ministry of Finance. In this respect, the Court rules through temporary or final decisions whereby the accused is acquitted or fined.

Advisory opinions are given by the Court upon the request of the agencies subjected to its control.

A judicial decision is issued ordering the withholding of any expenditure resulting from an appointment contrary to laws and regulations. In exercising its jurisdiction, the Audit Court relies on highly qualified judges, controllers and auditors. To increase the efficiency of its control over the various agencies, the Court has recently reinforced its technical staff with experts in civil engineering, computer science, and telecommunications.

Relations of the Audit Court with The Public Authorities

I - RELATIONS WITH THE LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITIES

The Audit Court is not under the administrative authority of the Chamber of Deputies, as is the case for some financial control agencies abroad. The Court, however, has a close relationship with the legislative branch. As a financial control agency, it offers a useful assistance to the Parliament.

The Court oversees the execution of the national budget, verifying the compliance of the executive branch with the Budget law enacted by the Chamber of Deputies. The Court prepares an annual report, which is submitted to the President of the Republic, to the Speaker of the Chamber of Deputies and to the Prime Minister. The Finance and Budget Committee and other competent parliamentary committees receive, in a hearing, the explanations given by the President of the Court or by his representative.

The settled budgetary accounts are submitted to the Audit Court by the Public Accounting Department of the Ministry of Finance, pursuant to Article 195 of the Public Accounting Act. The settlement, which represents the actual results of the Budget is examined by the Court. The Comments of the Court are submitted to Parliament which, pursuant to Article 87 of the Constitution, has to approve the settlement during the discussion of the draft budget law for the financial year following the year whose accounts have been settled.

When deemed necessary, the Court prepares special reports on specific issues, with appropriate recommendations. These reports are submitted to the President of the Republic, the Speaker of the Chamber of Deputies, and the Prime Minister.

The Court issues statements of conformity, which are transmitted to the Chamber of Deputies for distribution to the members.

Since the Audit Court has no jurisdiction over the ministers regarding financial violations, the Audit Court Organization Act requires the Court to inform the Chamber of Deputies of any violation committed by a minister.

II - RELATIONSHIP OF THE COURT WITH THE PRIME MINISTER AND THE COUNCIL OF MINISTERS

1 - An administrative link, as established by Article 1 of the Audit Court Organization Act, which stipulates that the Court is under the administrative authority of the Prime Minister and that it is located in Beirut,

2 - The inclusion of the Court's budget in the chapter of the Budget regarding the Council of Ministers.

3 - The referral of the Court's special reports on some issues to the Prime Minister.

1 - An administrative relationship, through the appointment of the Court's regular staff by decrees of the Council of Minister, upon proposal by the Prime Minister.

2 - A functional relationship, as established by articles 40, 41 of the Court's Organization Act. When the Court, in the context of its prior administrative control, disapproves of the proposed project, the Council of Ministers is empowered to rule on the issue submitted by the concerned administration. In such a situation, the decision of the Council of Ministers is a substitute for the approval of the Court.

Relations with the Ministry of Finance

Relationship with the Ministry of Finance.

The President of the Court draws up an expenditure plan, which is transmitted to the Minister of Finance.

In case of modification by the Minister of Finance, the Council of Ministers will make a final decision, after hearing the President of the Court.

Paragraph 2 : Transmission of formalities regarding expenditures subjected to prior administrative control.

These formalities are submitted to the Court by the controllers of spending committments, who are posted at various ministries and who are under the authority of the Ministry of Finance.

In connection with the Court's judicial control over public accounts, the Department of Public Accounting at the Ministry of Finance submits to the Court the consolidated accounts of public accountants.

The Ministry of Finance submits to the Court the reports of financial controllers posted by the Ministry at the public agencies subjected to the control of the Court.

The controllers of spending committments inform the public prosecutor at the Court of any violation of Articles 111 and 112 of the Public Accounting Act regarding expenditures committed in violation of the law or exceeding appropriations of the Budget.

All other competent authorities at the Ministry of Finance inform the public prosecutor of any of the violations mentioned in the Court Organization Act.

Relations of the Court with other Control Agencies of the State

1 - RELATIONSHIP WITH THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD

Regarding their professional status, all the employees of the Court, except the judges, are under the authority of the Civil Service Board and are governed by the Civil Service Statutes.

With the exception of judges, all controllers and account auditors at the Court are selected from the graduates of the Department of Economic and Financial Affairs at the National Institute of Administration and Development, which is under the authority of the Civil Service Board. All other employees are appointed in accordance with the Civil Service Statutes.

II -RELATIONSHIP WITH THE CENTRAL INSPECTION ADMINISTRATION

Paragraph 1: Relation of the Court with the Central Inspection Administration.

The Audit Court Organization Act empowers the Court and the public prosecutor to request the Central Inspection Administration to conduct any inspection or investigation in the public interest. If required, the Central Inspection Administration shall give priority to such requests.

The President of the Central Inspection Administration forwards copies of the financial inspection reports to the public prosecutor at the Court. The public prosecutor reviews these reports and returns them with his comments and suggestions to the Central Inspection Administration, in order to take the appropriate administrative and judicial measures against liable officers.

The law does not establish any direct relationship between the Court and the Tenders Administration. However, the prior administrative control of expenditures by the Court has established an indirect relationship with the committees in charge of tendering operations, through the Court's verification of the legality of the tendering procedures, and through memoranda to these committees about the modalities of their work.

Relations of the Court with the Agencies subjected to its Control

The primary objective of the Audit Court is not to watch out for errors and offences but rather to watch over the use of public funds. In light of this objective, the Court endeavors to clarify its relationship with the agencies subjected to its control, and to persuade them of the necessity of total cooperation for the sake of public interest, including the sound management of public funds.

- Providing the agencies subjected to its control with advisory opinions on financial matters upon their request, in order to ensure an orderly implementation of legal texts.

- Drawing the attention of public administrations and advising them on how to avoid gaps in administrative and financial matters, through the Court's decisions in the context of prior administrative control.

- Issuing instructions and circulars to be notified to public agencies by the President of the Court about the best ways of implementing financial formalities.

Activities of the Court in Training and Automation

A training unit is still lacking in the chart organization of the Audit Court. The Court, however, being conscious of the primary importance of developing its human resources, endeavours to improve the professional skills of its staff. On the occasion of adding new controllers and auditors to its regular staff in 1994 and 1995, the Court organized two training sessions at its headquarters, These sessions allowed the newly -appointed staff to attend lectures on financial and administrative topics by senior experts from the Court and from outside the Court. They also attended, in Beirut, training sessions in commercial accounting at specialized institutions.

Furthermore, the Court intends to organize, in the near future, a training session for the financial officers of public administrations, institutions and municipalities, in order to develop their abilities and improve their performance in the financial and administrative fields.

In the fields of automation and computerization, the Court acquired three computers, and concluded contracts with an engineer and an expert in computer science to supervise the use of these units. A committee was formed, including some judges from the Court, to computerize the documentation on the opinions and decisions taken by the Court in the context of prior administrative control and of judicial control as well. In 1994, according to an agreement between the United States Agency for International Development and the Lebanese Government, the Court received technical assistance from the Center for Legislative Development at the University of New York, which installed a computer network connected to a server, in order to help the Court in creating applications for the computerization of its activities.

Cooperation of the Court with Arab and International Supreme Control Organizations

In the context of a policy which aims at developing its capacities and consolidating its role on all levels, the Audit Court, being conscious of the importance of international cooperation in the field of financial control, has joined a number of specialized Arab and International Organizations, including:

Paragraph 1: The Arab Group of Supreme Financial and Accounting Control Agencies (ARABOSAI).

Lebanon is a member of this group and has participated in most of its conferences and meetings. In 1995, Lebanon, at the initiative of the President of the Court and with the approval of the Council of Ministers, hosted the fifth session of the general assembly of this group in Beirut. The session took place at the highest level and the President of the Lebanese Audit Court was elected chairman of the group and of its executive board. The various recommendations and decisions taken by the assembly helped in strengthening the basis of close cooperation between the Arab control agencies.

Paragraph 2: The International Organization of Supreme Financial Control Agencies (INTOSAI).

Lebanon renewed its contacts with this organization at the end of the war and participated, during the last two years, in its scientific and training sessions.

Paragraph 3: The Association of the Audit Courts of French-Speaking Countries.

The Lebanese Audit Court is a founding and a current member of this Association.

Autonomy of the Audit Court

In Lebanon, the Audit Court is an administrative court with financial jurisdiction. In this respect, it has to function in a setting which guarantees to the Court an autonomy and an immunity like those enjoyed by the Judiciary.

The international and regional organizations of Supreme Control Agencies, of which Lebanon is a member, have emphasized, in their decisions and recommendations, the necessity of ensuring an adequate autonomy for such control agencies.

However, it appears from the relations between the Court and the public authorities, including other control agencies, that there are factors which limit, to a certain extent, the autonomy of the Audit Court at the administrative and financial levels.

In Lebanon, the Audit Court is administratively under the authority of the Prime Minister, In this respect, it differs from similar agencies in other countries, which are independent although cooperating with all public authorities.

Regarding the appointment of the Court staff, including those of the lower categories, the procedure requires a decree to be taken by the Council of Ministers. Furthermore, the appointment, except for judges, must be made through the Civil Service Board. Thus, the fact of not giving the Court a direct recruitment authority is limiting its ability to develop its human resources so as to be in tune with the growth of its activities. In contrast, similar control agencies in other countries are empowered to recruit their own staff, which is a means of safeguarding their autonomy and strengthening their control.

The autonomy of the Audit Court is hindered by the fact that any modification of the Court's proposed budget by the Ministry of Finance must be submitted to the Council of Ministers. It is noteworthy that, in many countries, the proposed budget of similar control agencies is not subject to modification by the Government, and that it is approved as a line-item by the legislative authority.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the Audit Court hopes that this guide will provide researchers, politicians and all those interested in public affairs with sufficient information and explanation about its establishment, its role, its structure and methods of work, as well as about its relationship with the legislative and executive authorities, and with other control agencies.

The Audit Court is an administrative Court with financial jurisdiction and its task is to safeguard public and Treasury funds, and to take legal action against individuals who violate laws and regulations regarding the management and use of public funds, in this respect, we have tried to pinpoint some obstacles that impede its work and reduce the tightness of its control over the concerned agencies.

Aspiring to overcome these difficulties, the Court will seek to reach its goals through:

- The amendment of decree-law no 82/ 83 and its amendments (the Court Organization Act) in accordance with the criteria of effective control, so as to control and streamline public expenditures.

- A participation in the study of the draft Budget law and its items by the Finance and Budget Parliamentary Committee.

- The authority to rule on conformity, and to assess financial formalities not only from the judicial viewpoint but also regarding each individual project, assessing its economic efficiency and expected results.

Finally, we consider that the reinforcement of the Court's role as described above will make a very important contribution to the sound management and protection of public funds.

The Audit Court Organization Act

Promulgated by Decree-Law No.82 dated September 16, 1983, as amended by Decree- Law No.5 dated 23/3/1985 and by Act No. 132 dated April 14,1992

General Provisions

The Audit Court is an administrative tribunal with financial jurisdiction. Its task is to oversee the management of public and Treasury funds by:

- Controlling the use of these funds, and its conformity with laws and regulations.

- Trying the individuals who, in the management of public funds, violate financial laws and regulations.

The Audit Court is under the administrative authority of the Prime Minister. Its headquarters is in Beirut.

2 - The municipalities of Beirut, Tripoli, EI-Mina, Bourj Hammoud, Saida, Zahleh, AI-Moallakah, and the Municipalities which are under the control of the Audit Court or which will be placed under its control by a decree of the Council of Ministers upon recommendation by the Prime Minister.

3 - The public entities of the State and of the municipalities that are subjected to the control of the Audit Court.

4 - The control boards representing the State in the institutions supervised by the latter, or in the institutions to which the State guarantees a minimum profit.

5 - The institutions, associations, boards, or companies financially linked to the State, municipalities, or public corporations as a result of participation, assistance, or credit.

The extent and modalities of the control over the public corporations, associations, boards, and companies mentioned in paragraphs 4 and 5 of this Article shall be determined by decree of the Council of Ministers upon the proposal of the concerned minister and after consulting the Audit Court.

The provisions of Decree No. 13615 of August 21, 1963 shall remain in effect, until such a decree is promulgated.

PART I - COMPOSITION OF THE COURT

CHAPTER I - STAFF RULES

The Court staff is composed of judges, controllers and account auditors. It includes the administrative employees, and an independent Public Prosecutor's Office.

The President of the Court and the Public Prosecutor at the Court are appointed by decree of the Council of Ministers, upon proposal by the Prime Minister. They are chosen among the Audit Court's judges of the first two classes of the second category or higher, or among judges of the Judiciary or the State Council judges of the class equivalent to the first two classes of the second category at the Audit Court.

Before taking office, the President of the Audit Court and the Public Prosecutor take, before the President of the Republic and in the presence of the Prime Minister, the following oath:

The Presidents of chambers are appointed, by decree of the Council of Ministers upon proposal by the Prime Minister; they are chosen among the Audit Court's judges of the fourth class of the third category, or higher.

1 - The graduates of the Public Law Department or the Financial Jurisdiction Department at the Institute of Judicial Studies, in accordance with Article 76 of the Judicial Corps Act, on condition that the following substitutions be made with regard to the tasks specified in the said article:

- The President of the Audit Court instead of the President of the State Council.

- Two judges from the Audit Court appointed by the President of the said Court, instead of two State Council judges.

The provisions governing the trainee judges of the Judicial corps shall govern the trainee financial judges.

2 - By competitive examination organized, according to paragraph (3) of this Article, for the controllers at the Court who hold a Master's degree in law with, at least, ten years of experience as controllers.

3 - If appointments cannot be made in accordance with the two preceding paragraphs, then, exceptionally and for one time only, the councillors and assistant prosecutors may be appointed as a result of competitive examination organized by the Audit Court. The participants in this examination must meet the general criteria for civil service eployment. They must be holders of a Master's degree in Law (or in Lebanese Law where required), and must have, at least, ten years of experience in the practice of law or in any position requiring a Master's degree in Law.

The Audit Court's Council sets forth the rules of the examination mentioned in the preceding paragraph. It determines the subject matters of the competitive test, and the required average. It also appoints the examining committee and admits applicants. Admission decisions are final and not subject to any judicial review, including requests of invalidation for action in excess of powers and requests of compensation through full jurisdiction.

Upon recommendation by the Audit Court's Council, councillors and assistant prosecutors are appointed by decree of the Council of Ministers upon proposal by the Prime Minister. They are appointed at the lowest class of the salary scale determined for them. If the appointed person is a civil servant and the salary he receives is greater than that of the lowest class, he shall be appointed in a class for which the salary is equivalent to that of his original class.

Before taking office, the councillors and the assistant prosecutors take the oath stipulated by Article 4 of the present Act.

1 - The controllers at the Audit Court are appointed from the first-rank graduates of the Department of Economic and Financial Affairs at the National Institute for Administration and Development, provided that they hold a Master's degree in Law.

Exceptionally, within three months from the publication date of this Act, the Civil Service Board shall organize a special session to fill vacant posts among the controllers of the Audit Court.

2 - The account auditors are appointed from the first-rank graduates of the Department of Economic and Financial Affairs at the National Institute for Administration and Development, who hold a Master's degree in Business Administration or Accounting, or any other university degree related to accounting or finance, and who are considered by the Audit Court's Council as qualifying for the position of account auditor at the Court.

Exceptionally and for one time only, if appointments cannot be made in accordance with the preceding paragraph, the account auditors may be appointed by competitive examination organized by the Court pursuant to paragraph 3 of Article 6 of this Act. However, the examining committee must include a civil service employee of at least the third category, commissioned by the President of the Civil Service Board, and the participants in the competitive examination must be holders of any of the university degrees prescribed by the preceding paragraph.

3 - The chief controllers and chief account auditors of at least the second class, are selected from the staff of controllers and auditors who have completed five years of service at the Court, and have attended with success the Advanced Training Seminar at the National Institute for Administration and Development, specified in chapter II of Part II of the Institute's Regulations.

4 - The controllers and chief-controllers, as well as the auditors and chief-auditors, are appointed, upon recommendation by the Audit Court's Council, by decree of the Council of Ministers upon proposal by the Prime Minister. They are appointed at the lowest class of the salary scale determined for them. If the appointed person is a civil servant and the salary he receives is greater than that of the lowest class, then he shall be appointed in a class the salary of which is equivalent to that of his original class.

The grade and salary scale of controllers at the Audit Court shall apply to the account auditors of the said Court.

5 - The controllers and account auditors shall take the following oath before the Audit Court Council:

6 - The controllers, chief controllers, account auditors, and chief account auditors must refrain from taking any paid work or holding any position at the public administrations, institutions, municipalities, or boards subjected to the control of the Audit Court. In exchange, they receive the compensation stipulated in Article 24 of the 1980 Budget Act No. 4/80.

7 - Upon recommendation by the President of the Audit Court, all other employees are appointed according to the Civil Service Statutes. The grade and salary scale of the general administrative staff shall apply to them.

1 - The Audit Court's General Assembly is composed of the Court's judges and the public prosecution judges.

The General Assembly is chaired by the President of the Court. The lowest ranking member is the Secretary of the Assembly.

2 - In addition to its prerogatives, specified by Decree-Law No. 82 dated September 16, 1983 and by its amendments, the General Assembly issues advisory opinions on the work of the Court, upon request by the President of the Court, the Public Prosecutor at the Court, or five members of the Assembly, These opinions are for guidance; they do not bind the Court.

3 - The General Assembly is convened by the President of the Audit Court, who shall state the meeting date and the agenda of the Assembly. The members are notified at least ten days before the meeting date. The meetings of the meeting are not legally valid unless attended by, at least, one half of the members. Decisions are taken by a majority of the votes of attending members, and the Chairman has a deciding vote in case of an equal division.

5 - A report is prepared on each meeting, with a record of the proceedings and decisions. It is signed by the Chairman and the secretary of the Assembly.

Decisions solving the problems resulting from contradictory judgements and taken with the purpose of unifying various interpretations of the law shall be signed by all attending members.

Article 10: (of Decree-Law No. 118 dated June 12, 1959. The article has been reinstated by Decree-Law No. 5 (article 3) dated March 23, 1985).

The President of the Court, the Public Prosecutor, the councillors, or the assistant prosecutors may not be transfered to another administration without the consent of the Court Council, and may not be removed without a decision of the Disciplinary Council.

Article 11: (of Decree-Law No. 118 dated June 12, 1959; article reinstated by article 3 of Decree- Law No. 5 dated March \v 23, 1985).

The public prosecutor at the Court of Cassation shall acts as public prosecutor at the Disciplinary Board.

The public prosecutor at the Audit Court shall act as public prosecutor at the Disciplinary Board.

When the need arises, the administrative employee member of the Displinary Board may be selected from the civil service corps by the concerned minister.

The public prosecutor at the Audit Court shall act as public prosecutor at the Disciplinary Board.

Article 12: (of Decree-Law No.118 dated June 12, 1959 reinstated by article 3 of Decree-Law No. 5 dated March 23, 1985).

Regarding the Audit Court, the powers of the High Council of the Judiciary shall be exercised by a council composed of the President of the Audit Court, the public prosecutor, and the three highest-ranking judges at the Court.

A judge of the Court may be referred to the Disciplinary Board by the above-mentioned Court Council upon proposal by the President of the Court. Upon proposal by the concerned minister, the President of the Court and the public prosecutor may, also, be referred to the Disciplinary Board by a decision of that Council to be taken with the participation of both the Government Commissioner at the State Council and the Vice-President of the State Council.

Article 13: (of Decree-Law No. 118 dated June 12, 1959; article reinstated by article 3 of Decree-Law No. 5 dated March 23, 1985).

With the exception of the provisions of this Decree-Law, the judicial corps regulations and all other relevant legal texts shall apply to the judges of the Audit Court. The Civil Service Statutes shall apply to the controllers and administrative employees of the Court.

Articles 14, 15, 16 and 17: (have been abrogated by Decree-Law No. 5 dated March 23, 1985).

CHAPTER II - ORGANIZATION OF THE COURT

The President of the Court organizes the internal management of the Court and sets the procedures to be followed in the performance of the tasks entrusted to the Court. The President corresponds with all public administrations in a direct manner.

Upon recommendation by the Court Council, the Chambers of the Court are formed, and their work is distributed by decision of the President. If needed, this distribution shall be modified with the same procedure.

With the exception of constitutional powers granted to Ministers, the President of the Audit Court is permanently empowered with the financial and administrative prerogatives of the Minister, as specified by law. He is responsible for the spending committments of the Court, and for the control of spending transactions and their settlement.

The President prepares the budget of the Court, and sends it to the Minister of Finance. If the draft budget is modified be the Minister, the Council of Ministers shall make a final decision, after hearing the President of the Court.

In the absence of the President of the Court or his inability to fulfill his duties, the highest ranking President of Chamber shall substitute for him. In case of equal ranks, it shall be the eldest; in case of equal ages, the senior practicing judge; and in case of equal seniority the senior as civil servant.

The judge examines the transactions referred to him. With the panel to which he belongs, he discharges his duties of prior control, posterior control, and consultation.

The controller assists the judge in his task. In general, the same controller examines the accounts of a public accountant over the whole fiscal year. No controller may examine the accounts of the same public accountant over more than two consecutive years.

If necessary, the provisions of the preceding paragraph may be disregarged by decision of the President of the Court upon recommendation by the Court Council.

The administrative employees of the Court discharge their duties in accordance with by-laws put forth by the President of the Court, upon recommendation by the Court Council.

The work of controllers, clerks, and bailiffs is deemed valid unless forgery is proven.

The public prosecutor represents the government at the Court. In jurisdictional control, he appears in court, argues orally, and asks for documents he needs to submit his opinion in writing. Regarding the discharge of his duties, he may correspond directly with public administrations.

The assistant prosecutor exercises the role of the public prosecutor under the supervision of the latter.

If the public prosecutor and his assistants are absent, the highest-ranking councillor acts as a public prosecutor.

Competent authorities shall inform the public prosecutor at the Audit Court about any violation of this decree-law; and the Central Inspection Administration shall provide him with copies of financial inspection reports.

The public prosecutor examines these reports and returns them to the Central Inspection Administration with his comments and suggestions, in order to take the necessary administrative or judicial measures against the officers responsible for violations.

The public prosecutor may request the Public Prosecution Office at the Court of Cassation to initiate the criminal prosecution of any civil servant he suspects of having committed a crime detrimental to the public administration, the public funds, or the Treasury funds, or having participated in such a crime.

To be carried out, the criminal prosecution needs no authorization from the administrative authorities. Both the concerned administration and the Central Inspection administration are given notice of the said prosecution.

The Audit Court or the public prosecutor at the Audit Court may request the Central Inspection Administration to perform any inspection or investigation required by the public interest.

When requested, the Central Inspection Administration shall give priority to these inspection or investigation tasks.

The measures taken by the Central Inspection Administration against the violators do not preclude their prosecution before the Audit Court.

PART II - JURISDICTION OF THE COURT

There are two functions of the Audit Court: one is administrative and the other jurisdictional.

The administrative function is performed through: a prior control over the execution of the budget; reports prepared by the Court regarding the results of prior and posterior controls; and advisory opinions on financial issues.

The jurisdictional function is performed through the control of public accounts, and the control over any individual entrusted with the use or management of public and Treasury funds.

CHAPTER I - ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROL

There are two types of administrative control: a prior control and a posterior control:

The purpose of prior administrative control is to ascertain the validity of transactions and their conformity with the Budget, and with established laws and regulations.

The prior administrative control of the Audit Court is an essential formality; any transaction not submitted to this control is considered unenforceable. The concerned officer is prohibited from putting it into effect, subject to the penalty specified in Article 60 of the present decree-law.

Article 34: (As amended by Article 25 of Act No. 286 of February 12, 1994 on the 1994 Budget).

Regarding revenues, the following transactions are subjected to prior administrative control:

1 - Any transaction regarding the auctioning of revenues, when it exceeds five million Lebanese pounds.

2 - Any real estate sale transaction, when it exceeds five million Lebanese pounds.

Article 35: (As amended by article 42 of Act No. 622 of March 7, 1997 containing the 1997 general budget).

Regarding expenditures, the following transactions are subjected to prior administrative control:

- Mutual agreement contracts, including lease contracts, exceeding 50 million Lebanese pounds.

Donations, subsidies, and contributions exceeding fifteen million Lebanese pounds.

Article 36: (As amended by article 25 of Act No. 286 of February 12, 1994 containing the 1994 general budget).

Out-of-court settlements, are subjected to prior administrative control, when the amount of the dispute exceeds 15 million Lebanese pounds.

The transaction and all related documents are submitted to the Audit Court, and a copy of the covering letter is filed with the public prosecutor's office by:

2 - The controller of expenditures at the public administrations, and the officer responsible for controlling these expenditures at the public institutions and municipalites.

The President of the Court assigns the transaction to the competent judge, according to the work distribution schedule. He may, in the cases specified by the distribution decision or when deemed necessary, examine the transaction himself.

Prior control is performed by the competent judge, who examines the transaction or refers it to one of the controllers working with him. The controller studies the transaction and reports on it. If the judge approves of it, he returns it with his signature; if he disapproves of it, the transaction is reexamined by a panel composed of a chamber President and two councillors, one of them being the judge who first examined the transaction.

Transactions on revenues or expenditures exceeding 500 thousand Lebanese pounds are subjected to prior control by a panel composed of a chamber President and two judges, one of them being the concerned judge.

In case, the Audit Court has no authority to exercise prior control, the decision shall be made by the above-mentioned panel.

The Court rules on a transaction within ten days from the submittal date. If there is a need to request documents or clarifications, or to hear the concerned officer, the Court is given five additional days from the reception date of the requested documents or clarifications.

If the Court does not rule on the transaction within the time limit, the administration may recall the transaction and disregard the opinion of the Court.

- Regarding a revenue transaction, if the decision of the Court is different from the opinion of the authority that is competent to approve the transaction, this authority must abide by the Court's decision unless the concerned minister agrees to submit the dispute to the Council of Ministers.

- Regarding a spending transaction, if the decision of the Court is different from the opinion of the controller of spending commitments, the controller must abide by the Court's decision unless the Minister of Finance agrees to submit the dispute to the Council of Ministers.

- If the decision of the Court disapproves of the submitted project, the concerned administration may submit the dispute to the Council of Ministers.

The Council of Ministers rules on the transactions submitted to it by motivated decisions, after hearing the President of the Court. If this decision is contrary to the opinion of the Minister of Finance or to the decision of the Court, it shall be a substitute for the seal of the Court or the seal of the controller of expenditures.

In both cases, the decision of the Council of Ministers must be referred to the transaction.

The Court is informed of the decision of the Council of Ministers. The Court may include the issue in its annual report, or in a special report to be submitted to the Chamber of Deputies.

If requested by the concerned administration, the President of the Court, or the Public Prosecutor's Office at the Court, the Court may reconsider a decision taken in the framework of prior administrative control.

If not implemented during the fiscal year in which it was granted, the prior approval of the Audit Court is considered void.

The purpose of posterior administrative control is to evaluate financial transactions and their overall results, from the time they are concluded until the end of their execution and their entry into the accounts.

An annual . report and special reports are prepared regarding the results of posterior administrative control,

At the end of each year, the Audit Court submits a report regarding the results of its control, with proposals to amend existing laws and regulations which have a financial impact.

The General Assembly of the Court approves this report, after hearing the public prosecutor.

The concerned agencies and administrations are notified of the annual report, and have to respond within one month.

The annual report, the responses of the concerned agencies and administrations, and the comments of the Court on these responses, are submitted to the President of the Republic by the President of the Audit Court.

Copies of the report, responses and comments are transmitted to the Chamber of Deputies for distribution to the deputies. Copies are also sent to the Civil Service Board and to the Central Inspection Administration.

The annual report, the responses of the concerned agencies and administrations and the comments of the Court are published in the Official Gazette, and printed in a separate book to be distributed to administrations and agencies that are subject to the control of the Court.

When examining the annual report, the Parliament's Finance and Budget Committee and all other concerned parliamentary committees hear the President of the Audit Court or his representative and, if necessary the representatives of the public administrations and the concerned agencies, in order to obtain the clarifications they need.

When deemed necessary, the Court may submit to the President of the Republic, to the Speaker of the Chamber of Deputies, to the Prime Minister, or to the concerned public administrations and agencies, special reports on specific issues, together with appropriate proposals.

The Court issues, each year, a Statement of Conformity for each account submitted to its control, supported with documentary evidence, as specified by existing laws and regulations.

- The Speaker of the Chamber of Deputies for distribution to the deputies, and to the Minister of Finance if they pertain to the Budget accounts, to the accounts of the annexed budgets, or to any budget requiring the approval of the Chamber of Deputies. The provisions of Article 51 of the present decree-law shall govern these statements.

- The Minister of Finance, the supervising minister, the concerned agencies, and the competent authority which approves the settlement of the Budget accounts, in case the statements are related to Budget accounts requiring the approval of an authority other than the legislature.

CHAPTER II - JUDICIAL CONTROL

There are two types of judicial control: the control of accounts and the control of officers.

The purpose of this control is to rule on the legality of accouts of public accountants and of any individual who interferes, without having legal authority, with receiving or disbursing public or Treasury funds.

Taking into consideration its final decisions regarding the accounts of the preceding years, the Audit Court shall exercise its control over the accounts starting from fiscal year 1991.

2 - The legality of collection operations and their conformity to collection laws.

1 - The legality of documents used to make payments; and the conformity of the transaction to existing laws and regulations, to the Budget Act, and to the Budget appropriations.

The legality of receipt and payment transactions, and their conformity to the orders given by the competent authority.

The legality of the operations of receipt, storage, and delivery of items; and the legality of inventory lists.

1 - The legality of accounts and their conformity to established laws and regulations.

The Audit Court, audits and settles the accounts, and rules on them through provisional and final decisions.

The provisional decision determines the defects in the account and the obligations to be met by the accountant in response to these defects.

The final decision hold the accountant quit, creditor, or debitor. In the first two cases, if the accountant has left his position, the Court orders the authorities to clear his properties and his own funds from any restriction which may have been imposed on them, and to return to him the bond he has posted. In the third case, the Court enters a judgement against the accountant to pay the due sum within a specified period. If the debt is the result of force majeure circumstances, the Court may exempt the accountant from payment.

In case of death of the accountant, his estate can not be transfered to his successors until the Court issues a final decision on his account.

The concerned administration must submit the account to the Court within three months from the date of death.

In any case, if the Court does not issue a decision regarding the account within six months from the date of its submission, the estate of the accountant can be transfered to his successors, unless there is another legal impediment.

The control of officers includes any individual managing or using public funds or Treasury funds, and all those who receive or effect payments on behalf of the Treasury or for the benefit of the Treasury, as well as those who keep its books. The control includes also any individual who, with no legal authority, interferes with the management of the above-mentioned funds or with effecting the above-mentioned transactions. It finally includes all those interfering with any of the above-mentioned operations in preparing, controlling, or approving them.

Is considered an officer, for the purposes of this control, any person who is entrusted with performing the operations mentioned in paragraph 1 of this Article, whether by appointment, election, or contract. This includes the members of the decision - making boards while they perform the said operations, and any individual with no legal authority who performed, interfered with, or contributed to the performance of these operations.

Any officer who committed or participated in any of the offences mentioned below is liable to pay a fine from one hundred fifty thousand to one million five hundred thousand Lebanese pounds. This does not preclude civil obligations, and criminal and disciplinary penalties decided by the competent authorities:

2 - The committment of an expenditure without obtaining the approval of the controller of spending commitments.

3 - The failure to submit a transaction to the prior control of the Audit Court; or the execution of a transaction without abiding by the conditions decided by the Court.

4 - The non-compliance with the disapproval of the Audit Court, or that of the controller of spending commitments.

5 - The improper entry of an expenditure for the purpose of covering a transaction exceeding a budget appropriation.

6 - The execution of an illegal order received from a person other than his immediate supervisor.

7 - The illicit enrichment of a person transacting with the administration, or the attempt of such an enrichment.

8 - The committment of an error or a negligence, which may result in damage to the public funds or the Treasury funds.

9 - The failure to submit the requested accounts, documents, or clarifications to the Audit Court, or to the Public Prosecutor's Office at the Court within the time limits specificied by existing laws and regulation.

10 - The violations of the provisions governing to the management or use of public funds or of Treasury funds.

If it is found that the violations mentioned in Article 60 of the present decree-law have resulted in damage or loss to public or Treasury funds, the Court may, in addition to the fine stipulated by Article 60, punish the offender, with a fine calculated in proportion to the seriousness of the violation and to the gross salary of the officer if he receives a salary, or to the pay or fees he receives if he does not receive a salary.

The additional fine shall not be less than the monthly salary or the monthly benefits of the officer, or their equivalent, at the time of the violation, It may not exceed his annual salary or annual benefits, or their equivalent, at the said time. If the work of the officer is not remunerated the fine shall be between one thousand and ten thousand Lebanese pounds.

1 - The Court evaluates the causes of the violation and the extent of the officer's liability. The culprit shall be fined under the provisions of Articles 60 and 61 of the present decree-law.

2 - The officer receives no punishment if the transaction is cancelled before it is put into effect, or if it is found that he committed the violation according to a written order from his immediate supervisor, provided that he had drawn the attention of the latter in writing to the violation which may result from the execution of the order. In this case, the supervisor shall be held responsible and punished in accordance with Articles 60 and 61 of the present decree-law.

An officer who reports directly to the Minister shall not be exonerated, unless he had notified, within a week, the Audit Court and the public prosecutor at the Court of the memorandum he submitted to the minister before carrying out the order, and in which he had pointed out the violation resulting from the execution of the order.

3 - The Court may exempt the officer from punishment if it finds that is was impossible for him to be cognizant of the violation at the time it was committed, or that he committed the violation in order to ensure the proper functionning of public services, or to avoid a harm which undoubtedly would have affected these services.

4 - The Court may fine the officer and, at the same time, suspend the fine if it ascertains the good faith of the convicted officer, who may not benefit from more than one suspension in the same fiscal year in which the violation was committed.

The fines decided by the Court may not be cumulated except within the maximum limits stipulated by Articles 60 and 61 of the present decree-law.

The fines stipulated by Articles 60 and 61 may not be modified by administrative decision.

The Court must inform the Chamber of Deputies of any violation committed by a minister.

1 - The dismissal of the officer does not preclude his prosecution before the Audit Court.

2 - Charges are dropped and extinct through the death of the responsible officer or by lapse of time.

3 - The lapse of time for a violation shall be five years from the date it is committed if this date is known or, if unknown, from the date it is discovered.

The lapse of time period is counted from one day to an identical day; it may be interrupted only for one of the following reasons:

a - A request submitted to the Audit Court to examine the violation in accordance with the present decree-law.

b - The starting of procedures to investigate the violation, in accordance with the present decree-law.

d - An appeal to the Court of Cassation regarding the decision of the Audit Court on the violation.

The Court exercises its judicial jurisdiction as a regular Court composed of one President and two judges.

The provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure shall apply to the withdrawal and recusal of judges.

If the panel of the Court cannot be formed, it shall be completed by judges from the State Council, commissioned by the Prime Minister upon proposal by the President of the Audit Court and with the consent of the President of the State Council.

1 - The Court shall examine the violation either automatically or at the request of the public prosecutor at the Court.

For this purpose, the public prosecutor may start an investigation on the matter or extend the investigation already in process. He may hear the employees and witnesses, request the concerned agency to release the needed information, documents, and clarifications. He may order a controller to perform an on-site investigation provided that such an order be notified to the immediate supervisor of the violating officer before start of the investigation.

The provisions of Article 80 of the present decree-law shall apply to officers and witnesses, and the provisions of paragraph 2 of this Article shall apply to the request of information, documents and clarifications.

If the infraction is examined automatically by the Court, the same procedure shall be followed, and the competent judge shall act as a public prosecutor in this respect.

2 - The President of the Chamber assigns the case to the competent judge, who either examines it himself or refers it to a controller to assist him in the examination.

The judge may request the concerned public agency to release the written information and clarifications he needs, interrogate the suspected employee, hear the witnesses, propose the appointment of experts. He may also give a written order to the controller to perform any relevant on-site investigation, provided such an order is notified to the Head of the said agency before the start of the investigation.

The concerned agency must respond to the request within a time limit of no less than ten days. The deadline may be extended whenever necessary either automatically or at the request of the concerned agency.

The Audit Court may examine any file or document related to the case being examined, including secret files or documents.

The competent judge prepares a report on the results of the investigation, including a summary of the case and his own opinion.

Reports of the competent judges regarding the request of reconsideration, the determination of jurisdiction, the declaration of the account asbeing in balance or in debit, or the imposition of fines are referred, with documentary evidence, to the public prosecutor at the Court.

All other reports are referred to him upon his request or if the President or the concerned agency so decides.

The public prosecutor shall return these reports, together with his written opinion, within a time limit of ten days.

The interlocutory decree shall be notified to the accountant or the employee through the bailiffs in accordance with the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code, or by registered mail with acknowledgement of receipt, or by administrative means. A copy of the decree is sent to his immediate supervisor.

The concerned party must submit his defense within the time limit specified in the judgement, provided it is no less than 30 days. If no response is submitted by the deadline, the Court shall examine the case.

The case is examined in the deliberation room, based on exhibited documents. Decisions are taken by a majority of votes.

The concerned party is notified of the final decision in accordance with the provisions of Article 71 of the present decree-law.

The public prosecutor and the concerned ministry or administration are notified with a copy of the decision; a copy is also sent to the Ministry of Finance for enforcement of the decision, in accordance with the direct tax collection law.

The legal interest on the liability decided upon shall start from the date specified in the decision.

In all cases, the Audit Court may recommend to the concerned minister to take legal action against the officer in a criminal or administrative court, provided a copy of the recommendation is notified to the Central Inspection Administration.

The final judicial decisions of the Court may be appealed either by an application to reopen the proceedings or by an appeal to the Court of Cassation.

2 - The reconsideration of the decision takes place at the request of the public prosecutor, the Minister of Finance representing the Treasury, the accountant, the concerned officer, or the concerned administration or agency.

3 - The request for reconsideration is submitted by the accountant or the concerned officer within two months from the discovery or the emergence of a new, justifying fact. The acceptance of the request shall depend on the posting of a bond in the amount of ten thousand Lebanese pounds, paid in exchange for a Treasury receipt. This bond is appropriated by the Treasury as a revenue if the request for reconsideration is rejected, whether in the form or on the merits of the case. It is restituted to the accountant or officer in other cases.

4 - The reconsideration request does not prevent the execution of the contested decision, but the Court may grant a stay of execution, at the request of the accountant or of the concerned officer, if it finds that the execution may cause a great damage and that the request is based on serious reasons.

5 - The reconsideration process is carried out by the panel which issued the contested decision.

Within two months from the date of the decision's notification, an appeal may be filed with the State Council for lack of jurisdiction, violation of procedural rules, or violation of the law.

The appeal may be filed by the public prosecutor at the Audit Court or the Minister of Finance for the interest of the Treasury, or by the concerned officer, administration or agency.

In case of reversal of its decision, the Audit Court shall comply with the State Council's decision.

CHAPTER III - COMMON PROVISIONS

1 - For the purposes of prior and posterior controls, public officers, witnesses and experts are summoned to appear by the President of the Court Chamber.

A summoned person who does not appear in court is liable to pay a fine of twenty thousand Lebanese pounds. This fine shall be doubled each time the said person fails to appear, except for a legitimate reason.

The Court examines the case in accordance with Article 68 of the present decree-law.

2 - The experts at the Audit Court are selected from the official list of experts used by the Courts of General Jurisdiction.

The relevant panel at the Audit Court determines the fees of the expert, with the approval of the President of the Court. The fees are paid from the proper budget item or from the bond posted by the concerned party for this purpose.

The fees are determined in accordance with the provisions of Decree-Law No. 65 of 9/9/1983.

The modes of drawing from the bond mentioned in the present section (2) and the payment of the expert fees are set forth by the President of the Court, with the approval of the Court Council.

PART III - DOCUMENTS TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE COURT

The appropriate officers forward their accounts to the Audit Court in accordance with a special status, established by agreement between the said Court and the Ministry of Finance and approved jointly by the Minister of Finance and the President of the Court.

The appropriate officers of the municipalities and public institutions, governed by the Public Accounting Act, shall submit to the Court the accounts, documents, and relevant information, in conformity with the rules specified in the preceding Article.

The municipalities, public institutions, and all other agencies not governed by the Public Accounting Act, shall forward their accounts to the Court in accordance with a special status established by agreement between these municipalities, institutions, or agencies, and the Audit Court, and approved by the minister in charge of administrative supervision.

The Audit Court may request from the concerned administrations all the accounts, clarifications and documents needed to exercise its control.

If the concerned officer fails to submit the requested information, accounts and documents within the time limits, the Court may appoint, at the expense of the concerned officer, an expert who shall gather them for submission to the Court; in this case, it shall determine the fees of the expert. The provisions of Articles 71 and 80 of the present decree-law shall apply to the notification of appointent of the expert and to the determination of his fees.

After completing the examination of the submitted accounts and documents, and following its ruling on the case, the Court may keep these accounts and documents in its, archives or return them to their source, stamped with a special seal.

The Court may also decide to examine the documents at the offices of the administrations, municipalities, public institutions, and agencies subjected to its control. In this case, the Court requests from the concerned administration, municipality, institution, or agency to keep the documents in their custody.

The Audit Court and the Public Prosecutor at the Court are notified of all the texts concerning the appointment of civil servants at the administrations, institutions, and agencies subjected to the control of the Court.

If the concerned Chamber finds that a civil servant has been appointed in violation of the law, it shall issue a judicial decision prohibiting the disbursment of the resulting expenditure.

The concerned Chamber examines the case spontaneously, or at the request of the President of the Court or the public prosecutor at the Court. The investigation and the trial of the case shall proceed according to the provisions of the present decree-law regarding judicial control.

The decision of the Chamber is notified to the competent authorities for enforcement, as well as to the concerned party.

This decision may be contested according to the provisions of the present decree-law regarding judicial review.

PART IV - VARIOUS PROVISIONS

Public administrations and institutions, municipalities and other agencies subjected to the control of the Audit Court may request the advice of the Court concerning financial issues.

This advice, issued by the competent Chamber in accordance with the work assignment decision is a non - binding recommendation.

In case of divergent interpretations at the Court, in the course of exercising its various controls, the President of the Court shall submit the matter to the General Assembly, in order to reach a unified decision.

Unless otherwise stipulated, civil servants bound to take an oath before the Audit Court shall take the following oath:

PART V - FINAL PROVISIONS

(As abrogated by Decree - Law No 5 dated March 23, 1985 and amended by Act No. 132 dated April 14, 1992)

The documents of the Audit Court are archived for at least fifteen years. After this period, they shall not be destroyed or disposed of without the approval of the Court Council.

(As abrogated by Decree - Law No. 5 dated March 23, 1995 and amended by Act No. 132 dated April 14, 1992)

The fine stipulated by Article 60 of Decree-Law No. 82 of September 16, 1983 is increased from LBP500 to LBP150,000 and from LBP150,000 to LBP1,500,000 (One million five hundred thousand Lebanese pounds).

The fine stipulated by section (2) of Article 80 of the said decree-law is increased from LBP200 to LBP20,000.

The bond stipulated by Article 77 of the same decree-law is increased from one hundred Lebanese pounds to ten thousand Lebanese pounds.

The cadre of the Audit Court is determined according to Table No, 1, appended to this Act.

Act No. 132

Issued on April 14, 1992
This act amends some provisions of the Audit Court Organization Act.

Articles 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 of Decree - Law No. 118 dated June 12, 1959 and reinstated by Decree -Law No. 5 of March 23, 1985 are abrogated; Articles 92 and 93 of Decree - Law No, 82 dated September 16, 1983 are abrogated and replaced, together with Article 91, with the provisions thereunder:

All texts and provisions that are contrary to the provisions of the present Act or that are inconsistent with its content shall be abrogated.

Act No. 133

Issued on April 14, 1992
Pertaining to the Establishment of the Financial Law Department at the Institute Of Judicial Studies.

The following text is added to article 76 of Decree - Law No. 150 dated September 16, 1983:

A Department for Financial Law shall be established at the Institute of Judicial Studies. The Prime Minister, after hearing the opinion of the Audit Court's Council, determines the number of trainee financial judges to be appointed at the Department in order to become, after their graduation, financial judges of the last grade at the Audit Court.

In all matters pertaining to trainee financial judges, the Audit Court's Council replaces the High Council of the Judiciary; and at the Board of Directors of the Institute, the President of the Audit Court replaces the President of the High Council of the Judiciary. Two judges of the Audit Court replace two judges of the judicial corps appointed by virtue of a decision of the President of the Audit Court after the approval of the Audit Court's Council.

The trainee financial judges are governed by the provisions applied to trainee judicial judges.

- The First President of the Court of Cassation	President
- The President of the State Council	Member
- The Inspector General of the Ministry of Justice	Member

- The President of the Audit Court	President
- A councillor at the Court, appointed by the Court Council, who is not a Council member and of a rank equal to that of the judge referred to the Disciplinary Board.	Member
- A judge from the corps of the Ministry of Justice commissioned by the Minister of Justice. He must be of a rank equal to that of the councillor or the assistant prosecutor referred to the Disciplinary Board.	Member

- The President of the Audit Court or a delegate chosen among the presidents of Chambers.	President
- A councillor	Member
- A controller or an administrative employee of the same rank as the employee referred to the Disciplinary Board, chosen by the President of the Audit Court	Member

- The President of the Audit Court	President
- A judge from the State Council and a judge from the judical corps of the Ministry of Justice; both are commissioned by the Minister of Justice and must be of the same rank as the chamber President referred to the Disciplinary Board.	Members

LEBANON