SALLY TIBBOT CONSULT MUST BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF ACCOUNTING AND AUDITING STANDARDS

 SALLY TIBBOT CONSULT MUST BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF ACCOUNTING AND AUDITING STANDARDS

By Comrade Abdul-Jeleel Samakin, a Financial Analyst

The audit report on Osun State covering the period 2018–2022, prepared by Sally Tibbot Consult, has generated significant public concern and professional debate. This matter transcends political considerations; it raises weighty regulatory and ethical questions that demand thorough and impartial scrutiny by the appropriate financial and auditing authorities. As the issue is whether the report complied with established accounting standards and whether it truly reflected a fair and accurate representation of the payroll and financial records it purported to examine.

An audit, by definition, is an independent examination of financial statements conducted to enable the auditor express an opinion on whether those statements present a true and fair view in accordance with an applicable financial reporting framework, such as the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). The strength and credibility of any audit depend on strict compliance with professional principles; independence, objectivity, materiality, integrity, professional competence, and due care. Once any of these pillars is weakened, the reliability of the entire report becomes questionable.

The Osun State Government has maintained that the report presented by Sally Tibbot Consult did not align with the required accounting and reporting standards and failed to meet the threshold of a true and fair view. The particular concern is the issue of auditor independence. Independence is the bedrock of auditing; it requires that an auditor perform duties without bias, undue influence, or personal financial interest in the outcome of the engagement. Where remuneration arrangements create a direct financial incentive tied to specific findings; such as a reported commission of 15 percent of the total value of identified “ghost workers”; a significant self-interest threat arises. Under globally accepted ethical standards and professional codes, such threats must either be eliminated or reduced to an acceptable level through safeguards. Failure to do so undermines public confidence in the audit process.

It was further reported that Sally’s Tibbot Consult had been engaged in similar job as far back as May 2016 in Kogi State, where comparable controversies allegedly arose. If such patterns are established, it raises serious concerns about systemic professional deficiencies rather than isolated oversight. A firm entrusted with auditing public institutions must demonstrate consistency, competence, and strict adherence to regulatory frameworks. Any repeated controversy suggests a need for comprehensive review of the firm’s practices and professional standing.

The auditing profession in Nigeria operates within a structured regulatory environment guided by the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA), the ethical and professional oversight of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Nigeria (ICAN), and compliance with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). These frameworks are not symbolic references; they are binding standards designed to protect the public interest, ensure transparency, and maintain professional credibility. Where an audit engagement appears inconsistent with these standards, it is not merely a contractual disagreement but a potential breach of professional obligations.

Auditors are bound by fundamental ethical principles: integrity, objectivity, professional competence and due care, confidentiality, and professional behavior. These principles exist to ensure that the auditor’s primary duty is to the public interest, not to personal or financial gain. If it is established that self-interest influenced the outcome of the Osun payroll audit, then the report cannot be regarded as dependable for public use. In such circumstances, regulatory and disciplinary mechanisms must be activated to protect both the profession and the public.

Appropriate actions may include legal review under principles of contract or tort where professional negligence or breach of duty is proven, as well as disciplinary proceedings by ICAN and other relevant regulatory bodies. Where violations are confirmed, sanctions; including suspension or withdrawal of professional license may be necessary to safeguard the integrity of the auditing profession. If repeated professional shortcomings are established, it would call into question the firm’s qualification to continue operating as a certified auditing entity.

This call for accountability is not rooted in sentiment but in the necessity to preserve the dignity and credibility of the auditing profession. Public sector audits carry enormous responsibility because they directly affect governance, fiscal transparency, and citizens’ trust in public institutions. To prevent further embarrassment to the profession and to uphold established standards under CAMA, ICAN regulations, and IFRS, any firm found wanting must be appropriately sanctioned.

Transparency, independence, and ethical compliance must remain non-negotiable in matters of public finance. Where these standards are compromised, decisive regulatory action becomes not just appropriate, but imperative.

20/02/2026