The unethical practices of accountants and auditors and the compromising stance of professional bodies in the corporate world: Evidence from corporate Nigeria

Owolabi M. Bakre

Accounting Forum, 2007, vol. 31, issue 3, 277-303

Abstract: Investors in Nigeria have lost several billions of dollars through the collusion of accountants and external auditors with companies’ management and directors to falsify and deliberately overstate companies’ accounts. As a consequence of unethical practices by accountants and auditors, which have resulted in the distress or occasionally the closure of companies, some indigenous Nigerian Managing Directors of multinational corporations such as Lever Brothers Nigeria Plc and Cadbury Nigeria Plc have been sacked and replaced with expatriates. Some companies placed under receivership have also lost billions of dollars due to professional misconduct by their official receivers. Contrary to the claim of ‘protecting the public interest,’ accountants and auditors may be partly responsible for cases of distress and closure of companies and banking institutions in Nigeria. However, the various Statutory Provisions and Acts relating to companies and professional bodies all place the responsibility on the accountants and auditors to detect and report to the regulators cases of suspected fraud and accounting malpractice. Through detailed consideration of cases of fraud, falsifications and deliberate overstatement of companies’ accounts, this paper examines the claim that the professional bodies are capable of protecting the public interest. It utilizes archival documents to provide evidence that suggests professional misconduct by accountants, particularly the members of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Nigeria (ICAN). The paper provides further evidence that ICAN has been reluctant to either investigate or sanction its erring members. The paper posits that the reluctance or inability of the ICAN’s “Investigation and Disciplinary Machinery” to either investigate or discipline the erring accountants and auditors suggests that whether by design or default, the ICAN’s “Investigation and Disciplinary Machinery” operates to shield the activities of its erring members in accountancy firms from critical scrutiny.

Date: 2007
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (14)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1016/j.accfor.2007.06.001 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:accfor:v:31:y:2007:i:3:p:277-303

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/racc20

DOI: 10.1016/j.accfor.2007.06.001

Access Statistics for this article

Accounting Forum is currently edited by Carol Tilt

More articles in Accounting Forum from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().