Irregular Expenditure
Irregular Expenditure — Investigation Backlog
Ageing of irregular expenditure awaiting the section 32 investigation that must precede condonation.
Why the investigation backlog matters
Irregular expenditure cannot lawfully be condoned, recovered or written off until the section 32 investigation establishes whether a loss was suffered and who is liable. When that investigation backlog ages, the cumulative balance simply grows and consequence management stalls, which is exactly the inertia the AGSA and the Standing Committee on Public Accounts criticise. AuditPro Core ages every open item against the investigation that must precede its resolution, so the accounting officer can prioritise the oldest, highest-value cases instead of letting the balance ossify.
The Numbers
AuditPro Core renders this view from your tenant's live, tamper-evident records. The figures below are illustrative sample data.
Awaiting investigation
R61 bn
▲ 6% vs prior year
Older than 3 years
R34 bn
Investigations completed
1 240
Average age
2.8 yrs
Un-investigated balance by age (R bn)
Backlog by entity type
| Entity type | Backlog (R bn) | Oldest item |
|---|---|---|
| Metros | 22.4 | 2018/19 |
| Local munis | 18.1 | 2017/18 |
| Provincial depts | 12.6 | 2019/20 |
| SOEs | 7.9 | 2018/19 |
Figures shown are illustrative sample data for demonstration. AuditPro Core renders these views from your own tenant's live, tamper-evident records.
The section 32 gateway
MFMA section 32 and its PFMA equivalent require an investigation to determine whether the irregular expenditure caused a loss before any recovery or write-off decision. Skipping this step makes a subsequent write-off itself irregular.
Ageing as a control metric
The age of an unresolved item measures how long consequence management has been deferred. A balance dominated by items older than twelve months indicates the determination process is not functioning.
Investigation capacity
Backlogs usually reflect a mismatch between the volume of new transgressions and the investigative capacity available. Tracking inflow against closure rate shows whether the entity can ever clear the balance at current capacity.
How AuditPro Core Bridges the Gap
- Ageing buckets: each open item is bucketed by time since detection so the oldest, highest-value cases rise to the top of the work queue.
- Investigation workflow: the section 32 determination runs as a tracked case with stages, owners and due dates, not a loose spreadsheet.
- Inflow versus closure: continuous monitoring compares new transgressions against investigations closed to expose a structural backlog.
- Audit-ready status: the backlog and its ageing export directly into the audit committee pack and the AFS disclosure narrative.
Key Takeaways
- No condonation, recovery or write-off is lawful before the section 32 investigation is complete.
- An ageing profile skewed beyond twelve months signals a stalled determination process.
- Compare inflow to closure rate to judge whether capacity can ever clear the balance.
- Prioritise by age and value so consequence management targets the most material delays.
See This on Your Own Data
AuditPro Core renders this dashboard from your tenant's live, tamper-evident records — every figure traceable to source.