OPA opposes prosecutorial power for auditors

By Marconi Calindas
Reporter

Public Auditor Mike Sablan is opposed to the idea of granting prosecutorial powers to his office, saying this “dangerous” and could potentially lead to abuse.

“Personally, I don’t believe that it is the right solution nor the right thing to do,” said Sablan, adding that there had been a lot of discussions the last couple of years if OPA should be given prosecutorial authority—at least for those investigations that OPA had initiated.

During a Rotary Club meeting held Tuesday at the Hyatt Regency Saipan, Sablan said the core responsibility of OPA is to conduct audits in accordance with established standards. “This office has to maintain some objectivity. It could be dangerous if an office, whether OPA or another office, is given the responsibility to audit, conduct and do investigative support that would make them the judge jury and investigator,” he said.

He said that having prosecutorial powers and being a public auditor are different because, aside from the conflict it could create, the position can be very susceptible to abuse.

“That could be a very dangerous situation,” he added.

The OPA currently does not have prosecutorial powers. Under the Auditing Act, when the OPA suspects a violation of the law, it refers the case to the Attorney General’s Office, which makes the decision whether to prosecute, conduct additional investigation, refer the matter to the federal prosecutor, or drop the case.

The issue came up after Saipan Chamber of Commerce president Alex Sablan suggested at the meeting that public auditors be given prosecutorial powers.

SCC’s Sablan pointed out that the CNMI has had recurring problems of an ethical nature. By having an independent agency such as the OPA having this authority, this could provide the opportunity to take people to court.

“They [OPA auditors] could diminish the problems we are having now,” he said, “by fixing the problem, by having this opportunity to focus on the problem.”

OPA’s Sablan said, though, that focus should be given more toward enhancing the prosecutorial independence of the AGO rather than transferring that responsibility. Currently, according to Sablan, his office is given the responsibility to monitor campaign spending.