Law and its interaction with accountants

Editor’s Note: The following is text of the remarks delivered by Attorney General Matthew Gregory before the Association of Pacific Islands Public Auditors conference on July 14, 2008, at the Saipan World Resort in Susupe.

I’m very happy to have been invited to speak before the 19th annual Association of Pacific Islands Public Auditors conference. You are the best and brightest in our region. The hope of the people of our region for better government through the end of government waste and corruption lies in this room. I rarely speak outside the courtroom, but I could not pass up the opportunity to address this most important body, particularly because it will be the last such conference for our Public Auditor, Mike Sablan.

I have had the pleasure of working with Mike Sablan for over 2 1/2 years, and I’ve known him for far longer. I am very sorry to see him go. I can say without reservation that his courage and honesty will be missed. Mike was incredibly innovative in ending the public auditor’s reliance on foreign workers. Today, he has shown that people from the CNMI can police themselves in matters of government ethics and public corruption. The naysayers said it couldn’t be done; he has proved them wrong. In addition, under his leadership OPA has repeatedly received the highest possible rating in its peer reviews.

The reason I bring these issues up is not simply to congratulate Mike Sablan upon a job well done, although that is one of the reasons. His career is illustrative of what we should all be doing in the service of our islands.

As I thought about this conference over the weekend, I naturally turned to what I know best, the law and its interaction with the world of accountants. The founding fathers of most of our islands understood the dichotomy between law enforcement and public audits. Notice that the public auditor and law enforcement roles are separate. This is one of the natural checks and balances in most of our governments. Above all, it shows the compromise between the public auditor’s desire to conduct clean audits and resolve problematic audits and law-enforcement desire to prosecute individuals for their crimes.

We sometimes forget that these roles sometimes cause tension in that both entities have slightly different goals. The law enforcement side will want to seek prosecution first and foremost, and utilize resources to the neglect of some audit work. The public auditor, as an accountant, will seek to complete as many audits as possible to reveal to the people as well as the government where public waste and graft exist.

The beauty of this dichotomy is that it forces both sides to compromise for the common good, as well as avoiding concentration of power in one individual or office. The office of the public auditor and law-enforcement must work hand-in-hand to set priorities that accommodate both goals. Remember that an audit is only the beginning of a criminal investigation, and resources are not endless in the islands. The audit is the beginning of this interaction between the public auditor and law-enforcement in which some cases are brought for prosecution, others are brought civilly to collect lost money, or in others the result is systemic reforms to prevent the problems from occurring again. Only through interaction of the two entities can the proper decision be made on how to proceed. Above all though, it is incumbent upon all of you to develop a relationship with your law-enforcement officers so that public corruption is punished, government money is collected through civil actions when a criminal case is not possible, and that when neither are possible, the audits inform the public so they can make good decisions in the next election.

Mike, it’s been a pleasure working with you and we will all miss you.