“The statement of conducting an audit in ENA, more specifically, this audit, by and large, is a bluff”, said economist Artak Manukyan in the interview with Aravot.am. According to him, the audit does not mean conducting an audit to reveal the abuses made by the Electricity Networks of Armenia. The economist explains that generally the audit by its format cannot address the fraud because it should be distinguished between the financial audit and the other types of audits. The economist says that the financial audit inspects the accounting functions as to what extent the report is consistent with the balance. The other type of audit is the performance audit as to what extent it is effective and the compliance audit examines to what extent the company has worked in line with its internal definitions.
These are the functions of the audit, which, according to the economist, will not disclose the ENA’s frauds, to identify them the company should order a special kind of study, which is called possible exposure of frauds. Artak Manukyan noted that Ernst & Young company that ranks the third among the giant international companies has conducted an audit of ENA in the last 4 years. Ernst & Young company has the additional service to expose the possible frauds. But ENA should order this company, which, according to the economist, appears unlikely. In addition, Ernst & Young has conducted audit at ENA for 4 years and has examined the administration and management, while audit also provides directions on how to solve the existing problems, and as mentioned by Artak Manukyan, if this international company has conducting audit and in the end, ENA has appeared in this situation, then what is the point of this announced audit. To the point, the winner of the tender announced by ENA in the last 4 years, according to Manukyan, was Ernst & Young company. Thus, this audit, too, will provide nothing, and the public demand will not be met.
Nelly BABAYAN
