The Board of Audit and Inspection of the Republic of Korea : Some Structural Aspects (Goals, Extrinsic Relations, and Service Organizations)

Abstract

In Korea, the separate monitoring system in the bureaucracy has a long history. The origin of such a system could be traced back to the ancient, royal inspectorate system in autocratic monarchs. Some thousand years ago, the King Sungjong of the Koryo Dynasty established he "Uesadae" which served as inspectorial agency of the bureaucracy. As an emulation of the Chinese system, such a separate monitoring mechanism had been existent in one form or another throughout the history until the end of monarchies in 1909. Monitoring systems in those days, however, were primarily designed to safeguard the loyal service of the servants of the king. Appointed by the king, the inspectorate (Uesa) of the state had powers to investigate the performance of the bureaucracy, and to decide and enforce his decisions. Area royal representative he had a strong power and prestige, and served, in some measures, as a separate channel of communication within the bureaucracy. Practically, however, his major mission was to facilitate the enforcement of the king's will throughout the territory, and to enlist the loyalty of peripheral offices of the kingdom. During the thirty odd years of thc Japanese occupation, financial audit of the Government- General of Korea was carried out by the Japanese Board of Audit (Section 3, Bureau 3), which belonged directly to the Japanese Emperor and maintained an independent status from the cabinet Within the Government-General of Korea, there was a small counterpart unit in charge of financial transactions and audit of accounts. In those days, thc control exercised by the auditing authorities was largely geared to a strict regularity control of state accounts and to prevention or punishment of thefts or other corruptive practices of the public service betraying the will of rulers. It was primarily for the protection of state rather than citizens' interests. There was no significant system for the control of the general administrative performance other than financial transactions.