Audit and accountability
Public audit must allow an independent institution to examine records, methods and results without depending on the audited body’s narrative. In Candeia, different institutions receive different mandates for finances, integrity, rights, data and extraordinary situations.
Current limit. There is no completed state audit report at this stage. The former project-preparation checklist was removed from this public page because it does not constitute an institutional state audit.
Who audits depends on what is being examined
Revenue, expenditure, assets, funds, contracts, public enterprises and systems with financial effects.
Art. 259Assumptions, sustainability, fiscal rules, risks and consistency of medium-term planning.
Art. 260Administrative corruption, conflicts, asset declarations, professional representation of interests and institutional protection of whistleblowers.
Art. 263Maladministration, rights and independent review of access to information.
Art. 262Data processing, digital rights and high-impact automated systems within its mandate.
Arts. 80–82Scope → access → testing → finding → response → publication → correction
Independence
The audited body must not control auditor selection, the legitimate agenda or legally required access to evidence.
Audit does not replace due process
A finding of apparent wrongdoing is referred to the competent authority; an audit is not equivalent to a judicial or disciplinary conviction.
Reports will be published when they exist
The portal does not invent findings, expenditure, contracts, incidents or conclusions. Reports should appear only when produced by a competent authority and linked to their evidence and version.
Reference basis
This page explains the architecture envisaged in Candeia’s constitutional proposal. The unpromulgated text remains the project’s legal reference; the existence of a screen in Sistema Candeia does not create competence, a decision or an official act.