THE TURKISH COURT OF ACCOUNTS

1. THE TURKISH COURT OF ACCOUNTS THE EXPERIENCES OF THE TURKISH COURT OF ACCOUNTSIN ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT Derya KUBALI Principal Auditor, TCA

2. Part 2: ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT CONDUCTED BY THE TCA Environmental audit mandate : TCA Law No 832 (1996) Additonal Article 10–Efficiency and effectiveness audit mandate and duty(performance audit)

3. The environmental audits of theTCA After performance audit pilot studies are conducted, The first environmental audit(through performance audit) called “Preventing and Dealing with Pollution from Ships at Sea and in Ports” was performed.

4. Our national report was presented to the Turkish Grand National Assembly in 2002. The joint audit report was issued by the Coordinator Netherlands SAI under the name of “Marine pollution from ships – Joint report based on national audits 2000-2003”. Coordinated audit The first audit activity conducted through the collaboration with other countries.

5. TCA environmental audit activities The reports submitted to the Turkish Grand National Assembly: “Preventing and dealing with pollution from ships at sea and in ports ” “Protection of forests” “The Planning and audit of the coastal utilization” “Waste Management in Turkey” “Performance of Activities for the Protection of Air Quality in Turkey”

6. “ Preventing and dealing with pollution from ships at sea and in ports” Surrounded by seas on its three sides, Turkey is located in one of the busiest sea traffic areas of the world. Unfortunately, its seas are getting more polluted each day because of heavy maritime traffic, especially in the over-loaded Turkish Straits. As other states signing MARPOL Convention, Turkey clearly stated its wish its desire to eliminatepollution from operation of ships and minimize any accidental discharge.

7. Coordinated audit; Turkey and other six countries (Greece, Holland, Italy, Malta, South Cyprus Administration and the United Kingdom) of the European SAIs (EUROSAI) The audit criteria; MARPOL Convention Port State Control of Mediterranean Memorandum Barcelona Convention etc. “Preventing and dealing with pollution from ships at sea and in ports”

8. “Preventing and dealing with pollution from ships at sea and in ports” Audit scope: • to what extent the relevant institutions have constituted their policies regarding the prevention of pollution and they achieve accountability; • to what extent survey and controls of ships are succeeded in accordance with the international conventions and national regulations; • whether the waste reception facilities meet the needs in the ports; • to what extent the studies for dealing with pollution are efficiently conducted; • whether monitoring and punishing the polluters give the desired outcome.

9. “Preventing and dealing with pollution from ships at sea and in ports” Responsibleinstitutions: The Ministry of Environment, The Undersecretariat of Maritime Affairs, The Coast Guard Command, Relevant public administration authorities and metropolitan municipalities were audited; and The General Directorate of Coastal Safety and Ship Rescue and port authorities affiliated to different institutions and Turkish State Railways’ ports.

10. “Preventing and dealing with pollution from ships at sea and in ports” Audit findings: • Turkey is a partner in various conventions for the protection of seas and has international standards, but internal regulations remain insufficient and need improvement. • The Undersecretariat of Maritime Affairs has not been able to fulfill flag state and port state controls in line with the liabilities specified in international conventions. • The Undersecretariat of Maritime Affairs has not been able to control the activities of the classification societies to which it has granted certification authority

11. “Preventing and dealing with pollution from ships at sea and in ports” • No waste facilities exist in most of the ports. • What is important in dealing with pollution is to prevent the formation of pollution. Current penalty system was constituted with punishing after pollution approach instead of preventive measures. As penalties are given in accordance with the gross ton, the variety and size of pollution and the evil intent of the polluter have not been considered. Penalties given to ships are not fair and preventive. • It cannot be possible to follow and punish the polluters effectively due to the lack of sufficient means.

12. The impacts: • Ship Inspection Department and Marine Environment Department were established within the General Directorate of Maritime Transport of the Undersecretariat for Maritime Affairs. • The number of port state controls increased noticeably and a second control started to be applied on flag state ships. • Regulation on Collection of Wastes from Ships and Waste Control, prepared by the Ministry of Environment and Forestry and the Ministry of Transportation took effect in 2004. • the Law on Intervention in Urgent Cases in Pollution of Marine Environment by Petroleum and Other Hazardous Substances and Principles of Compensation of Loss”.

13. ‘Protection of forests’ Audit objective: In Turkey, according to the Constitution,total area of forests,of which the property cannot be transferred and which should be managed and operated by the State is20,7 million hectares, making up the 27% of the surface of the country. As forests are reducing in Turkey as they reduce all over the world, the Turkish Court of Accounts prepared a “Report on Protection of Forests” in order to identify the risks threatening forests and to help more effective and efficient conduct of safeguard activities.

14. ‘Protection of forests’ Audit scope: (the activities of the General Directorate of Forestry ) • Activities related to definition of the legal boundaries of the forests; • Licenses granted for various utilizations in forests; • Dealing with forest fires; • Dealing with forest pests and diseases; • Dealing with illegal acts on forests.

15. ‘Protection of forests’ Audit findings: • The legal boundaries of the forests have not been defined in the national land registry; it is been hard to reverse illegal clearings. • Giving licenses for establishment of facilities such as refuse disposal areas, wholesale markets, cemeteries, sports facilities, foundation universities, military facilities in forests (necessity of constructing them in forests is arguable) caused depletion of forests.

16. ‘Protection of forests’ Audit findings: • The destruction of forests stem mostly from the high value of land. (such as Fethiye, Marmaris, Köyceğiz, Antalya and Alanya) Forests, especially those near the economically very active and touristic sites have been cleared in most cases illegally. It has been very hard to reverse the illegal constructions once they have been built. In some cases, even the legal court decisions could not be enforced. • Identification of areas disqualified from forest is not based on scientific and objective criteria. Surveying committees sometimes carry out wrong applications and areas, which have not been actually disqualified from forest, are also excluded from forest areas.

17. ‘The Planning and audit of the coastal utilization’ Audit objective: Our country is one of the fortunate countries in the world with its seashores’ length and their variety and with the natural resources and cultural values on those lands; however the incorrect utilization of coastal lands creates a big environmental pressure. “Report on the Planning and Audit of the Coastal Utilization” has been prepared by the TCA with the purpose of taking legal and managerial precautions necessary for ensuring an efficient utilization of our coasts without harming the natural structure.

18. ‘The Planning and audit of the coastal utilization’ Audit scope: • to what extent the practices implemented at the coastal lands are planned; • whether the plans prepared are appropriate for the characteristics of the coasts; • what kind of problems are encountered during the planning studies; • to what extent the studies on the identification of the Coast Edge Lines are healthy; • whether the practices at coastal lands were audited effectively or not.

19. ‘The Planning and audit of the coastal utilization’ Audit findings: • Due to the lack of upper-scaled guiding plans, healthy plans can hardly be prepared. • Data does not exist regarding on which coasts the edge lines, which is the foremost element for planning, are designated. • Illegal buildings occupy large segments of the coasts where the land is valuable. These infringements persists despite the Constitution which specifically gives the government a duty to protect the coasts and states the coasts can be used only for public benefit and despite a large set of laws and regulations.

20. ‘The Planning and audit of the coastal utilization’ Audit findings: • In many instances, it is the municipalities and local authorities who violate the laws and permit and sometimes undertake the illegal construction. • Some authorities in charge of protecting the coasts defer their duties and tasks to others, after interpreting the laws and regulations in their favor. • The fact that the illegal acts are still going on through taking mesne profits at the coastal lands is perceived as an indication that occupations are condoned for the sake of profit.

21. Concluding remarks: • As a supreme audit institution for saking public benefit, SAIs can make significant contributions to the field of environmental management. • The TCA has accumulated a considerable experience in the field of environmental audit which is a new audit type, as well as having deep-rooted public audit tradition with its history of 146 years.

22. Thank you ASOSAI