The Authority was established pursuant to the Courts Administration Act 1993.
The Authority is independent of the legislative and executive arms of government. It is the means by which the judiciary of this State, acting independently of the Executive Government, controls the provision of the administrative services and facilities that the courts of the State require to discharge their judicial functions.
The State Courts Administrator is responsible to the Council for the management of the Authority’s assets and staff. The Council, Administrator and staff are collectively referred to as the ‘Courts Administration Authority’.
The judiciary are not regarded as being part of the Authority. However, their salaries and some salary related payments are included under Administered Items.
The structure of the Authority is shown in the following diagram:
Section 27 of the Courts Administration Act 1993 provides for the Auditor-General to audit the accounts of the Council in respect of each financial year.
The audit program covered all major financial systems and was directed primarily towards obtaining sufficient evidence to enable an audit opinion to be formed with respect to the financial statements and internal control.
During 1999-2000, Head Office functions that were the subject of audit attention included:
budgetary control and management reporting
receipting and banking
accounts payable
accounts receivable
payroll
asset register
revenue
general ledger
capital works.
The audit also incorporated a review of the:
developments made with respect to the Courts Case Management System;
financial systems at the Port Adelaide Magistrates Court;
Suitor’s Fund operations at the Supreme, Magistrates and District Courts and the Sheriff’s Office trust account;
Jury Election and Management Financial System;
management and operation of the Court Circuits;
progress made with respect to the implementation of the Financial Management Framework. Comments in relation to this can be found under the Attorney-General Department ‘Audit Findings and Comments’.
A management letter communicating issues arising from the audit was forwarded to the State Courts Administrator and a satisfactory response was received. The main issues raised by Audit related to the need to make procedural changes to enhance general financial controls over a number of activities.
The reviews of the specific auditable areas of coverage involved an assessment of the adequacy of accounting, record keeping and control, and the test verification of financial transactions processed and recorded during the year. The review identified a number of instances where internal control procedures either required improvement or were not applied consistently over the year.
While there were a number of control issues raised by Audit, substantive testing of transactions processed by the Authority did not reveal any material errors in the sample of transactions tested.
Audit has over the past few years reported on the progress made by the Authority in respect to the implementation of its Courts Case Management System (CCMS) and in particular has commented on the significant delays that the Authority has experienced in implementing the system, problems experienced with the software and project costs. The project budget was increased from the original estimate of $6.9 million to $10.4 million. The authority spent an additional $1.2 million on the project in 1999-2000 bringing the total expenditure as at 30 June 2000 to $9.3 million.
Developments with respect to the two components of the system during 1999-2000 are summarised as follows:
The civil component of CCMS became operational in February 1998. However, the Authority has since its implementation had to conduct further work and incur additional costs to correct the programming faults and increase its functionality.
As reported last year, an independent review of the civil component of CCMS was undertaken by KPMG in February 1999 which identified a number of control weaknesses with respect to:
Data integrity
Appropriateness/deficiencies in checks and balances
Auditability and traceability of financial transactions and records
Reconciliation between general ledger and CCMS
Change management
Adequacy of documentation and training
Security arrangements.
During the year the Authority finalised all enhancements to the civil component of the system. Costs capitalised for the year amounted to $364 000.
Any additional work carried out in the future on the civil system should be in the form of maintenance.
Criminal Component
As reported last year, in view of the problems encountered with the development and implementation of the civil component, the Authority made a decision during 1998-99 to cease the development of the criminal component of CCMS at the end of the functional design and specification stage. The Authority entered into negotiations with DMR Consulting Group (Australia) Pty Ltd (DMR) to disengage from this project.
The Crown Solicitor’s Office, on behalf of the Authority, established two Deeds of Settlement and Release. The first relates to the disengagement between the Authority and DMR and a settlement to reimburse DMR for the work undertaken on CCMS criminal component to date of cessation. The second is in relation to the termination of the relationship between the Authority and DMR regarding the sale and marketing of CCMS.
The Deeds of Settlement and Release were signed by the Authority and DMR in October 1999.
The Authority made a final payment of $855 000 to DMR for work undertaken on the criminal component of CCMS and to terminate the agreement between them in relation to this project.
As required by subsection 36(1)(a)(iii) of the Public Finance and Audit Act 1987, the audit of the Courts Administration Authority included an assessment of the controls exercised in relation to the receipt, expenditure and investment of money, the acquisition and disposal of property and the incurring of liabilities. The assessment also considered whether those controls were consistent with the prescribed elements of the Financial Management Framework as required by Treasurer’s Instruction 2 ‘Financial Management Policies’.
Audit formed the opinion that the controls exercised by the Courts Administration Authority in relation to the receipt, expenditure and investment of money; the acquisition and disposal of property; and the incurring of liabilities, were sufficient to provide reasonable assurance that the financial transactions of the organisation were conducted properly and in accordance with the law.
Government appropriation ($61 million) to the Authority in 1999-2000 was 89 percent of the Authority’s total funding sources as compared with 94 percent in the previous year. The Authority’s operating expenses include the costs incurred to collect significant revenue on behalf of the Government with respect to Courts fines and fees, $24.4 million in 1999-2000, which is directly credited to the Consolidated Account. This revenue is reported under Administered Revenues.
During 1999-2000, the Authority’s operating expenses and operating revenues increased by $2.8 million and $4.1 million respectively resulting in the net cost of services for the year decreasing by $1.3 million to $51.6 million. This result is mainly attributable to the Authority receiving $4.8 million ($0.7 million) from the Attorney-General’s Department Administered Account towards the costs of establishing the Fines Payment Unit to operate the new Fines Enforcement System. Further details with respect to this can be found under ‘Administered Items’ below.
The written down value of property, plant and equipment increased by $9 million to $122.7 million. The main factors contributing to the increase are:
a revaluation increment of land and buildings of $5.8 million (refer Note 21);
recognition for the first time of plant and equipment to the value of $668 000 (refer Note 20).
The Authority in cooperation with other Justice agencies established the Fines Enforcement System, the legislation for which was proclaimed on 6 March 2000, to improve the collection of outstanding fees and fines which at 30 June 2000 totalled $65.1 million ($60.7 million). Refer Note 2(g)(i).
A pilot call centre which was established in 1998 to trial the collection of outstanding warrants is now fully operational. The Authority has advised that revenue collected during 1999-2000 as a result of the follow up of outstanding warrants by the call centre was $2.8 million ($1.9 million).