From Audit Findings to Fiscal Accountability: Tracing the Institutional Transmission of Public Debt Oversight in Ghana, 2016–2025

The institutional processes through which public debt audit findings are translated into corrective action remain insufficiently understood, particularly where fragmented administrative records and fiscal stress coexist with established debt-reporting practices.This study examines the evolution of public debt reporting in Ghana between 2016 and 2025 and traces the institutional response to a substantial discrepancy identified in the Auditor-General's 2024 Whole-of-Government Accounts (WGA).A longitudinal embedded single-case study design was employed, combining systematic coding of Annual Public Debt Reports (APDRs) across eight disclosure domains with process tracing of the subsequent institutional response.Debt indicators were examined to contextualise the findings rather than to establish a causal relationship between audit intervention and fiscal outcomes.The analysis shows that annual debt reporting became an established practice, accompanied by broader disclosure of debt portfolio characteristics, costs, risks, guarantees, on-lending and contingent liabilities.Nevertheless, a GH¢138.91 billion difference was reported between the debt balance consolidated by the Controller and Accountant-General's Department (CAGD) and the corresponding Ministry of Finance record.Subsequent parliamentary scrutiny indicated that a substantial part of this discrepancy arose from differences in consolidation boundaries, following which the institutions reconciled their figures.This sequence illustrates how an audit finding can progress through detection, disclosure, deliberation and correction, although limited publicly documented evidence was identified of sustained improvements in preventive controls.Meanwhile, Ghana's debt-to-GDP ratio increased from 56.8% in 2016 to approximately 80% in 2020 before declining to 44.7% by the end of 2025, providing fiscal context without demonstrating that audit contributed to these changes.An Audit-Accountability Transmission Mechanism (AATM) is developed to distinguish the identification of audit findings from their institutional uptake and potential governance consequences.The framework highlights inter-agency reconciliation, parliamentary scrutiny and recommendation follow-up as critical mechanisms through which audit findings may be translated into corrective action and institutional accountability.The findings also demonstrate the importance of distinguishing discrepancies arising from different reporting boundaries from errors in underlying debt records.Effective public debt oversight therefore requires not only transparent reporting and independent scrutiny but also documented reconciliation procedures, traceable corrective actions and verifiable improvements in preventive controls.