Skip to sidebar Skip to main

Q45.

Are chains of command separate from chains of payment?

Score

SCORE: 0/100

Assessor Explanation

Assessor Sources

Compare scores by country

Please view this page on a larger screen for the full stats.

Relevant comparisons

Chains of command and the chains of payment are separate. This separation of competencies exist in the Ministry of Defence (MoD) and General Staff, but in the services and the command strcuture, the payment chain overlaps. In the services, the commander is responsible for both the command and payment chain [1, 2]. The standard payroll form includes, gross salary, allowances, and deductions, is provided by the Ministry of Finances and Economy [3].

There is no evidence confirming whether chains of command are separate from chains of payments; see the last country assessment (1). The Statute of Military Personnel presents, on the one hand, the hierarchical structure of the military (2) and stipulates on the other that soldiers are entitled to remunerations and benefits (2). No information could be found on whether chains of command are separate from chains of payment. Also, Presidential Decree No. 07-304, which regulates the salary index grid and the compensation scheme for civil servants does not provide any information on the civil service (3).

Salary payments should be made via the electronic Integral System of State Financial Management (SIGFE) that was created in 2004 to be rolled out by 2008. However, it’s unclear when the rollout was completed in the defence sector. There are indications that from 2016, in response to the deepening financial crisis, the government has stepped up efforts to update the salary database to weed out ghost public servants (1). In August 2018, President Lourenço in Presidential Decree No. 173/18 ordered the end of cash payments to public servants, though it remains to be seen how successfully the measures are implemented (2), (3).

There have been recurring media reports over the last few years on cases of illegal cash salary payments to soldiers that are employed by the president’s Security Office. According to a media report in September 2017, soldiers employed by the president’s Security Bureau have been threatened with imprisonment for complaining about salary delays and salary payments in cash, contrary to established procedures (4).

The payment chain starts with the salaries by category that are defined by the EP and that are within the national budget. The payment system is banking for the Armed Forces and is independent of the chain of command. In fact, the contracting regime is regulated separately from the Financial Administration System that deals with payments resulting from the different contracting procedures. Within the Code of Discipline of the Armed Forces it is considered a serious offense to unreasonably delay payment to personnel. [1] [2] [3] [4]

The chain of command is separate from the chain of payment in Armenia. Commanders have no authority to influence the rates for their staff. Monetary security is regulated through the Law on Remuneration of State Employees [1]. The law provides that all those holding state positions (defence sector inclusive) are subject to the principles and provision of the law. The law does not apply to the conscripts and students of military educational institutions. The monthly remigration of the latter is assigned through government decisions. In all other relevant cases, Clause 1 of Article 16 of the law provides the official rate for a particular position is composed of a basic wage rate and all additional payments that derived from the description of the position held. Article 23 of the law provides that all other payments and financial aid, social benefits inclusive, are regulated through the laws on social security of military personnel [2].

Salary and relevant allowances for members of the Australia Defence Force are determined by the Defence Force Renumeration Tribunal (DFRT), which makes Determinations, agrees to Workplace Renumeration Arrangements, and conducts hearings as required, among other duties [1]. The DFRT is set up as an independent body established by the Defence Act 1903 [2]. Salary payment is administered by the Defence Service Centre and local human resources offices, which are not in the military chain of command and are obligated to follow the Determinations of the DFRT [3].

It is almost impossible to get information on this subject. The issue of different chains of payment and command probably varies in different branches. It is not possible to obtain internal documents from the Ministry of Defence, the Border Troops, and the Internal Troops that pertain to this issue. Technically, the chains of payments are separate from the chains of command. According to a decision of the Cabinet of Ministers (2017), military personnel serving in the army and other armed units, as well as in other public bodies, shall be determined by the statutes approved by the heads of these agencies, taking into account their salaries and the types of money they provide. This decision envisages additional payments (allowances and bonuses) to the military in different positions, at the same time, in difficult circumstances, in need (1).
The Finance and Budget Office within the Defence Ministry is responsible for the payment of salaries of military servicemen in the army. The staff of this office consists of officers. There are allegations that the staff interfere with the payments to military personnel, in certain cases payments to soldiers and officers are sometimes reduced unofficially; funds allocated for certain works (construction, transport, etc.) in military units are not sent to the staff (cases of embezzlement), instead, the officers work use their money (2). For example, an expert says that most of the officers in the front line pay 250 AZN of their wages to a taxi service, even though the state budget allocates expenses for transportation expenses; these funds are embezzled (3).

The chain of commanders is not separate from the chain of payment. A commander can affect the payment of a soldier or personnel under his command [1, 2].

In Bangladesh, chains of command are separated from chains of payment. According to the 2015 document entitled Delegation of Financial Powers (updated in 2020) [1], Senior Secretaries or Secretaries of Ministries are Principal Accounting Officers (PAO), who are authorised to subdelegate this power to downstream offices. Through the respective Budget Management Committees formed under the Budget Management Act of 2009 [2], all PAOs are responsible for providing annual accounting statements to the CAG for auditing purposes. The Ministry of Defence also follows this standard procedure to adhere to the government’s Public Financial Management principles [3].

Payment is conducted by the Directorate General Budget and Finances, which is a seperate DG within the Defence structure [1]. There is thus a clear separation of the chains of command and payment.

Chains of command are separate from the chains of payment. Human resources management is performed by the Army’s Support Command, separate from operational commands. There is also a separate Personnel Management Section within the Ministry of Defence. The Law on Salaries and Allowances in the institutions of Bosnia and Herzegovina in Articles 13, 14, 15 and 16 determines the salary grades and fees for all categories of professional military personnel, meaning that commanders do not influence salaries [1]

Chains of Command are separate from Chains of Payment. Chains of Commanda are regulated in terms of the Botswana Defence Force Act (Cap. 21:05) and the Defence Force (Regular Force) (Officers) Regulations, as amended [1]. Payments are regulated in terms of the Finance Act and the Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Act [2].

The 2020 Assessment is not different from the 2015 Assessment on this matter. The Integrated System of Financial Management (SIAFI) [1] and the (Integrated System of Personnel Management) SIAPE [2] are still the systems that separately run payments and personnel from the chain of command. However, there are the cases where the single forces hire occasional services from professionals that are not from personnel from within the armed forces, as stated by the 2015 assessment; these payments require the need of the signature of a unit commander. However, they are exceptions and do not compromise the whole payment system.

The chain of command is completely different from the chain of payment (1). According to Article 19 (1) of Law No. 038 (2016) states, “the personnel of the Armed Forces have the right to remuneration while performing their duties and responsibilities” (2). The actual — “Intendance Militaire — is responsible for all payment, and supplies in the defence ministry. Besides, Article 19 (4) “any measure of broader purpose affecting the remuneration the employees of State civil service is, except necessary adaptation measures, applied with simultaneous effect to the personnel of the Armed Forces.” In the gendarmerie or the armed forces, the chain of command inspects departments and units, and each commanding officer performs an inspection at his or her own level of command, based on pre-established annual timetables, or without any notice, to ensure that every man or woman is on duty (3). However, under some circumstances, the remuneration of the personnel takes place within the unit. This often happens, especially for newly enrolled personnel, living in dormitories within the unit they belong to. To this end, Article 27 says that “the personnel of the Armed Forces have right to their unit-based housing,” and a little sum is taken from their salary for housing fees.

The chains of payment are separated from the chain of command given that the chain of payment is directly under the Ministry of Finance, which manages the salaries of all civil servants. However, the Presidential guards, who are civil servants, that have been co-opted from the different security services to serve the President of the Republic have certain privileges and allowances that come from the budget of the Presidency [1] [2] [3] [4].

Chains of Command are entirely separate from pay strucutres. Personal relationships have no effect on the payment of personnel and pay rates are standardised by rank/position. [1] [2]

There is some separation in the chains of payment, but only in the administrative sense [1]. The branches of the armed forces have the Department of Finance and Departments of Payments, in charge of the systems with the payments for all the personnel. There are also systems for allowances and payments, as the Contraloría General de la República (CGU) and the IMPER in the army. However, these units are subject to the military hierarchy and chain of command. There is no publicly disclosed policy that requires the mentioned separation. Moreover, investigations have highlighted weaknesses of the system, such as in cases of irregular allocations for travel expenses [2, 3, 4].

Chains of command are separated from chains of payment in the PLA. Payments are made by the Logistics Department of the Central Military Commission (CMC) and the personnel receives its salary according to grades and years of service (Article 31). [1] Cases where commanders bypass the system and influence salaries are not identifiable. [2]

The Colombian Government has the Nation Integrated Financial Information System (SIIF), [1] which aims to “coordinate, integrate, centralize and standardize national public financial management, in order to promote greater efficiency and security in the use of the resources of the General Budget of the Nation and to provide timely and reliable information” (Decree 2674 of 2012). [2] The SIIF is mandatory in all entities of the state. They must detail the programming, settlement, modification, and execution of the budget; the programming, modification, and implementation of the Annual Monthly Fund Programme (PAC), accounting management, and the collections and payments made by the National Single Account and other treasuries. [2] As such, payroll processes should also be reflected in the system. According to Procedure No. 10 of 2010 of the Ministry of Defence, [3] executing units must create the payroll or beneficiary list including the associated discounts. This list must be delivered to the Systems Group of the Administrative Directorate of the Ministry of Defence, who charges the payroll to the system. Once the payroll information is in the SIIF, the resources are requested from the Directorate General of Public Credit and the National Treasury, and sent to the General Management Unit to make the corresponding payments with authorisation from the Finance Directorate. Thus the payroll process is carried out independently of the chains of command.

The official chain of command (chaîne de commandement) at the MoD is separate from the chain of payment (chaîne de paiement) for civil servants (fonctionnaires publics). There is evidence of exceptions to this rule in the aftermath of the soldier uprisings of January and May 2017. The Directorate General of the Treasury (Direction Générale du Trésor) is generally tasked with paying civil servants. This is known in French as the “masse salariale de la fonction publique”. The Treasury deposits the money in banking institutions. For example, in April 2018, a tranche of the wage arrears and salaries promised to military officers was disbursed via the Caisse générale de retraite des agents de l’Etat (CGRAE) (1). In addition to the Directorate General of the Treasury, the Directorate of the Office of the Armed Forces has a significant role in the calculation of the pays and allowances serviced to the members of the armed forces. This service although headed by a general directly falls under the authority and command of the chief of staff of the army. Hence, there is hardly any delineation between these two chains of action.

As per Law No. 2016-1109 (Portant Code de la Fonction Militaire) of 16 February 2016, Chapter 3 (Solde, avantages divers, garanties et protection), Articles 32-37, address the allowances provided to members of the military. For example, Article 33 refers to the different types of remuneration: basic salary, special compensation, residence allowances, family benefits and other bonus payments. Article 35 refers to per diem payments to cover transportation and lodging. Article 37 covers paid annual leave of 45 calendar days. But there is no provision specifying the payment channel (chain of payment) (2). Law No. 2016-1109 provides for a special remuneration regime for higher-ranking military officers such as marshals and generals. Title 3 (Dispositions particulières à certaines catégories de militaires), Chapter 1 (Maréchaux et officiers généraux), Articles 114-120 outline this special remuneration regime. There is no provision specifying the payment channel (2). In November 2012, there were instances in which certain soldiers were being paid their salaries in cash. The news aggregator Koaci.com reported that a source had revealed the different places where soldiers were secretly being paid to avoid long lines at banking institutions. According to the source, this alternative payment method was adopted by President Ouattara shortly after coming to power (3).

In January 2017, the opposition daily “Aujourd’hui” revealed the salary levels (grilles salariales) of members of the military according to their rank. The leaked information was not confirmed by the Army Chiefs of Staff. However, the source did not state what entity was tasked with paying the salaries. (4)

In May 2018, France’s La Tribune said the second phase of wage arrears payments had been completed as part of the government’s early retirement scheme for members of the armed forces (FACI). There was an official ceremony in Akouédo (Abidjan) to celebrate the measure, aimed at retiring 4,000 military officers by 2020. During the ceremony, Minister of Defence Hamed Bakayoko several officers were symbolically provided with checks valued at about USD 30,000 (15 million FCFA). No details were provided as to how the wage arrears had been disbursed (5). In November 2018, Koaci.com reported that Minister of Defence Hamed Bakayoko had addressed the NA Commission on Security and Defence (Commission de la Sécurité et de la Défense, CSD) regarding the draft legislation for Order No. 2018-515 (Ordonnance No. 2018-515 Portant Sanctions Administratives Applicables aux Militaires) of May 30, 2018. The draft, adopted unanimously by the CSD, confirmed the administrative penalties that apply to members of the armed forces. Minister Bakayoko stated that the State was responsible for paying salaries and allowances of the members of the armed forces and that all the outstanding arrears claimed by the soldiers had been paid by November 2018 (6).

Based on the examples above, it can be said that the chains of command are “generally” separated at the MoD.

Chains of command are separated from chains of payment. All matters related to HR are managed by the Ministry of Defence Personnel Agency [1]. The Personnel Agency is an agency within the combine of the Ministry of Defence. Defence Command Denmark is the military agency within the combine of the Ministry of Defence. It is the superior, coordinating, and governing authority for the Defence [2]. Thus, the Personnel Agency and Defence Command are two separate and equal agencies within the combine of the Ministry of Defence [3].

According to our sources, the chains of commands and chains of payments are not separate, evidence shows that commanders punish lower officers and soldiers by deducting and reducing their salaries for a month or more (1), (2), (3).

The pay brackets are public and approved by the Minister of Defence. [1] Within those brackets, superiors have the right to decide what will be the exact individual pay. The superior has the right to promote and increase the pay. However, the Commander of the Defence Forces has the last say. [2] The immediate commander of the military serviceman evaluates [3] the compliance of the military serviceman in his or her subordination with the peacetime post for at least once a year. The remuneration for the Commander and other top personnel is allocated by the Minister. [4]

Superiors cannot arbitrarily influence the payment of employees. Payment of each employee consists of task specific payment and personal performance level payment [1]. Payments are taken care of by a separate financial administration unit (Palkeet) to which the public sector payments have been centralised [2].

Chains of command are strictly separated from chains of payment throughout the Ministry and armed forces. These are two separate branches, as seen on the organisational chart of the Ministry of the Armed Forces (MOAF) [1] : the Etat Major deals with operations (land, air, sea command), whereas the Secrétariat Général pour l’Administration (SGA) handles payments.

The Federal Office of Administration is in charge of salary payments. Payments are governed by the ‘Federal Civil Service Remuneration Act’ (‘Bundesbesoldungsordnung’) [1]. Superiors are only allowed to suggest performance bonuses or allowances, which then have to be communicated to/coordinated with the respective HR department [2].

Chains of command are separated from chains of payment (3), (4), (5). The Forces Pay Regiment (FPR), which operates under the Support Services Brigade Group, processes the payments in the Ghana Armed Forces (GAF) (1), (2). However, there is a lack of transparency, in so far as the payment system is not published, and therefore it cannot be excluded that for certain areas exceptions might be in place.

Section 214 (c) of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana empowers the Chief of Defence Staff to make regulations in respect to the control and administration of the services of the Armed Forces and the conditions of service. These include those relating to the enrolment, salaries, pensions, gratuities and other allowances of officers and men of each service and deductions from them. The Regulations on Administration and Discipline further elaborate on the laws (6).

Chains of command are strictly separated from chains of payment. There are no known examples of exceptions to this [1, 2]. The MOD’s Financial and Accounting Centre is responsible for payments.

The Ministry of Defence (MoD) Defence Economy Bureau [1] is a separate agency within the MoD, and it is the responsible body for the payments. As payment categories are defined clearly by law, officers have to respect these regulations.

Chains of command are separate from chains of payment. The Defence Accounts Department (DAD) comes under the Ministry of Defence with the Controller General of Defence Accounts as the Head of the Department. The duties of the DAD are broadly audit, payment and accounting of all charges pertaining to the Armed Forces, including bills for supplies and services rendered and for construction/repair works, pay and allowances, miscellaneous charges, pensions etc [1]. All three military branches have their own Accounts branch and budget [2].

According to Minister of Finance Regulation No. 190/PMK.05/2016 [1], the payment process in state agencies is carried out by treasury officials, including the Budget User (PA), Power of Budget User (KPA), Commitment Making Officer (PPK), Officer for Signing of Payment Order (PPSPM), National General Treasurer (BUN) and BUN Authorisation and Expenditure Treasurer. This regulation explains how the chain of payment in the Ministry of Defence is specific and different from the general chain of command because it relates to the national treasury. However, as Budget User (PA), the Ministry of Defence still holds the authority for the execution of expenditure, including personnel expenditure. In addition, this is still carried out by the appointed KPA, both in the Ministry of Defence and the TNI. The PA (Minister of Defence) and the designated KPA are generally commanders who are also authorised in the chain of command. The difference is, in the chain of payment, the KPA delegates the authority and responsibility for using the budget to the Budget Section of the Ministry of Defence/TNI. Subsequently, the chain of payment is implemented by the PPK and assisted by the Officer for Signing of Payment Order (PPSPM), Expenditure Treasurer and Officer for Personnel Spending Administration (PPABP) [2,3]. The PA (Minister of Defence) as the administrative manager/Chief Operational Officer (COO) serves as the ordonansering, which has the authority to conduct tests for billing to the country, order payments and assign budget responsibilities within the relevant ministries/agencies [4]. The PA continues to have an impact on the PPK because, in the context of implementing the State Budget, the PA delegates payment tasks to the KPA, which directs the PPK to take action that results in the spending of the State Budget [4], including employees’ salaries. If the PPK exercises its authority beyond the authority bestowed by the KPA, the PPK is in violation of the rules and may be subject to applicable law.

In theory, chains of command are separated from chains of payment. It is outlined in detail in Article 15 and article 16 of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ (IRGC) Constitution [1].

Chains of payment are vulnerable to manipulation in the absence of formal oversight and transparency. The prevalence of ghost soldiers in the recent past and missed or unpaid wages in certain PMF factions is strong evidence that payment chains are vulnerable. Coverage concerning payment discrepancies emerges often, in the context of units administered by Iraq’s PMF commission. To curb these problems, Iraqi premier Adel Abdul Mahdi at the 8th National Security session launched an electronic payment platform for the disbursement of MoD government salaries. Months later, local press coverage revealed that the system had been hacked. It is not entirely clear, due to contradictory information, whether sensitive information was obtained. Manipulation of payment is most rife in the domain of retired military pensions even though the National Pension Agency exercises oversight over such allocations. What remains unclear is whether budget allocations of PMF salaries are enough to cover the total number of fighters that the PMF is comprised of.

The army’s 5th Division allegedly reports to “the militias’ chain of command” according to US and coalition officials. This partly stems from Haider al Abadi’s decision to task Badr Organization commander Hadi al Ameri to be in charge of Diyala province’s security. While the MoD has its own chain of command, it is unclear which group’s follow its formal military chain of command. It is not uncommon for militias to refute allegations relating to its separate command structures, as well as their members dispatched into unauthorised military missions outside Iraq’s borders. The lack of transparency makes it difficult to distinguish or draw separating lines between official and unofficial chains of command. Another source verifies the latter, arguing that (1) the PMFs chain of command “at times overrides the prime minister”.

As for salaries, there is no identifiable chain of payment. As one interviewed source distinguished, the “MoD funds the army, while MoI funds PMF’s paramilitary groups and the police” (2). The Hashd Commission is allocated government funds they are expected to be distributed among fighters. There are obstacles, the source interviewed described “a state within a state” (2). While the government of Iraq helps paramilitaries to purchase arms and receive salaries, many of these groups compete against formal chains of command, the interviewee told TI. One can deduce that chains of command and are not necessarily separated, there is a dual chain of command, one for the army, and another for paramilitaries. “Hashd (PMF) seniors are those in control of wage disbursement,” a military affairs expert told TI (3).

Chains of command are seperated from the chains of payment in the Israel Defence Forces (IDF). The defence budget is part of the general budget that the coalition is trying to approve in the knesset. The department of budgets in the Ministry of Defence is the body who suppose to carry all the planning every single year (1). The department is not a chain in the IDF but the Ministry of Defence and therefore not obligated only to the army. The high command appoints a general to the role of Financial Advisor to the Chief of Staff, and he is handling the budgeting of the armed forces with the chains of payments.

According to the Organisation Chart, the “technical-administrative area” is formally separated from the “technical-operative area” [1]. Even though both the General Defence Secretary and the National Armaments Director depend on the Chief of Defence Staff for technical-operational matters, the division of the chain of command from the chain of payment is formally ensured.

The Law regarding the Salary of the Personnel of the Ministry of Defence (MOD) regulates salary and allowances for the broadest categories of employees of the MOD. [1] It applies to Self-Defence Force (SDF) officials, SDF personnel instructors and certain categories of MOD civil servants (primarily career path civil servants). [2] One article in this law refers to an attached table that shows the salary for each pay step within the pay schedule for each rank, [1] and a different article stipulates that the salary is to be paid directly to the employee on a set date each month. [1] Detailed rules for determining pay step within a pay schedule are to be determined in ordinances. [1] This law and the related regulations would constrain an attempt by persons in the chain of command to intervene in the chain of payment and unfairly change the payment of salary and allowances to employees. Institutions in the MOD and the three service branches of the SDF each have separate, and in many cases several, units that are in charge of paying salary and allowances to employees. For example, the Minister’s Secretariat is responsible for paying employees of the internal bureaus of the Ministry and the SDF Council for Personnel Affairs. [3] To take a service branch as an example, a circular with the bylaws for handling pay for the Ground SDF contains rules that separate accounting functions from command functions. The head of the finance service in the relevant army corps is to ensure that there is a pay record for each employee which is kept in the custody of this service. [4] The personnel section of the company is to determine the income of each employee, based on specific documents. [4] The bylaws include detailed procedures for checking that all payment relevant information about employees is correct and for certifying that salary and allowances have been paid. [4] Nevertheless, a MOD Official stated at interview that chains of command are not separated from chains of payment. [2] A lack of such separation is found in some regulations. For example, pay is in part determined by personnel assessment conducted by an employee who holds a supervisory position with regard to the employee being assessed. [5] Such personnel assessment may affect promotion to a higher pay step within the pay schedule for a specific rank. [6] However, Career Picks, a website operated by a private company, which provides information on pay and promotion by the SDF as well as by employers in a variety of other business sectors, does not give examples of unfair or incorrect change of pay by commanding officers or as a result of personnel assessment. [6] Nor were any reports of unfair or incorrect changes of pay for MOD or SDF personnel found in the mainstream newspapers Asahi Shimbun, [7] Nikkei Shimbun, [8] or Yomiuri Shimbun. [9] A relevant issue is, however, that an MP asked a Question to the Minister in 2016 about an allegation that a Lt. Commander had not received any pay rise for several years because he had acted as a whistleblower. Nevertheless, this is a stand-alone case, the contents of which the parties involved do not agree on (see Q36C). There is, thus, strong evidence that chains of command are separated from chains of payment in the sense that persons in the chains of command do not intervene in the chains of payment.

The armed forces are considered the largest public sector employer in the country [1]. There is evidence from local news reports that suggest that payments to all public sector employees are made electronically, thus meaning that they are separate from chains of command [2]. There is no evidence to support that chains of command are linked to chains of payment in any way, or to suggest that there are exceptions in the separation between chains of command and chains of payment. However, there are exceptions where the commander-in-chief has authority over things such as bonuses and expenditures related to critical operations [6,7].

Fiduciary Management of the Ministry of Defence is separated. The day-to-day management of the ministry is the Cabinet Secretary (CS) under the CS is Principal Secretary (PS) and thereafter the senior management of three commanders from the Kenya Army, Airforce and Navy. [1] The three fall under the Chief of Defence Forces (Gen). The finance (budget) committee in the military is chaired by the Chief of General Staff, with the Chief of Finance (usually a brigadier) as its secretary.

The other members include the Vice-CGS, the Senior Deputy Secretary (the accounting officer), the service commanders (of the army, the air force and the navy), the assistant CGSs and the Chief Finance Officer (a civilian). [2] According to section 16 of the KDF Act Service Commanders are the only ones responsible for ensuring the implementation of the budget relating to the service. [3]

Within the Ministry of Defence and the Kosovo Security Forces, the command chain is separated from the payment chain [1]. The Regulation on Salaries in the Kosovo Security Force states that the the Ministry of Defence plans for salaries annually and based on the needs and requests recommended by the Kosovo Government based on the Mid-Term Expenditure [1]. Furthermore, salaries of members are paid on a monthly basis directly into personal bank accounts [2]. This payment system is managed by the Government and administered using an economic budget code developed by the Ministry of Defence [2].
The Regulation on Internal Organisation and Settlement of Job Positions in the Ministry of Defence states that the Sector for Personnel Policy, Retention and Documentation (SPRD) – which functions within the Department of Personnel Policies and Recruitment – drafts the policies and carries out the financial analysis of salaries, compensations, additional allowances, daily allowances and other financial requirements for the Ministry of Defence and the Kosovo Security Forces. This SPRD also drafts the annual budget according to the Medium Term Expenditures Framework for salaries, additional allowances and daily allowances. The Head of this Sector reports to the Head of Department on Personnel Policies and Recruitment within the Ministry of Defence [3].

Chains of command are not separated from the chains of payment. Article 24 of the police law and 27 of the military law gives both ministers the power to allocate the funds given to them by the central Government as they see fit, and it is their job to set up their own system of auditing and regulations to make sure no money is stolen (1 and 2).

These chains of command are separated and the system implemented works well. The issuing of an official order for the payment of bonuses is in violation of Section 11 of the Law “On the Prevention of Conflict of Interest in the Activities of State Officials” according to which a public official is prohibited, in the performance of the duties of a public official, from preparing or issuing administrative acts or other acts in which this public official has a personal or interest interest. In order to avoid conflicts of interest, the decision on the award of bonuses must be made by another senior official or collegiate body. [1] [2]

The chain of command and the chains of payment are not separate. The Finance Unit under the Directorate for Financial and Administrative Affairs handles payments funding for soldiers (1). The Directorate is linked to the Chief of Staff through Decree No. 3771/81 Article 9 (2).
Although the Directorate for Financial and Administrative Affairs handles the monetary funds, the Quartermaster Directorate is responsible for the allocation of the personal salaries of every single MoD employee; it is completely separate from the chain of command (3).

Chains of command are strictly separated from chains of payment, which is overseen and regulated by law: payments and allowances are coordinated by the Ministry of Defence, not by commanders, and basic pay is not discretionary. No media reports suggest that chains of payment are broken [1]. Payment rates of Ministry of Defence officials are published on the Ministry of Defence’s website [2].

Payments for procurements are controlled by the Finance Division of the Ministry of Defense. At the same time, there is a separate corps in the military called Urusan Gaji Angkatan Tentera (UGAT) or the Salary Management of Armed Forces, to deal with salary payments. [1]

The weak budgetary system and heterogeneity of management methods does not facilitate optimal allocation of maintenance funds. Allocations are often channelled to other uses, as highlighted by the embezzlement of military bonuses.³ Overall, the inadequacy of follow-ups and funds for effective upkeep and maintenance threatens the usability and sustainability of new investments provided for in the Ministry of Defence’s budget request.¹
Another weakness of the accounting practice in the military sector is the lack of a division of accounting positions into principal and secondary accountants, as is the case in all other ministries.² Instead, commanders of administrative centres have a dual role with implementation (fund authorisation) and accounting functions similar to those of principal accountants in civilian administration. Similarly, military accountants are not required to be accredited to an official with power to authorize payments. Thus, the principle of separation of authority between officials who authorize payment and those who oversee how money is spent is compromised, with the consequent implications for accountability.²
The Bertelsmann Foundation remarks that steps to improve Mali’s institutional framework returned to the agenda in 2014 and 2015.⁴ It cited a “transformation linking spending systems at the central and local levels, to improve budget documentation and provide up-to-date information on budget execution”. Moreover, medium-term expenditure frameworks have been extended, to translate into budgetary terms the Growth and Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper’s sectorial strategies. But it cautions that “cultivating professionalism among auditors, however, remains a long-term process” in a system that is rife with corruption, informality and unclear delineations of responsibilities.⁴
Accounting practices for non-salary related funds are also open to abuse. In 2017, it was revealed that four gendarmes had allegedly been skimming off 5,000 CFA each month from payments made to gendarmes from the institution’s housing cooperative.⁵ This scam continued from 2004 until 2014, allowing the four gendarmes to amass an estimated fortune of 2.3 billion CFA.⁵
The World Bank notes that “the main risks affecting the payment of wages in the military are at the local level and involve potentially unjustified, and in fact completely irregular, siphoning off in units by supervisors”.⁶

The chains of command are not separate from the chains of payments. There are payment units in each region and military zone of the Mexican territory, headed by a paying officer who technically depends on the General Directorate of Administration of the dependencies. [1] [2]

Chains of command are strictly separated from chains of payment. The armed forces provide information about their needs and the Ministry deals with procurement and payments. [1][2] In practice, the armed forces collect information about requirements through the chain of command, and then provides that information to the Ministry. [3]

The chain of command is separated from chains of payment with the exception of the delivery of salaries for frontline personnel [1,2].

The Human Resources Service Centre handles HR regulations and personnel administration, including the payment of salaries and obtainment of allowances and entitlements [1]. The Human Resources Service Centre is part of the Service Command and is separate from operational chains of command [2].

In New Zealand, chains of command are strictly separated from chains of payment throughout the Armed Forces. The NZDF remuneration systems are operated by Defence Human Resources, which is separate from the military chain of command. The payroll process complies with the Wages Protection Act 1983 and utilises SAP HCM to manage payroll. Payments are automated into bank accounts with very few cash payments or cash purchases made. Payroll activity can only be input from a single-entry point and Payroll Operations pass the data to the Finance Branch to load the bank file. There is no opportunity to divert funds within this process [1, 2]. The NZDF Remuneration System and Remuneration Review Process policy are promulgated in DFO 3: Human Resources Manual, Part 7, Chapter 1, the main intent of which is to provide for fair, reasonable and equitable remunerative conditions of service for members of the NZDF [3]. Payroll is externally audited by Audit New Zealand on behalf of the Auditor-General and reported on annually. There is no evidence of any procedural issues with the payroll process [4.] On 2 December 2020, Defence Force Financial Instructions 9.1 was released which provides for the direct policy, processes and procedures that enable all members of the Defence Force and other users to safely, accurately, reliably and efficiently meet their financial obligations, and replaces six previous DFOs (DFO 72, 73, 74, 77, 78, and 79) [5].

The Accounts Payable process is separate from the military chain of command. A key control is the segregation of duties so that no one person is able to complete a transaction in its entirety. Wherever possible, the requisition, purchasing, invoice verification, payment and Masterfile maintenance are performed by different individuals. The AP system (in SAP) is used to enforce the segregation of duties through the setup of user IDs and by restricting access to users. Internal controls are reviewed as part of the annual external audit process. Segregation requirements are contained within DFI 9.1, section 1.1.11 [6]. Exceptions from the segregation of duties are permissible in exceptional circumstances, such as operations in the field where circumstances may prevent adequate numbers of staff. Nevertheless, permission must still be granted from the Financial Controller in advance of the requirement and “must include fully documented compensating controls that are to be applied” [7]. Payment of accounts to creditors is conducted as e-commerce. Invoices are matched to duly authorised Purchase Orders and payments made into the creditors bank accounts electronically. Purchase Orders are approved by personnel holding formal purchasing delegations. Approval to commit funds are approved by personnel holding formal financial delegations. The approving authorities or delegation holders cannot be the same person. There is no opportunity to divert funds during the process [8]. No information was forthcoming from the ministry on this issue.

Chains of command are arguably separate from chains of payment. According to an interviewee, the human resources and financial division work together to send information (a list of paid military personnel) regarding salary payments to the Treasury that has an account at the Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO); it is the chief of fefence (Etat Major) that ensures payment through bank transfers to military personnel, and in some rare cases he also pays in cash (1).
This demonstrates that there is no direct de jure link between the management of human resources and the actual payment of wages. However, de facto it returns to military (chief of defence) to provide the final payment.

Chains of command are separated from chains of payment. The National Defence Policy 2006 posits a change of command for planning and conduct of military operations – from National Defence Council, Minister of Defence, Chief of Defence Staff, to Service Chiefs or Commander of the Joint Taskforce. The government has concluded arrangements to begin the enrolment of all military personnel on the Integrated Personnel and Payroll Information System (IPPIS) July 30, 2018. This aim at integrating all personnel within the system of payment (1), (2).

Following the introduction of the IPPIS, the stated aim is to capture “all” personnel within the system so any exceptions are anomalous given the stated aim (2).

As military personnel are not all yet captured on the Payroll Information System (IPPIS), most payments still flow through the regular military command structure (2).

The chains of command are separated from payment processes. The Finance Directorates of the Ministry of Defence and the Army are responsible for paying salaries and allowances. Military personnel receive their salaries through their personal bank accounts. A decision on salaries, allowances and other benefits for active military and civilian personnel is made by the Minister of Defence or by another authorised official [1]).

Armed Forces payment is managed by the Salary and Pay Office within the Norwegian Armed Forces HR and Conscription Centre, which is separate from operational departments. [1]. Payroll within the ministry is managed by the Department of Development, Administration and Preventive Security [2]. Chains of command are kept strictly separated from chains of payment within the organisational structure [3].

There is no separation between the chains of command and the chains of payment. They are connected, and commanders can affect the payments of the soldiers or junior officers (1). Defence institution websites do not publish chains of command or salary grades (2), (3). Wage Protection Systems were put in place in 2017, by the Ministry of Manpower (equivalent to the Ministry of Labour); however, reforms are aimed at the private sector (4), (5). The Employment Law, RD 35/2003 sets out rules around salaries, Article Two states that it does not apply to the armed forces (6). There is no evidence to suggest that chains of command are separate from chains of payment.

IGenerally, the chain of command is separated from the chain of payments (2). However, the commanders influence the chain of payments within their units, agencies or offices. According to the Military Service Law, commanders have power over some financial matters (1), (2).

There is a strict separaton of chains of command and chains of payment, with electronic payment systems in place and offices on financial management and human resources at DND [1, 2].

The chain of payments in MoD – the Administrative Department – is under control of the MoD director-general, it is independent and separated from the chain of command [1]. The payment system is defined in the Law on Professional Military Service (Art. 74) [2]. Lower level wages are paid by specialised entities that deal with all financial issues that pertain to military units. For example, three support units of the Warsaw Garrison Command deal with the logistics of 300 units subordinated to MoD [3].

Chains of payment are defined under the General Law on Public Employment [1] and Decree-Law 142/2015, which establishes military payment systems [2] and are formally independent of chains of command. Existing legislation limits interference beyond clearly defined disciplinary situations [3].

The chair of the command is separated from the payment system. However, the command can intervene in some cases such as fining, punishment or the increase of bonuses. The general idea is that they are separated and work independently from one another. [1,2]

According to Article 4, Point 3 of Federal Law No. 306 ‘On Pay and Allowances for Military Personnel’, payment for contracted military personnel consists of payment by rank, payment by post and a number of allowances, and is paid out of both federal and regional budgets [1]. According to Article 4, Point 4 of the same law, payment for recruited military personnel consists of payment by post and a number of allowances [1]. This law also states that the payment and allowance amounts for military and civil personnel within the army is defined by the Government of the Russian Federation upon recommendation of the territorial and unit command [1].

The chain of payment is separate from the chain of command and made up of financial authorities in the structure of defence sector [2], including territorial financial authorities and financial-economic authorities in the central defence institutions [3].

The Saudi government does not publish details relating to its payment processes in the military or government ministries, except for occasional announcements of bonuses for military and other personnel (1). According to a Gulf affairs expert, chains of command are not separated from chains of payment (2). Three other sources have also highlighted that the payment chains are not separated from the chains of command. They are well connected, and commands can alter the payment of personnel through their authority (3), (4), (5).

The system of personnel payment appears routine throughout most of the government. Many Saudi ministries employ multinational government services firms to design systems for payroll processing and other administrative functions. The Ministry of Interior contracted with TCS (Tata Consultancy Services), which utilizes the well-known Oracle E-Business Suite of applications to administer payroll and other personnel management tasks (6).

However, according to information published by the Ministry of Defence, under its new organizational structure, the military chain of command is separated from support service functions. For example, strategic affairs, technical and administrative services, and procurement units are separate (7). The literature does not refer to the chains of payment of salaries.

Chains of command are strictly separated from chains of payment throughout the ministry and armed forces. According to the Law on Serbian Armed Forces, the government determines the base salary calculation, whereas the defence minister defines coefficients for salary calculations, conditions and criteria for increase or decrease of a salary, salary payment etc [1].
The accounting service, situated within the MoD’s Budget and Finances sector, calculates salaries and allowances of military staff and transfers the payments to their bank accounts [2].

The Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) and the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) maintain a centralised system of payments which is separate from the chain of command. The Defence Finance Organisation, a unit under the MINDEF’s Defence Management Group, is responsible for civilian and military payroll and allowances [1, 2].

Pay is separated from command structures and determined by a combination of rank, role, and time in a position [1]. This process is administered by the Department of Defence Human Resources division with the data being stored on the PERSOL software system [2]. Pay scales and salaries are determined by the Military Bargaining Council although the minister of defence and military veterans is authorised to unilaterally change pay rates in consultation with the minister of finance, should the Bargaining Council not reach an agreement [3].

Chains of command and payment are separate throughout the South Korean military. The salaries of the Army, Navy and Air Force are calculated by the Military Personnel Remuneration Act and Public Officials Remuneration Regulations. [1] [2]

No publicly available data exists to rate this indicator. Sources contacted were not knowledgeable about it. This indicator has therefore been marked ‘Not Enough Information’.

Chains of command are separated from chains of payment. Article 20 of Royal Decree 1314/2005 regulates the Comisión Superior de Retribuciones Militares (Higher Commission on Military Retributions), the body in charge of the management and supervision of the payment process. This commission is inter-ministerial and composed of both military and civil members. The commission’s tasks and obligations are clearly explained in Article 20 of Royal Decree 1314/2005 [1].

The SAF pays through regular army channels (payroll), while RSF commanders receive and disburse their troops’ salaries in hard currency [1]. Please also see the example of soldiers in Libya, who are also paid by their commanders [2].

The management of salaries within the ministry and armed forces are strictly separated from the chain of command. Trade unions like Officersförbundet also collaborate with employers and audit the issue of wages [1].

The chain of command and chain of payments are separated across the board. The Federal Department of Defence, Civil Protection and Sport (DDPS) is under the same set of rules as other ministries of the federal administration. By law, a designated HR unit takes care of salary payments (Article 27.7 of the Federal Personnel Act) (BPG) [1]. For conscript members of the armed forces, there are two types of income: One is the Erwerbsersatzordnung (Income Compensation Allowance) (EO), and the other is the “Sold” (“pay”). The EO is part of a civilian insurance system and is handled by an outside social security institution [2]. The sold is a small sum, a daily allowance (4 CHF a day for recruits, 5 CHF for soldiers) and is paid out via the unit [3].

The remuneration systems of Taiwan’s armed forces are computerised in conjunction with the personnel management systems. This system is directly managed and operated by the Ministry of National Defense and is separate from military chains of command [1]. There are exceptions in certain areas via the mechanisms of rewards or reimbursements.
When a candidate comes in for rewards and reimbursements, the authority/sector is responsible for managing and reviewing the rewards and reimbursements by related regulations. The authority/sector sends a qualified list of rewards to the commander for approval. The financial sector of the unit gives the bonus to the qualified personnel. The inspection officer supervises the whole procedure. Commanders cannot decide rewards or reimbursement by will. [2]

There is not enough information to score this indicator. Such information would be contained, presumably, in the Defence Forces Regulations, a document which is inaccessible. A historical version is available online, but it’s not current. [1]

In 2018, the Comptroller General’s Department announced a new policy that requires the MoD to pay salaries to each military official’s account via the E-Social Welfare system in order to reduce the influence of chains of command over chains of payment [1]. However, there is evidence of cases of sergeant majors keeping their subordinate’ bank accounts and ATM cards with them and withdrawing cash to allocate salaries to conscripts at the end of each month [2]. In February 2020, Nation TV also reported that, against the policy, some sergeant majors still kept their subordinates’ bank accounts and ATM cards with them and allocated salaries to the conscripts in cash, mainly due to fear of desertion [3].

According to Interviewee 2, a military expert, chains of command are not separated from chains of payment since the commanders are responsible for controlling and determining salaries [4]. Interviewee 3, a high-ranking military officer, also agrees with this point [5]. To put it simply, even though the chains of command and chains of payment are separated by policy, they are occasionally not separated in practice. For example, Sgt Narongchai Intharakawi of the Army Ordnance Materiel Rebuild Centre reported that his name and signature were frequently being used for the reimbursement of allowances, a common means of corruption used in Thai bureaucracy [6].

According to our sources, there is a strong separation between the financial and administrative command and the operation commands within the MoD, however, they all work under the Minister of Defence(1,2). In accordance with article 13 of Decree n° 79-735, dated 22 August 1979, on the organisation of the Ministry of National Defence, the General Directorate of Administrative and Financial Affairs is responsible for mandating or authorising the expenditure of personnel, or the administrative and financial affairs of the personnel of the Ministry of Defence. The Directorate of Personnel and Training is responsible for other aspects of military personnel management (Article 18 of the same Decree) (3).In its response to GI 2015, the Ministry of Defence affirms that the General Directorate of Administrative and Financial Affairs is responsible for mandating or authorising the expenditure of personnel, and for the administrative and financial affairs of the personnel of the Ministry of Defence. The directorate is not included in the chain of military command and refers directly to the Minister of National Defence (4). Despite extensive research, no other sources related to this issue, such as reports from the media, or civil society, could be found (5).

As emphasised before, the Turkish military has a well-established finance branch and finance management system. All military personnel in the military finance branch receive proper training in the military finance schools run by the Army, the Navy and the Air Force Commands. In order to carry out tactical and non-strategic defence, services and activities, military finance personnel are responsible for using the budget allocated for the military in which they serve economically and efficiently; all resources and facilities at hand, such as people, money, materials and legislation, are used in accordance with modern management techniques and these resources are used in the most rational way.

Another duty of military finance personnel is to provide consultancy services to the commander in charge of that particular unit. Please also note that, a commanding officer has nothing to do with the salaries of the soldiers under his command as the salaries are directly controlled by the Ministry of Defence. Furthermore, traditionally speaking, military finance personnel are given some autonomy to fulfil their tasks and other military personnel do not like to be part of contracting, finance management or any other money-related processes because of the extreme levels of monitoring and oversight. Independent unit commanders, who hold the rank of brigader general or higher, are defined as the ‘Authorised Financial Decision Maker’, who can spend from the unit’s budget for urgent needs in counter-terror operations or unplanned military exercises. However, this authorisation is very strict and is always used under close control of the military finance personnel, who work as the ‘trustees’ of the military unit pursuant to the Military Regulation (1993) [1].

According to Lieutenant Colonel Deo Akiiki, the Ministry of Defence and Veterans Affairs is paid by the Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development [1]. This has nothing to do with the chain of command in the military.

Chains of command are not strictly separated from chains of payment. It is the state secretary who defines the size of allowances and bonuses at the proposals of heads of departments. The salary of civil servants within the MoD is comprised of several components such as the basic salary (depends on the serviceman`s position), wage premium, monthly arrears payment, etc. Salaries are fixed depending on the position of the civil servant, but they can sometimes vary within brackets (for instance: salary for position “A” according to the military unit “B” job pattern varies from 900 UAH to 1200 UAH). Although commanders have a certain influence on this kind of variation of salaries, the General Staff is set to abolish this practice, and the salary will not be subject to this kind of influence. Wage premiums specifically fall under the influence of commanders. Although the legislation requires a decrease in wage premiums, commanders still use these [1, 2].

Research has revealed that the chains of command are strictly separated from chains of payment throughout the ministry of defence and armed forces. The UAE government has put in place a Wages Protection System (WPS), developed by the Central Bank of the UAE, which allows the Ministry of Labour to create a database that records wage payments to guarantee the timely and full payment of agreed-upon wages (1). The WPS is activated at all institutions registered with the Ministry of Labour across all sectors and industries, and the system also guarantees that payment is processed independently from the chain of command in all sectors, including the defence sector (2), (3).

Pay16 – ‘The Armed Forces Pay Model’, separates chains of command and chains of payment throughout the ministry and armed forces [1].

Civilian and military pay is disbursed by the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS), which is separate from the chain of command [1]. The DFAS sits under the Office of the Secretary of Defense. Military salaries increase annually based on a formula corresponding to the Employment Cost Index, unless Congress or the President deviate [2,3].

While the Organic Rules of the Ministry of the People’s Power for Defence (MPPD) state that the personnel directorate is responsible for the supervision and management of civilian and military personnel, the ministry also uses the Financial Management and Human Resources System as a tool for the registration and payment of personnel. There is no evidence to show that the chains of command are separated from the chains of payment [1]. Access to this system is restricted and detailed information on the operation of payment systems cannot be obtained [2]. In view of recent wage adjustments, made without public disclosure of salary scales, and the discretion in the management of military companies that allows military officials to obtain other sources of income, there is a high risk that these payment chains are affected by the influence of senior commanders [3, 4].

The Zimbabwe Army’s Pay and Records Department took over responsibilities otherwise previously carried out by the Salary Services Bureau. This department works hand in hand with the Defence Services Commission, which is responsible for the remuneration of the military under Section 34 of the Defence Act [1, 2]. In terms of procurement payments, these are separated from the chain of command through senior officers within the administration and procurement teams that authorise payments [3].

Country Sort by Country 45. Sort By Subindicator
Albania 50 / 100
Algeria 0 / 100
Angola 0 / 100
Argentina 100 / 100
Armenia 100 / 100
Australia 100 / 100
Azerbaijan 50 / 100
Bahrain 0 / 100
Bangladesh 100 / 100
Belgium 100 / 100
Bosnia and Herzegovina 100 / 100
Botswana 100 / 100
Brazil 100 / 100
Burkina Faso 50 / 100
Cameroon 50 / 100
Canada 100 / 100
Chile 25 / 100
China 100 / 100
Colombia 100 / 100
Cote d'Ivoire 50 / 100
Denmark 100 / 100
Egypt 0 / 100
Estonia 50 / 100
Finland 100 / 100
France 100 / 100
Germany 100 / 100
Ghana 50 / 100
Greece 100 / 100
Hungary 100 / 100
India 100 / 100
Indonesia 50 / 100
Iran 100 / 100
Iraq 0 / 100
Israel 100 / 100
Italy 100 / 100
Japan 75 / 100
Jordan 50 / 100
Kenya 100 / 100
Kosovo 100 / 100
Kuwait 0 / 100
Latvia 100 / 100
Lebanon 50 / 100
Lithuania 100 / 100
Malaysia 100 / 100
Mali 0 / 100
Mexico 0 / 100
Montenegro 100 / 100
Morocco
Myanmar 50 / 100
Netherlands 100 / 100
New Zealand 100 / 100
Niger 0 / 100
Nigeria 100 / 100
North Macedonia 100 / 100
Norway 100 / 100
Oman 0 / 100
Palestine 50 / 100
Philippines 100 / 100
Poland 100 / 100
Portugal 100 / 100
Qatar 50 / 100
Russia 100 / 100
Saudi Arabia 0 / 100
Serbia 100 / 100
Singapore 100 / 100
South Africa 100 / 100
South Korea 100 / 100
South Sudan NEI
Spain 100 / 100
Sudan 0 / 100
Sweden 100 / 100
Switzerland 100 / 100
Taiwan 75 / 100
Tanzania NEI
Thailand 25 / 100
Tunisia 100 / 100
Turkey 75 / 100
Uganda 100 / 100
Ukraine 50 / 100
United Arab Emirates 100 / 100
United Kingdom 100 / 100
United States 100 / 100
Venezuela 25 / 100
Zimbabwe 100 / 100

With thanks for support from the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) and the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs who have contributed to the Government Defence Integrity Index.

Transparency International Defence & Security is a global programme of Transparency International based within Transparency International UK.

Privacy Policy

UK Charity Number 1112842

All rights reserved Transparency International Defence & Security 2022