Budget accountability matrix: who knew, decided, signed and controlled?
An evidentiary method linking each fiscal decision to authority, warnings, signatures and consequences.
Accountability requires an audit trail
The stronger the sanction, the more precise the proof must be. Any future personal accountability regime therefore requires preservation of initial forecasts, alternative scenarios, HCFP opinions, inter-ministerial arbitration, Court of Auditors warnings, freeze/unfreeze decisions, signatures and forecast-to-outturn gaps.
Eight minimum fields
| Field | Question |
|---|---|
| Decision | What precise act was taken? |
| Legal basis | What rule applied? |
| Competent authority | Who legally had power to decide? |
| Information | What data and warnings existed at that date? |
| Signature | Who signed or formally validated? |
| Alternative | What compliant alternatives had been proposed? |
| Outcome | What deviation or loss occurred? |
| Reaction | Did the person correct, report or conceal it? |
Reusable download
The CSV matrix can become the basis of a future public register of major fiscal decisions.
Legal and institutional sources
French Constitution, Article 20 — Government role.
Article 24 and Article 47 — Parliament and finance bills.
Article 26 — parliamentary non-liability for opinions and votes.
Article 67 and Article 68-1 — President and Government criminal regimes.
Financial Courts Code L.131-2, L.131-9 and sanctions L.131-16 et seq.
HCFP official missions; Swiss debt brake; German Basic Law Article 115.
Return to the project’s core framework
This page is part of the package on constitutional fiscal rules and accountability of public decision-makers.