Page 53 - CMA Journal (Jan-Feb 2026)

Articles Section

The 2024 standards clearly separate the internal audit board was only expected to approve the charter. This
mandate (Standard 6.1) from the charter (Standard 6.2), showed that, although the board was involved, its
focusing on its importance through proper supervision of the mandate remained passive and
documentation, defined requirements, and board dependent on how clearly the charter fulfilled the
supervision. This makes it different from earlier internal audit’s role.
frameworks, where, unlike the 2024 standards, no
However, in the 2024 standards, the board is explicitly
emphasis on the mandate was given, and the mandate
required to give authority to the mandate as a separate
might have been integrated within the charter and
entity, expanding its role beyond simply approving the
managed accordingly.
charter and ensuring that ongoing activities are aligned
1) Separation and Emergence of Mandate as an with corporate goals and priorities.
Independent Unit - Standard 6.1 Internal Audit
Under GIAS 2024, the board is now responsible for
Mandate is now an individual requirement, separate
establishing, approving, and supporting the internal
from the internal audit charter (Standard 6.2), as set
audit mandate as its own governance body, rather than
by the 2024 Standards. This shows that emphasis has
treating it as a subsection of the charter. This includes
been placed on the importance of the mandate. The
active participation in periodic reassessments of the
mandate is referred to as a hub that serves as the
mandate, engaging with the chief audit executive to
basis of authority, duties, and responsibilities for the
ensure that internal audit authority, scope, and
functioning of internal audit, requiring periodic
responsibilities remain sufficient given organizational
evaluation by the board and chief audit executive
changes, increasing risks, or shifts in strategy.
(e.g., Standard 6.1 highlights the conditions for
reassessing the mandate).
Additionally, the standards emphasize that the board

must not only approve the mandate but also promote
2) Previous Position and Status of Mandate - In
and protect the independence of internal audit across the
previous versions (like 2017), laws, regulations, or
organization. This involves ensuring support from senior
prior practices might have embedded the mandate
management, maintaining internal audit’s open access to
within the charter (e.g., “laws and/or regulations may
people and information, and addressing any threats to
serve as the internal audit mandate and charter,” and
independence or scope with the board for resolution.
“if laws comprehensively cover requirements for a
These responsibilities go beyond approval and require
charter, they may substitute the formal charter”).
careful planning and supervision. Taken together, these
However, the 2024 Standards stress that even where
measures indicate a structural change in governance. The
mandates are legally set, the chief audit executive
board’s oversight has shifted from charter approval to an
must clearly document and periodically validate
active role in governance and controls, where the
compliance with the Standards (see Standard 6.1).
mandate functions as a separate governance unit
3) Shift for Clarity - It is clearly stated that Standard 6.1 requiring continuous attention, planning, validation, and
previously included the mandate in the charter, but reinforcement. This represents a stronger and more direct
now the mandate is an independent requirement governance role for the board.
with its own essential conditions, responsibilities,
1) Evolution of Board Responsibility for the Internal
and proof of compliance. This variation in structure
Audit Mandate - The document does not explicitly
aligns with stronger governance, board supervision,
reference the 2017 standards, but the general
and proper processes (e.g., “the board institutes,
principle aligns with the board approving the
approves, and supports the mandate”).
charter, which included the mandate. Under
Board’s Role Gets Strengthened Standards 6.1 and 6.2, the board’s role included
approving the charter and discussing the mandate.
The charter was approved by the board in 2017 In the 2024 standards, the board is assigned a more
(indirectly approving the mandate as part of the charter). authoritative governance role. The standards now
At that time, the board had a limited role, mainly clearly state that the mandate should be separately
granting governance-level approval to the internal audit established, approved, and supported by the board,
charter. As the mandate was embedded in the charter, it not just embedded in the charter. This represents an
indirectly contributed to internal audit responsibilities, authority-driven approach where the board directly
duties, and authority. In that framework, there was a owns, supervises, and reviews the mandate
clear absence of any requirement for the board to periodically to ensure it functions in alignment with
separately describe and authorize the mandate; the organizational goals and strategies.
ICMA’s Chartered Management Accountant, Jan-Feb 2026 51