AUDIT QUALITY IN THE NIGERIAN-BANKING SECTOR IMPLICATIONS OF THE 2006 CODE OF CORPORATE GOVERNANCE FOR BANKS IN NIGERIA
Corporate governance encompasses the legal and regulatory framework governing the actions of firms, organizations, institutions, their internal policies and controls established by the institutions themselves. The objective of corporate governance is to ensure that the board and management act in the best interest of all stakeholders. This study aimed at determining the influence of audit quality in Access bank, Diamond bank, Ecobank, First bank, FCMB, GTB, Skybank, Stanbic Bank, Union Bank, United Bank for Africa and Zenith Bank with reference to 2006 code of corporate governance. The study made use of ex-post facto research design. A sample of eleven banks were selected from a population of 22 banks quoted on the Nigerian Stock Exchange using judgmental sampling technique. Data was collected through secondary source from published annual financial reports (2007 – 2014), which was analysed using the Standard Ordinary Least Squared Regression Model. The study revealed that Ownership concentration of Nigerian banks in the post-corporate governance code has a positive but a non-significant effect on banks audit quality for Nigerian banks(ıı = 0.330; ı = 0.145 > 0.05). There was a positive and significant effect of bank executive duality on the bank audit quality banks (ıı = 0.0.598; ı = 0.000 < 0.05) Nigerian banks in the post-corporate governance period has a positive and significant effect on board Size of Nigerian bank banks(ıı = 0.449; ı = 0.0.0.0463 < 0.05) () in the post-corporate governance period there was a positive and significant effect on banks’ audit quality. The composition of Nigerian banks’ boards in the post-corporate governance period has a negative and insignificant effect on banks’ audit quality (ıı = 0.3368; ı = 0.2196 > 0.05.). Composition of the audit committee in Nigerian banks in the post-corporate governance period has a positive but non-significant effect on banks’ audit quality(ıı = 0.3049; ı = 0.6197 > 0.05). It was recommended that Proponents of large board size believe it provides an increased pool of expertise because larger boards are likely to have more knowledge and skills at their disposal, also are capable of reducing the dominance of an overbearing CEO, and hence put the necessary checks and balances.