Maturity model for accounting expertise in court cases of the Superior Court of Justice of Arequipa (2019–2022)

Abstract

The jurisdictional bodies responsible for administering justice at the local level in Peru are a representative case of the deficient application of scientifically rigorous standards for expert reports, where their role is relevant and even decisive in a judicial process. To identify these deficiencies, this article aims to analyze the level of development and relevance of accounting expertise and its components: the expert, the expert report, and the assessment of expert evidence in the most frequent legal proceedings handled by the Superior Court of Justice of Arequipa between 2019 and 2022. To this end, 9 of 15 evaluation criteria proposed by an accounting maturity model developed by Vadizadeh were applied; the criteria were selected based on their compatibility with criminal, civil, and labor proceedings. The research methodology applies a qualitative approach and is characterized by being non-experimental and descriptive, employing a documentary review of legal regulations, scientific literature, and institutional reports. The findings corroborate the weak preparation of accounting experts in criminal proceedings in terms of scientific rigor and international standards. In civil and labor proceedings, more technical preparation and a higher degree of admissibility were observed. All of the aforementioned processes are carried out in an institution that has the potential to become uniform.