The evaluations and to seem of the internal auditor are of basic importance for the managemental and administrative procedures of the company, however the existence of a work of internal auditorship does not exempt the responsibility of the administrators and managers to be following and fiscalizing its respective sectors. The works of internal auditorship are regulated by Resolution CFC published N 986 in Federal official gazette (D.O.U.), in 28 of November of 2003, that they approve NBC T 12? Of the Internal Auditorship, revoking Resolution CFC N 780 of 24 of March of 1995. The exercise of the internal auditor demands that it has procedures technician and minimums that can allow the internal auditor to identify imperfections, and to get enough tests that they can prove and base its to seem and recommendations. As the Resolution n 986 of 21/11/03, that it approves NBC T 12, in its 126.96.36.199 item, describes that the internal auditorship understands: … the examinations, analyses, evaluations, surveys and evidences, metodologicamente structuralized for the evaluation of the integrity, adequacy, effectiveness, efficiency and economicidade of the processes, the systems of information and integrated internal controls to the environment, and of management of risks, with sights to attend administration of the entity in the fulfilment of its objectives. Although the internal auditor possesss independence, if he cannot deny that the same it is integrant part of the company, with its functions parallel bars the politics and goals defined for the administration of the organization, however these politics must be compatible with the Norms for the Professional Exercise of the Internal Auditorship. The areas of abrangncia of the internal auditorship are diverse, thus searched on the basis of the material developed for the Self-Regulating Body of the Accountancy Profession of the Rio Grande Do Sul, the north of the communication of the diverse areas of performance of the internal auditorship, more known.
Curitiba, 04 of May of the 2011 (Wednesday) controversy on the new Forest code, for Henry Pack The Brazilian, regulating constitutional emendation from the deforestation and agrarian use suffers quarrel in the congress for the afrouxamento of the Brazilian forest regulation, becoming possible its feasibility. In Brazil, more than 90% of the Brazilian agricultural producers possess legal pendencies. A quarrel that if extends since 2008 tends to flexibilizar the mechanisms of proteco and ambient conservation. After all, a utopian law is a good law? The new ambient code must solve empasses generated by the economic growth and the consequent devastao in the 5,2 million country properties spread by 38% of the State. With it, the Law of Ambient Crimes and the size of the APA will be defined, that includes the APP and the RL. The controversial project, must guarantee the length of the law, in parents of ' ' democracy recente' ' (managing Greenpeace Brazil, in exclusive news article to the JN). Between what this in guideline, cites the size of APPs, fragile places where it can occur erosions, landslides and floods, in the areas of hillsides of mounts and sides of rivers.
Its computation will have also to be defined as RL. The new law can harm the exportation of agricultural commodites, marked for the strong economic importance; Brazil is the producing and exporting greater of coffee, soy, cotton, sugar, bovine meat and orange juice – headquarters of biggest planetary biodiversity. It fits to stand out that only countries as Uruguay and Brazil possesss RL areas. ONGs defending of the Brazilian natural resources, little makes in other countries, as U.S.A. After all, this country more produces 4 times the amount of grains of that one, while its liberal laws on natural conservation have not been argued for ambientalistas. The Brazilian constitution of 1988 guarantees that ' ' all the Brazilian has right to an environment saudvel.' ' From 1965, the government implants measures that would guarantee the natural preservation in private properties and the punishment of the respective proprietors, considering the land as of common interest to all the citizens.