I also think the same way what Prof. Kamal pointed. If the external reviewer committee is formed by experts in the specific areas they are evaluating there should not be any issues. If experts from accounting background reviews chemistry there could be a potential problem.

I agree with the views of Dr.Kamal and Dr.Amritlal. A QA team comprises the experts in various fields.

I think the accountant should be useful but he should be a member of a team with specialists.

As Huajiang Ouyang stated, it is possible if it is necessary as a member of QAA team. Of course, it depends on what QAA team reviews in an institution. On the other hand, an institution has many functions and roles. Hence, we need reviewers depending on the content of the tasks and defined jobs. For example, If the institution deals with any monetary issues, why don't we have an accountant in the team? We need an expert accountant even in a small scale research nowadays.. If the chemistry department has contacts with industry and industrial productions, it will be a very good idea.

If we are talking about general accreditation yes we can say that people with any background  still can evaluate university but not for all aspects.

If we are talking about special accreditation for a program. Thus the person who in charge should have a compatible background with the area of proposed program.

Unfortunately in developing countries people whom in charge to evaluate the university either general or specific they are not qualified or don't have enough experience to deal with it.

Regards

Dear Islam Bourini. I completely agree with you.

Dear Dr. Mahfuz Judeh

I appreciate your kind support.

Regards

You are welcome dear Islam.

We have to differentiate between institution accreditation and   program accreditation

For institution accreditation external reviewers should be  experts of the process and of the national standards while for program specification external reviewers should be expert in both process and contents.