ACC reform drive stalls as key proposals dropped from ordinance

HIghlights

• ACC reform proposed 47 changes to ensure independence and accountability.
• Key recommendations were omitted or weakened in the ordinance.
• Oversight, autonomy, and political neutrality remain unresolved.
• Experts warn reforms may fail to curb corruption.

The journey of the interim government to reform the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) began with high expectations. The ACC Reform Commission was formed with the aim of creating a politically independent, accountable, and effective institution. To strengthen the ACC by reducing its reliance on politics and bureaucracy, the commission made a total of 47 recommendations. However, several important proposals among these did not find a place in the ACC Act amendment ordinance.

Consequently, experts are raising questions as to whether the ACC will truly be able to remain free from political and bureaucratic influence.

The ACC Reform Commission was formed in the first week of October 2024 as part of the interim government's broader reform agenda following the July mass uprising, with the stated aim of creating a politically neutral, accountable and effective anti-graft institution. The commission submitted its report in January this year, proposing 47 recommendations to strengthen the ACC and reduce political and bureaucratic control.

HIghlights: TBS

Key proposals included scrapping the controversial Rule 54(2) of the ACC service regulations, reducing the tenure of commissioners to four years, expanding the commission to five members, establishing an independent prosecution unit, recruiting dedicated staff for critical positions, opening ACC offices in every district, and setting up a new "selection and oversight committee" to replace the existing search committee.

The commission also recommended the formation of an internal integrity unit, greater financial and administrative autonomy, reduced dependence on the executive for budget approval and expenditure, more transparent and time-bound complaint handling, and steps to limit political influence in the appointment of commissioners in order to restore public trust.

However, in November last year, the advisory council approved an amendment ordinance to the ACC Act, the full text of which has yet to be officially published. Analysis of available information and media reports suggests that several strategically important recommendations were either excluded or weakly incorporated. Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB) has expressed serious concern over the omissions.

Iftekharuzzaman, head of the ACC Reform Commission and executive director of TIB, said that although the government formed the commission, it failed to demonstrate visible progress in implementing its urgent and fundamental recommendations. Instead, he argued, several provisions in the ordinance contradict the core philosophy of reform.

He noted that while the draft ordinance is marginally better than the existing law and reflects some commission recommendations, many strategically crucial proposals were ignored or downplayed, which he described as disappointing.

According to Iftekharuzzaman, the commission had proposed a "selection and review committee" to ensure transparency in commissioner appointments and accountability in the ACC's performance. However, the government rejected the review component, including the proposal for six-monthly evaluations of the commission's success or failure.

"As a result, the very conditions that have allowed the ACC since its inception to be used to protect those in power and harass opponents remain unchanged," he said.

He also criticised changes to the proposed composition of the selection committee, arguing that granting the parliament speaker – rather than the leader of the opposition – the authority to nominate an opposition representative effectively strengthens ruling party influence. "Similarly, the responsibility for nominating a member with expertise in anti-corruption and good governance was shifted from the chief justice to the president, while the proposal to publish shortlists of candidates was dropped, further reducing transparency."

The TIB maintains that the ordinance addresses only a portion of the recommendations identified as urgent by the reform commission.

How recommendations trimmed in ordinance

The ACC Reform Commission's recommendations were a blueprint for creating not just a structural change, but an independent yet accountable institution. However, key parts of that vision were either omitted or weakened in the subsequently approved ordinance.

Analysts say the biggest issue that was dropped is the independent structure for ACC's accountability. The Commission had proposed a multi-stakeholder oversight mechanism to monitor the ACC's activities, including representation from the judiciary, Parliament, and civil society. But the ordinance did not include any such structure.

Similarly, the recommendation to free the process of appointing the ACC chairman and commissioners from political influence has been virtually disregarded in the ordinance. Instead of a strong and participatory search committee, the structure remains under executive and bureaucratic control, as before.

Other important proposals that were not reflected in the ordinance include: an independent "Integrity Unit" to combat internal corruption within the ACC, financial and administrative autonomy, legal protection for investigators when probing powerful individuals, and establishing transparent criteria for withdrawing cases.

Consequently, ACC reform has practically reached a state where there is independence but no accountability; there is power, but its credibility is questionable.

Where concerns lie

Md Moidul Islam, former director general of the ACC, considers the recommendations of the ACC Reform Commission to be "cosmetic." He told The Business Standard, "The Reform Commission's recommendations did not talk about any major changes. Only one recommendation might have some impact. That is the Selection and Review Committee."

He added, "Although this committee will still have a predominance of government representatives, it has been recommended that it be kept somewhat more independent than the current structure. This has been retained in the ordinance. However, this committee has not been given supervising authority."

Moidul continued, "The Reform Commission needed to address some issues seriously. The Reform Commission had recommended increasing the number of ACC Commissioners, and this was approved in the ordinance. However, the real need was to increase the number of ACC investigation and inquiry officers.

"The ACC's workforce is 2,000, and even out of that, 1,000 positions are vacant. Not everyone among those who are employed serves as an investigation and inquiry officer. This is quite negligible for such a vast population. It was more urgent to recommend increasing the ACC's manpower than increasing the number of Commission members."

He further said that the recommendation should have been that if there is a specific allegation of corruption against someone, or if a case is filed against them, they should not be able to stand in an election until they are acquitted. "This is because, under the current system, even after being convicted of corruption, there is an opportunity to participate in elections by obtaining a stay order from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court."

Moidul believes that it was necessary to form separate tribunals for swift justice. "Swift judgement would have been possible if there were at least one judicial and one appeal tribunal in every division. Currently, all cases get stuck in the High Court, causing corruption cases to be pending for years.

The former ACC director general said he does not believe that the matters included in the ordinance, even if implemented, will have a significant impact on controlling corruption, as the most urgent issues have been overlooked.