Questions remain surrounding Anti-Corruption Commission
From its inception, the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) has turned into a failed institution. Despite being an independent body, the ACC has operated as a puppet of the ruling government. Every time a new government comes to power, it turns the ACC into a tool for its own purposes. This led to the resignation of the ACC Chairman and two commissioners following the recent people's uprising. After the student-led protests, the tables were completely upside down. Those who had previously used the ACC for their own benefit now found the ACC targeting them.
Rather than pursuing former criminals, the ACC has started investigating ruling party MPs and influential leaders in the changed political climate. As new investigation files pile up on the desks of officials, there has been stagnation in the ACC’s previous activities. Over the past four months, the ACC has remained almost paralyzed. In the meantime, a reform commission has been established to make the ACC more transparent and efficient. The reform commission, headed by Dr. Iftekharuzzaman, Executive Director of TIB, has been working on the proposals for reform.
The commission is expected to submit its report to the government within three months. Experts had suggested that the Chairman and Commissioners should not be appointed before the reforms. On October 29, a search committee was formed. On Tuesday afternoon, sources from the Cabinet Division revealed that the decision had been made to appoint Senior Secretary Mohammad Abdul Momen as Chairman of the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC). Two new Commissioners will also be appointed: Mia Mohammad Ali Akbar Aziz and Brigadier General (Retd.) Hafiz Ahsan Farid.
The news of these appointments has been circulating for several days, and political analysts have noted that this follows the old method. The question arises: if the ACC is formed based on the same criteria as before, why was the reform commission necessary? According to the current law, the new commission's term will be five years. After that, will appointments be made based on the reform commission's recommendations? Is this approach logical and practical?
The news of these appointments has been circulating for several days, and political analysts have noted that this follows the old method. The question arises: if the ACC is formed based on the same criteria as before, why was the reform commission necessary? According to the current law, the new commission's term will be five years. After that, will appointments be made based on the reform commission's recommendations? Is this approach logical and practical?
The Gono Odhikar Parishad has proposed a 22-point recommendation for the reform of the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC). They have emphasized that through reforms in the ACC law, the commission should be made a truly independent, accountable, and people-friendly institution. Others argue that the formation of the Election Commission is also questionable before ACC reforms. The widespread corruption in the country over the past 20 years cannot be addressed without investigating it, and only then can the ACC’s transparency be ensured. Although there are questions in the public’s mind regarding the appointment of the new ACC Chairman and the ongoing reforms, we hope that the newly appointed Chairman and Commissioners will set an unprecedented example in the fight against corruption.
Leave A Comment
You need login first to leave a comment