Ensure ACC Remains Nonpartisan: A Call for Transparency and Legal Integrity
Ensure ACC remains nonpartisan—this is a pressing concern as the government initiates the reconstitution of the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) through a search committee. The recent formation of this committee has ignited discussions about the transparency of the process, with critics questioning whether the ACC will continue its role as an impartial watchdog or become a political instrument. After nearly four months of inactivity, the commission’s future is now under scrutiny, and the selection of its next chairman and commissioners could set a precedent for its independence or partisan alignment.
The Structure of the ACC Selection Committee
The ACC’s selection process is governed by the 2004 Anti-Corruption Commission Act, originally enacted by the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP). This law establishes a five-member committee tasked with appointing new leadership, comprising one judge from the Appellate Division and High Court Division, the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG), the Public Service Commission (PSC) chairman, and the last retired Cabinet Secretary. However, recent reports suggest that the inclusion of a serving cabinet secretary in the selection process may introduce government influence, undermining the act’s original intent to ensure neutrality. The lack of a retired cabinet secretary on the committee raises alarms about the potential for political favoritism, as officials may be more inclined to support candidates aligned with their interests.
The Draft Proposal and Its Implications
Amidst the ongoing debate, the ACC’s draft proposal has drawn significant attention. The plan proposes granting the commission’s secretary—currently a civil servant on deputation—the authority to fill vacant commissioner roles. While this could streamline the process, it has sparked concerns about the erosion of the ACC’s independence. Critics argue that empowering the secretary, who operates under government directives, may allow the ruling party to exert control over the commission’s operations. This shift could weaken the ACC’s ability to act without political bias, particularly if the secretary is chosen with partisan considerations in mind.
Reports of thousands of accumulated complaints and pending investigations should serve as a warning that any further delay in reforming and reconstituting the commission will only weaken and overburden this critical institution.
The ACC’s role as a nonpartisan body is crucial to its effectiveness in combating corruption. With over 5,000 cases pending, the commission must maintain its independence to ensure fair and impartial adjudication. The current government, despite its efforts to reconstitute the ACC, has not yet finalized the 2025 Amendment Ordinance, which could introduce structural changes. This delay highlights the need for swift action to align the selection process with the principles of transparency and accountability. The absence of clear legislative guidelines may lead to interpretations that favor the ruling party, risking the ACC’s credibility as an impartial entity.
Restoring Public Trust Through Legal Reforms
To restore public trust, the government must demonstrate a commitment to ensuring the ACC remains nonpartisan. The selection committee’s composition should reflect a balance of diverse expertise and institutional neutrality. By including retired officials and legal experts, the process can minimize political interference. Additionally, the amendment to the 2004 act must be finalized to provide a legal framework that reinforces the ACC’s autonomy. Delaying this reform could allow the commission to operate under outdated rules, potentially enabling the ruling party to dictate its direction. The ACC’s ability to function independently is not just a legal matter but a cornerstone of democratic governance and public accountability.
The ACC’s recent inactivity has left a vacuum in its capacity to address corruption cases, prompting calls for immediate action. The commission’s officials have taken the initiative, but their proposals must be scrutinized for any signs of bias. Ensuring the ACC remains nonpartisan requires not only legislative clarity but also a transparent process that allows for public oversight. By prioritizing merit-based appointments and adhering to the law’s original principles, the government can position the ACC as a credible and effective institution. The stakes are high, as the ACC’s independence directly impacts its ability to investigate and prosecute corruption within the highest levels of power.
