CORRUPTION remains one of the most enduring and pervasive challenges facing Bangladesh. From petty bribery to grand scale embezzlement, corruption infiltrates various sectors of public and private life. Despite significant economic growth and social development in recent decades, corruption has impeded governance, stunted development and eroded public trust. Addressing corruption in Bangladesh is essential not only for strengthening democracy and the rule of law but also for ensuring inclusive development and international credibility.
Corruption, in the context of national and international law, refers to the abuse of entrusted power for private gain. It encompasses acts such as bribery, embezzlement, nepotism, cronyism and illicit enrichment. National legal systems often define corruption through penal codes and anti-corruption laws, criminalising the offering and accepting of bribes, misuse of public office, and misappropriation of public resources. In Bangladesh, for instance, the Anti-corruption Commission Act 2004, the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, and the Penal Code 1860 are key instruments addressing corruption-related offences.
At the international level, corruption is addressed as a transnational threat to development, the rule of law and global security. The United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC), adopted in 2003, provides a comprehensive legal framework that encourages countries to adopt preventive measures, criminalise various forms of corruption and promote international cooperation for asset recovery and law enforcement. Similarly, the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention targets bribery of foreign public officials in international business transactions, recognising corruption as a global impediment to fair trade and governance.
听
Corruption ranking
BANGLADESH continues to rank poorly in global assessments of corruption. According to Transparency International鈥檚 Corruption Perceptions Index 2023, Bangladesh scored 24 out of 100, placing it at the 149th position out of 180 countries. This score reflected widespread corruption across both public and private sectors. The sectors most affected by corruption include law enforcement, the judiciary, tax administration, public procurement and essential public services such as health and education. Although the government had launched several initiatives to curb corruption, the overall perception of governance and accountability remained troubling, with little visible impact on improving institutional integrity or transparency.
The situation further deteriorated in the following year. In the CPI 2024 (published in early 2025), Bangladesh鈥檚 score declined to 23, its lowest in over a decade, and its global rank slipped to 151st out of 180 countries, sharing the position with the Republic of Congo and Iran. This placed Bangladesh as the 14th most corrupt country in the world, based on perceptions of corruption. Regionally, it was ranked as the second most corrupt country in South Asia, ahead of only Afghanistan, which scored 17. The consistent decline in rankings, despite intensified anti-corruption efforts, underscores the depth of systemic corruption and the erosion of public trust in state institutions. These findings suggest that without structural reforms and stronger enforcement mechanisms, Bangladesh鈥檚 struggle against corruption is unlikely to see meaningful progress.
This Corruption Perception Index mirrors the findings of the 2025 Citizen Perception Survey conducted by the Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics, which confirmed that corruption remains a deeply entrenched barrier to governance and development in Bangladesh. With input from over 84,000 respondents across the country, the survey exposes the widespread and institutionalised nature of corruption in public service delivery. A striking 31.67 per cent of participants reported having to pay bribes to access essential services, a figure likely underestimated due to fear, normalisation or lack of awareness. According to survey data, a significant portion of the population in Bangladesh reported paying bribes to access various government services over the past 12 months. The highest incidence of bribery was reported at the BRTA office, with 63.29 per cent of respondents admitting to paying bribes, followed closely by law enforcement agencies (61.94 per cent), the passport office (57.45 per cent), and the land registry or cadastre office (54.92 per cent).
Corruption was also prevalent within the judiciary, including judges, magistrates, prosecutors and related officials, where 53.77 per cent of respondents indicated paying bribes. Other highly affected sectors include land record, acquisition, and settlement offices (51.40 per cent), accounts offices (44.68 per cent), and customs, excise, and VAT offices (35.37 per cent). local government institutions such as union parishads, paurashavas, and upazila offices also saw a significant rate of bribery (32.91 per cent), as did the District and Upazila election offices (26.04 per cent). Social welfare services, including the Office of Social Services and the Department of Women Affairs, had a reported bribery rate of 19.20 per cent, while public utility services (electricity, water, gas, sanitation, etc.) followed closely with 18.41 per cent.
Elected local government representatives were reported to have accepted bribes by 14.94 per cent of respondents, and income tax or revenue offices by 14.08 per cent. The rate was lower in district or upazila administrations (11.33 per cent), agricultural offices (9.07 per cent), and public healthcare institutions, including doctors and nurses (8.05 per cent). Notably, 7.91 per cent of respondents reported bribing members of parliament. Comparatively lower levels of bribery were reported in government or autonomous banks and insurance offices (2.98 per cent), public educational institutions (2.94 per cent), and the Anti-Corruption Commission, where only 1.99 per cent reported paying bribes. These figures reveal the deep-rooted and widespread nature of corruption across various tiers of public service in Bangladesh.
Only a limited segment of the population interacts with certain government offices for services. For instance, business people primarily engage with customs, while contractors and developers often deal with departments responsible for road construction and other engineering works. Similarly, individuals with taxable income typically approach the tax authorities. However, these interactions represent a narrow portion of the broader public experience with government services.
As a result, any study based solely on these offices may fail to provide an accurate or comprehensive picture of the actual prevalence of corruption. In contrast, a significantly larger portion of the population regularly seeks services from land management offices and law enforcement agencies 鈥� sectors widely perceived to have higher levels of public interaction and, often, greater vulnerability to corrupt practices. Therefore, to capture a more realistic and representative understanding of corruption, it is essential that studies encompass the institutions most frequently accessed by the general public.
In the eleven months since the August 5 uprising, the Anti-Corruption Commission has taken significant action against corruption. During this period, it accepted 768 complaints for preliminary inquiry and filed a total of 399 cases 鈥� an average of approximately 36.27 cases per month. The ACC submitted 231 charge sheets and issued nine final reports. Additionally, 223 notices were served, requiring individuals to submit wealth statements. The highest number of cases filed in a single month occurred in January this year, with 70 cases registered. Altogether, 1,264 individuals have been named as accused. Among them are 243 government officials, 114 businessmen, 92 politicians, 447 private sector employees and 31 public representatives.
Corruption involving government officials and employees has reached alarming levels in recent years, reflecting a broader pattern of systemic abuse of power. These individuals have increasingly engaged in illicit activities such as bribery, the accumulation of illegal wealth, money laundering and the misuse of public office. This conduct suggests that corruption has become deeply institutionalised within the public sector, where the abuse of entrusted authority for personal gain is not only widespread but also frequently shielded by political or bureaucratic networks.
According to Anti-Corruption Commission sources, the allegations against many of the accused range from irregularities in major government projects and unlawful land allocations to the accumulation of wealth beyond known sources of income. Some are also implicated in extortion, tender manipulation and illegal land grabbing. Further accusations include stock market manipulation, investor fraud involving billions of taka, and the misuse of political influence to secure large fraudulent loans from both public and private banks. Several individuals have also been linked to money laundering and the establishment of assets and businesses in countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, the UAE, Switzerland, Malaysia, and Canada.
听
Causes of corruption
SEVERAL interlinked factors contribute to the persistence of corruption in Bangladesh:
Low salaries and job insecurity: In many public offices, low pay and poor working conditions push officials to seek illegal income as compensation. Recently, this writer had the opportunity to engage with a group of mid- to upper-level officers from the new generation. A recurring concern among them was the inadequacy of the current salary structure, which they feel has become unrealistic when measured against the rising cost of living in various cities. Many of them believe that a substantial salary revision could significantly reduce the temptation to resort to unlawful means.
In Bangladesh, it is often suggested that increasing the salaries of government employees could help curb bribery and corruption. While it is true that low wages, particularly at the lower tiers both at public and private organisations, contribute to financial strain and vulnerability, the notion that salary hikes alone can eliminate corruption is overly simplistic. Corruption in public service is deeply entrenched and intertwined with broader institutional weaknesses, socio-political influences and a culture of impunity.
A better salary can certainly reduce the financial desperation that leads some officers to accept bribes. When police personnel and low-paid public servants, for example, are poorly paid and lack access to proper housing, healthcare or family support, they may feel compelled to supplement their income through informal or illegal means. For instance, a constable or sub-inspector or staff of a similar status in the public office who cannot meet the basic needs of their family may be more vulnerable to accepting money in exchange for favours or leniency. In this sense, fair and sufficient remuneration is not just a matter of welfare 鈥� it is a prerequisite for ethical conduct. However, salary increases alone are not enough to address the complex problem of bribery in the public sector.
Experience from other countries and even from various public and private sectors within Bangladesh shows that higher salaries do not automatically lead to greater integrity if the system itself continues to tolerate or encourage corrupt behaviour. Corruption thrives not only because of economic hardship but also because of weak accountability, lack of transparency and impunity. If opportunities to demand or accept bribes remain unchecked, and if those caught engaging in corruption face no real consequences, then even well-paid officers may continue to engage in unethical practices.
Weak oversight mechanisms: Oversight mechanisms suffer from significant institutional weaknesses, severely limiting their ability to ensure transparency, accountability and the rule of law. Key regulatory and enforcement bodies 鈥� such as the Anti-Corruption Commission, the judiciary, law enforcement agencies, parliamentary committees and internal audit bodies 鈥� often operate under severe resource constraints, lack skilled personnel and are burdened by procedural inefficiencies and outdated legal frameworks. Compounding these issues is pervasive political interference, which undermines their autonomy and operational independence, particularly when dealing with cases involving politically connected individuals or powerful interest groups. These limitations prevent such institutions from acting impartially or enforcing laws effectively, resulting in unchecked financial mismanagement, abuse of power and policy manipulation. Consequently, systemic corruption persists, institutional integrity is eroded and public confidence in governance and service delivery is seriously weakened.
Political patronage and cronyism: The political landscape is deeply influenced by clientelism, where political support is exchanged for personal or group benefits. This environment fosters a culture of patronage, where appointments, promotions and access to resources are often determined by political loyalty rather than merit or competence. Cronyism becomes entrenched, with key positions in public administration, state-owned enterprises and regulatory bodies frequently occupied by individuals with close ties to ruling party elites. Such practices not only weaken the principles of transparency and accountability but also create an uneven playing field, discouraging capable professionals and eroding public trust in governance. Over time, this undermines institutional integrity and facilitates the misuse of state resources for personal or partisan gain.
Lack of transparency and accountability: Many core government functions, such as public procurement, budgeting and the awarding of contracts, are often conducted without sufficient transparency. Oversight mechanisms are either weak or circumvented, and information related to decision-making processes is frequently withheld from the public. This lack of openness creates fertile ground for irregularities, including inflated project costs, substandard work and the awarding of contracts to politically connected firms. In the absence of effective accountability, public officials and private contractors face little consequence for engaging in corrupt practices such as kickbacks, favouritism, or collusion. These systemic weaknesses not only waste public funds but also erode citizen confidence in government institutions and hinder sustainable development.
The Padma Bridge project, one of Bangladesh鈥檚 largest infrastructure ventures, became mired in a major corruption scandal when the World Bank withdrew its $1.2 billion funding in 2012, citing credible evidence of a high-level conspiracy to exchange bribes for consultancy contracts involving Bangladeshi officials and the Canadian firm SNC-Lavalin. This led other international partners to follow suit, prompting the Bangladeshi government to complete the project using domestic funding. Although a Canadian court later dismissed the charges due to a lack of admissible evidence, the episode raised serious concerns about transparency and governance in Bangladesh. The case has since been widely cited by watchdogs like Transparency International as a significant example of the risks of corruption in large-scale public procurement.
Culture of impunity: A pervasive culture of impunity exists in Bangladesh, where powerful individuals 鈥� especially those with political connections or influence 鈥� often evade accountability for their actions. High-profile politicians, bureaucrats and business elites are frequently shielded from legal consequences, even when credible allegations of corruption or abuses of power arise. This selective enforcement of laws sends a message that certain individuals are above the law, thereby discouraging integrity and ethical conduct among public officials. When wrongdoing goes unpunished, it not only undermines public trust in the justice system but also normalises corruption as a routine part of governance, weakening the rule of law and democratic accountability.
Public apathy and fear: In many parts of Bangladesh, especially in rural and marginalised communities, citizens have become desensitised to corruption, often viewing it as an unavoidable part of everyday life 鈥� a 鈥渘ecessary evil鈥� to access basic services or get things done. This normalisation of corrupt practices weakens public motivation to resist or report wrongdoing. Additionally, fear of retaliation 鈥� whether through harassment, loss of services, or social and political backlash鈥攄iscourages individuals from speaking out against corruption. Whistleblower protections are either inadequate or poorly enforced, leaving citizens vulnerable. This widespread sense of helplessness and fear undermines collective action and allows corrupt networks to operate with minimal resistance from the public.
A senior citizen, reflecting on the values of earlier times, recalled how those accused of corruption once faced intense social stigma. In his youth, individuals known for dishonest practices were met with public criticism, sharp insinuations, and a clear sense of social disapproval. Communities regarded corruption as a moral failing, and those involved carried the burden of shame and ostracism.
In stark contrast, today鈥檚 reality paints a troubling picture. Many individuals widely believed to be corrupt now move about society without remorse or any visible sense of wrongdoing. Instead of being marginalised, they often occupy positions of influence and enjoy a sense of social acceptance. Disturbingly, some even flaunt their illicitly acquired wealth with pride, viewing it not as a source of shame but as a marker of success and power. This shift reflects a profound erosion of ethical standards and public accountability in contemporary society.
Corruption in Bangladesh is a deep-rooted and systemic issue that affects nearly every sector of governance and public service. Despite legal frameworks and institutional mechanisms, corruption persists due to weak enforcement, political interference, low public sector salaries and a widespread culture of impunity. High-profile scandals and declining international rankings highlight the severity of the problem. Addressing it requires structural reforms, stronger oversight, political neutrality in enforcement, and a revival of public ethics and accountability. Without these changes, corruption will continue to hinder the country鈥檚 development and erode public trust in state institutions.
To be continued.
听
Dr Md Motiar Rahman is a retired deputy inspector general of police.
