AN ANTI-CORRUPTION agency that cannot rid itself of corruption risks becoming worse than useless; it becomes a shield for the very ills it is meant to fight. The revelations surrounding the Anti-Corruption Commission — an institution entrusted with protecting the country from the decay of bribery and abuse of power — are, therefore, as alarming as they are disheartening. According to its own figures, 244 officials and employees of the commission have faced disciplinary measures, including 34 dismissals, since 2008. More troubling still, in recent months several directors and deputy directors have been suspended on accusations of taking bribes, extorting money under threat of prosecution or receiving illicit favours from individuals under investigation. These are not mere lapses in judgement or bureaucratic oversights; they represent fundamental betrayals of mandate and morality. When the guardians of probity are themselves tainted, public trust — the lifeblood of any watchdog body — inevitably drains away. The consequence is not only reputational damage. It is that honest citizens lose faith that justice will prevail, while while wrongdoers are emboldened to believe they can buy their way out of accountability.
Transparency International Bangladesh is right to stress that departmental actions alone will not suffice. Suspensions and demotions may create the appearance of discipline, but they do not pass the test of justice. The law must take its full course, and officials who abuse their powers must face trial like any other offender. This is not about vengeance but deterrence. Every official allowed to retire quietly, or every suspension that culminates in reinstatement, sends the message that corruption is a manageable hazard rather than a career-ending disgrace. By contrast, the successful prosecution and conviction of errant officials would set the standard of accountability. That standard must be the rule, not the rare exception. The commission cannot rely on rhetoric alone. Its own internal corruption prevention committee, reportedly dormant, must be reactivated with urgency. The vetting and monitoring of staff should be strengthened, with greater transparency in recruitment, asset declarations and lifestyle audits. Whistle-blowers within the organisation should be protected and encouraged. Above all, the commission’s leadership needs to demonstrate zero tolerance not merely in words, but in decisive action. The stakes are high. Corruption remains one of the chief obstacles to Bangladesh’s democratic consolidation and economic development. If the ACC fails to put its own house in order, the country risks sliding back into a state where accountability is hollow and impunity the norm.
To clean the nation, the ACC must first clean itself. It must show that all its officials are under scrutiny and the errant ones are brought to account. Only then will its call to root out corruption in society carry weight. Only then will citizens begin to recover their faith in an institution whose credibility is now on trial.