Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB) on Friday expressed “deep disappointment” and “aggravation” over the Advisory Council’s final approval of the Anti-Corruption Commission Ordinance 2025, saying the government has “trampled on important strategic recommendations” aimed at ensuring transparency, accountability, effectiveness, and institutional independence of the ACC.
TIB said the removal of the proposal for forming a “Selection and Review Committee” — despite consent from relevant government authorities and full political consensus in the July Charter — undermines efforts to eliminate the ACC’s “negative image” as an institution “mainly known as a tool for implementing the agenda of only defeating opponents at the behest of the ruling elite.”
The organization said excluding this provision is “indicative of the state’s desire to reform being hostage to the conspiracies of anti-reform circles in almost all areas of the government.” It also questioned whether the chief adviser, as head of the consensus commission and initiator of 11 reform commissions, is trying to send a message to citizens that “state reforms are just empty talk by keeping the ACC out of accountability.”
Citing the ACC Reform Commission’s recommendation for the committee based on two decades of experience, stakeholder views, international best practices, and Bangladesh’s political and bureaucratic context, TIB Executive Director Dr Iftekharuzzaman said: “This proposal was made to overcome the dire situation of ACC as the institution has been suffering from a lack of public trust since its inception and has become a tool of protection for those in power and harassment of opponents as a puppet of vested quarters.
“The government has failed to understand the strategic recommendation to transform the ACC into a truly accountable, independent, and impartial institution through half-yearly reviews, public hearings, and consultations by this committee, which is a matter of great regret. For a government responsible for state reforms, this is a contradictory and anti-reform precedent.”
Zaman continued: “The matter is even more disappointing because according to reliable sources, at least seven advisors have also opposed this proposal. Yet they know that all the political parties that signed the July Charter have agreed on this provision. Before creating such an example of violating the July Charter, why does the government not bother to think that through this it is encouraging political parties to violate the July Charter themselves? Then why such bloody sacrifices were made? What kind of state reform is it that blocks the way to effectively curb corruption?”
TIB said the draft ordinance it reviewed had appeared to be “largely of a higher standard” than the existing law and had initially earned commendation from the organization. But the TIB executive director expressed “aggravation and regret” that “several other important strategic recommendations that had been agreed upon through consensus have been omitted,” describing the move as “nothing but a corruption-supporting and anti-reform stance of vested interests and influential quarters within the government.”
