We appreciate Bangladesh Bank announcing the initiative to verify all loans exceeding Tk 20 crore.
Indeed, we also agree that such an initiative could help to restore some public confidence in the banking sector, and is a long-overdue attempt to restore governance and accountability in a sector that has all but drifted into dysfunction.
However, we must also question what such an initiative suggests. Must not all loans be verified, regardless of their amount? Are we really hailing what ought to be a routine safeguard as reform?
In any healthy financial system, vetting is a basic function. That Bangladesh Bank had to announce this measure as a corrective action speaks volumes about the culture of lax oversight that has taken root.
Is it any surprise then that this nation is crippled by non-performing loans? Year after year, politically-connected borrowers and weak enforcement have destroyed the credibility of our financial system, with the number of non-performing loans seemingly increasing every month.
The fact that verification of loans is now seen as a win underscores how low the bar has fallen. Governance should not require special directives. When due diligence is celebrated as extraordinary, it exposes just how far we are from having a banking system that is truly functional.
Without systemic reform — independent audits, stronger regulation, and accountability for willful defaulters — the promise of investment and growth will continue to be futile, and it will be the insufficiency within our own financial system that will be the biggest culprit for this failure.
So the question is: Can we normalize vetting, accountability, and transparency across all sectors, rather than treating them as exceptions?
