Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB) has expressed deep disappointment and aggravation over the Advisory Council’s final approval of the Anti-Corruption Commission Ordinance 2025, alleging that strategically important recommendations were ignored despite earlier consensus.
The organisation stated that the government had removed from the final ordinance the proposed “Selection and Review Committee,” a mechanism intended to ensure transparency, accountability and institutional independence of the ACC.
In a statement issued on Friday, TIB said the provision – designed to free the ACC from its negative image as a tool used by ruling elites to target political opponents – had been agreed upon by relevant authorities and included in the July Charter with full consensus of all political parties.
TIB described the exclusion as “disappointing” and claimed it reflected the influence of anti-reform groups across government institutions.
The organisation also questioned whether Chief Adviser Muhammad Yunus, as head of the consensus commission overseeing the 11 reform commissions, was signalling that “state reform” was mere rhetoric by keeping the ACC outside accountability mechanisms.
Referring to the recommendations of the ACC Reform Commission, TIB Executive Director Dr Iftekharuzzaman said the committee had proposed the “Selection and Review Committee” after considering two decades of experience, stakeholder opinion, international best practices and Bangladesh’s political and bureaucratic context.
He said the proposal aimed to prevent the ACC from continuing to be used as a tool of harassment by those in power.
Iftekharuzzaman said the recommendation was meant to address the long-standing crisis of public trust in the ACC, which he described as an institution that had become a “puppet of vested quarters” used to protect those in authority and target opponents.
He criticised the government for failing to appreciate the committee’s strategic vision for transforming the ACC into an accountable, independent and impartial institution through half-yearly reviews, public hearings and consultations.
“For a government responsible for state reforms, this is a contradictory and anti-reform precedent,” Iftekharuzzaman said.
He added that, according to reliable sources, at least seven advisers had also opposed the exclusion of the provision, despite knowing that every political party that signed the July Charter had agreed to include it.
Iftekharuzzaman questioned why the government would set a precedent for violating the Charter, warning that it could encourage political parties to disregard their own commitments.
“Then why were such bloody sacrifices made? What kind of state reform is it that blocks the way to effectively curb corruption?” he asked.
TIB noted that the draft ordinance it had previously reviewed was of a higher standard than the existing law, and the organisation had commended the government for it.
However, Iftekharuzzaman said several other important strategic recommendations agreed upon through consensus had also been omitted from the final version, describing the move as a “supporting corruption and anti-reform stance” by influential quarters within the government.
