The recent preliminary approval of the draft Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) Ordinance, 2025 marks a positive and crucial step towards reforming the institution to address the widespread issue of corruption in the country. The decision to eliminate the previous unfair provision that granted special privileges to government officials, going against the principle of equality among citizens as enshrined in the constitution, is a necessary corrective action.
In 2013, the exemption for civil servants was added to the Anti-Corruption Commission Act, 2004 by the then government, despite objections from a parliamentary committee. The High Court later deemed this provision unconstitutional in 2014, ordering its removal, which was not followed by the government for the next ten years. Allegations suggest that these privileges were utilized by the government to secure the loyalty of civil servants for political gains, potentially influencing elections and stifling opposition under an increasingly authoritarian regime.
One of the recommendations from the ACC Reform Commission, established by the interim government led by Professor Muhammad Yunus following the 2024 popular uprising against the previous government, was to eliminate Section 32A of the ACC Act. This section required the ACC to seek government approval before taking action against judges, magistrates, or government employees, similar to Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. However, the draft ordinance does not fully incorporate the comprehensive reform proposals, as highlighted by Dr Iftekharuzzaman, the head of the ACC Reform Commission. Notably, the draft lacks provisions for transparency in the selection process of ACC commissioners.
Historically, the politicization of such bodies often commences during their establishment phase, influenced by secrecy and lobbying in crucial appointments. The current draft ordinance overlooks the important requirement for public disclosure of shortlisted candidates for the commission. It is imperative for the interim government to reassess these critical reform aspects. Additionally, implementing the suggested provision for regular performance evaluations of the ACC, as proposed by the reform commission, would enhance accountability.
While the current ordinance is poised to strengthen the operational efficiency of the ACC, the absence of robust safeguards against politicization due to opaque appointment procedures poses a risk to broader reform goals. Incomplete or flawed reforms seldom lead to lasting improvements. Therefore, it is essential for the government to address the reform commission’s concerns and fully execute its recommendations to empower the ACC effectively and rebuild public trust in the anti-corruption efforts.