Editorial
Amending ACC Act
Keep it independent of executive control
WITH the government-formed committee reviewing the ACC Act 2004 having finalised its report concerning the amendment proposals submitted by it in March last year, chief of the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) Ghulam Rahman along with two commissioners met law minister Shafique Ahmed on Tuesday. They reiterated their reservations over six of the 23 amendment proposals put up by the committee urging the minister to take their concerns to the cabinet for consideration and mitigation.
Corruption has been an intractable problem for the country chiefly because we have not had an independent, fully empowered and clearly mandated body to fight or curb the menace. Whatever agency we had was structurally and functionally an appendage to the head of government's office, be it in a parliamentary or presidential form of government. The case in point was the anti-corruption bureau which by virtue of the 2004 act was transformed into ACC, supposedly a statutory body. During the caretaker government it was given more powers through ordinance which was not subsequently ratified by the elected government. On top of it, it's now bringing amendment to the act, some of which evidently, run counter to the heightened demands for an autonomous, powerful ACC.
To cite some examples, the commission may be required, according to an amendment proposal, to take permission from the government 'to begin proceedings in certain circumstances' and it seeks to exclude almost every category of people known to have been traditionally prone to corruption -- public officials, policy-makers, MPs, local body representatives -- whose offences are 'believed to have been committed in good faith'. First of all, it discriminates between corruption suspects and, secondly, it is reflective of retaining executive control over the ACC. As it is, the very fact of the 'listed offences' in the ACC schedule is a guideline or a safeguard for taking rightful cognizance of an offence and proceeding against it.
Speaking of executive control one has to refer to the ACC being made accountable to the president who acts on the advice of the PM except in two cases -- appointment of the prime minister and that of the chief justice.
For all we know, the act provides for the ACC's accountability since the formulation of the organogram and rules and budget of the organisation is controlled by the government. Actually, it should be a self-governing body accountable to the parliament in the ultimate sense through an annual report that would be subject to parliamentary dissection.
We endorse the concerns of the ACC chief and his colleagues for an independent anti-graft body and hope that the cabinet will take into account their views and have these duly reflected on the final shape of the act.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel. 
Related News
India’s ‘push-in’ strategy violates international law
20 June 2026, 18:08 PM
Editorial
Why build roads through a reserved forest?
20 June 2026, 13:00 PM
Editorial
An alarming report on children’s exposure to climate risks
19 June 2026, 19:07 PM
Editorial
Why is safe water inaccessible for millions despite rising spending?
19 June 2026, 08:00 AM
Editorial
BB must confront bad loans’ true scale
18 June 2026, 18:38 PM
Editorial
Comments