Editorial
Now FBCCI wants to vet ACC investigation
Has it been set up to work on others' terms, not its own?
Now, the apex business body, the FBCCI, has the temerity of demanding that the ACC take clearance from it before instituting cases against any businessman on the plea that they are making signal contribution to the economy. What an unfair and ridiculous their demand is, given that the ACC's job it is to combat all forms of corruption including financial to which not only are the high government functionaries susceptible (in addition to abuse of power) but also top businessmen with high connections. Actually, today it is businessmen who are seeking immunity, tomorrow what will stop lawyers, every other professional groups, the doctors, engineers, even journalists and trade unions from demanding their representative bodies be asked for permission to lodge anti-graft cases?
The argument that is put forward in defense of clipping powers of the ACC is that it cannot be above accountability, so it is been made accountable to the President who, according to the Constitution, as every body knows, has to work on the advice of the Prime Minister. In other words, in processing cases, the ACC is subordinated to the executive's will which usually happens to be partisan. What the ACC statute provided for was a sufficient safeguard against any wrongful act of the ACC as it was made accountable to the parliament via the President through submission of an annual report that the parliament is to ultimately scrutinise. Furthermore, the ACC is governed by a schedule of offences to take cognisance of allegations of corruption and take action on them. So, what's wrong with all that?
We are shocked at the length to which some sectors are going to clip the ACC's powers and jurisdiction vested in it by the ACC Act of 2004 as amended through an ordinance by the last caretaker government. The grand alliance government despite pledging to strengthen ACC nonetheless set up a high powered special committee to suggest amendments to what remained of the ACC.
Twenty-six amendment proposals were made by the committee, six of which were deemed by the ACC as compromising the power and authority of the anti-graft body making it subservient to the executive much the same way that the anti-corruption bureau had been an appendage to the PMO. These required the ACC to take permission from the government before embarking on proceedings against high functionaries of the state including ministers, MPs and bureaucrats.
It is our firm conviction that the best interest of the government, people and the country dictates that the government allow the ACC to work independently with a separate secretariat, a budget of its own and the rules of business in line with powerful anti-graft bodies in the USA, UK and India.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel. 
Related News
India’s ‘push-in’ strategy violates international law
6 hour(s) ago
Editorial
Why build roads through a reserved forest?
11 hour(s) ago
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