Editorial
Handling of Hall-Mark scam
Onus is largely on Finance Ministry
We are perplexed by the finance minister's observation that Bangladesh Bank's (BB) is yet to mature to be able to detect and contain a scam like Hall-Mark. Contrary to popular notion, it is not the sole responsibility of BB to handle such situations. There is a dual responsibility. BB has a monitoring role to play based on certain criteria that include capital adequacy ratio, loan loss provision, etc. As per the present system BB can at best recommend a course of action to the ministry of finance. But it cannot unilaterally take any action. Hence the onus is on the finance ministry and not BB.
While it may now be expedient for the finance minister to try and pass the blame on to the central bank claiming that it failed to act at the right time, the facts read otherwise. It is now known that BB detected during one of its audits, anomalies in loan provisioning by Sonali Bank's Ruposhi Bangla branch in favour of Hall-Mark group. It had recommended to Sonali Bank management to immediately remove Deputy General Manager and Deputy Managing Director AKM Azizur Rahman and Assistant Managing Director Saiful Islam. This was not heeded. The other issue that BB raised with the ministry on August 26 was that there be a reshuffling of Sonali Bank's board upon expiry of certain Directors' contracts. The ministry went for an extension of contracts instead of heeding calls for a reshuffle. The series of actions clearly demonstrate who ought to have been in the driving seat.
The irony here is that the finance ministry itself lacks competence and manpower to actually monitor what the NCBs are doing. Given these inadequacies, it was for Sonali bank's management to ensure the proper functioning of the bank.
At any rate, the unilateral casting of blame on a regulatory body like BB can neither be healthy as a precedent nor helpful in solving the crisis.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments