The government formed the much talked about Anti-Corruption Commission on November 21, 2004, which was the fulfillment of an election pledge of the four-party ruling alliance. The government was under incessant pressure from the donor countries and agencies for formation of the independent Anti-Corruption Commission. Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs Minister Moudud Ahmed claimed that the formation of the commission was a landmark step of the government in order to fulfill its election pledge of combating corruption. Whatever may be the fact, the people of this country welcomed formation of the independent Anti-Corruption Commission and expected it to play a major role to control the unabated corruption in all sectors, though it has failed miserably. But the establishment of an Ombudsman's office, to act effectively as the watchdog against corruption still remains unfilled.

An Ombudsman is a public official empowered to investigate citizens' complaints against the government or its functionaries. He is to investigate complaints of citizens who claim to have suffered injustice in consequence of maladministration by the government functionaries. He may also initiate investigation suo motu without any formal complaint by anybody. As an intermediary between the citizens and the government functionaries, the Ombudsman is an impartial and independent official empowered only to recommend. Article 77 of the Constitution provides: “(1) Parliament may, by law, provide for the office of Ombudsman. (2) The Ombudsman shall exercise such powers and perform such function as Parliament may, by law, determine, including the power to investigate any action taken by a Ministry, a public officer or a statutory public authority. (3) The Ombudsman shall prepare an annual report concerning the discharge of his function and such report shall be laid before Parliament.”

The Ombudsman Act was enacted in 1980 pursuant to Article 77 of the Constitution that provides for the establishment of the office of Ombudsman. According to Section 6 of the Ombudsman Act, the Ombudsman will investigate any action taken by a ministry, a public officer or a statutory public authority when he receives a complaint regarding that action from any person, who claims that injustice has been caused to him. The Act does not include some important government functionaries, such as Minister, Members of Parliament, Judges, etc within the jurisdiction of the Ombudsman to investigate. The Ombudsman under the existing act will tantamount to the creation of what the British had termed as “Ombud-smouse” which means a toothless tiger. Obviously the people of Bangladesh do not need an Ombudsmouse, but an Ombudsman in the real sense of the term.

The Ombudsman has been empowered to serve summons and interrogate any person and ask for public record or its copy from any office for examination. Section 9 of the Ombudsman Act has made it mandatory for the competent authority to implement the recommendations made by the Ombudsman in his report after investigating a case. We think that it is necessary for establishment of an Ombudsman office for close look of the functions and responsibilities of the Anti-Corruption Commission so that the Anti-Corruption Commission can deal with some punishable offences committed by the high-powered government officials.

The formation of the Anti-Corruption Commission raised the old question of partisanship on the part of the government. Such a question raised at the very inception of the commission, because of the appointment of three core members whose past records show that they have been closely associated with the BNP-led government and may not go for taking actions that will displease the high command of the BNP. Our experience with another statutory organ of the state is not at all a pleasant one. The statutory body Election Commission has already lost its creditability as to holding free and fair election after recruitment of 150 upazila election officers (UEOs) who have umbilical link with the ruling alliance. The establishment of an Ombudsman office in the similar way will create another new crisis.

The newly-formed Anti-Corruption Commission started functioning from November 22, after its Chairman Justice Sultan Hossain Khan joined his new assignment. The chairman sought all-out cooperation from the government, opposition political parties and people for effective functioning of the commission, and said the commission would succeed in getting rid of corruption if it received everyone's cooperation. According to the Anti-Corruption Commission Act, the commission needs no approval from anybody to investigate any person or to prosecute any person on charge of corruption. The people of this country have very bitter experience with the Bureau of Anti-Corruption, whose only job was to harass the opponents of the party in power. But the Anti-Corruption Commission has also miserably failed to fulfill their expectations.

Ranking of Bangladesh as the most corruption afflicted country in the world by Transparency International for the fourth successive year, is no doubt a matter of deep embarrassment for the nation as a whole. One may dispute the ranking of Bangladesh as the most corrupt country in the world, but there prevails no scope for denying the widespread corruption in the country. The present government as well as its predecessor came to power with firm pledges to wipe out corruption from the country on top priority basis. But the hard reality is that none of the governments honoured their pledges so vital for the better growth of economy and well-being of the people. The present government, however, has at last formed the independent Anti-Corruption Commission, though it has not yet been able to start functioning properly.

For a country that has ranked as the most corrupt country in the world, for the fourth successive year by the Transparency International, the formation of an independent Anti-Corruption Commission was a praiseworthy development. But the Anti-Corruption Commission failed to fulfill a long-standing public demand as it was not allowed to operate independently and neutrally with sufficient powers. If the government was genuinely interested to let the Anti-Corruption Commission function effectively and the parliamentary standing committees to work with full flair, these institutions would be able to address the unabated corruption in the country at least to some extent.

As many as one hundred countries across the world introduced the office of the Ombudsmen, to ensure that rules and regulations were complied with by the government functionaries while discharging their duties. The constitution of Bangladesh also desired that the national parliament would enact necessary law to introduce the office of the Ombudsman. Twenty five years have elapsed since enactment of Ombudsman Act, 1980 in the Parliament, but the nation has not yet seen an Ombudsman though it is a crucial need to ensure good governance in the country. A constitutional obligation should not remain unimplemented for such a long time. Not only a tax Ombudsman, the appointment of sector-wise Ombudsmen and cancellation of the official secrecy act are also imperative to ensure good governance. But before going for such appointments, the government must select non-partisan men and create necessary environment for the Ombudsmen to perform their duties without fear or favour.

The author is a freelance contributor to The Daily Star.