TDS Desk:

Corruption in administration has become the most-talked-about issue in recent days following the revelations of corruption and illegal asset acquisition of two top bureaucrats.

Reported graft by former National Board of Revenue member Matiur Rahman and former Inspector General of Police Benazir Ahmed triggered headlines and widespread gossip and reactions among the masses.

Public administration experts and former bureaucrats argue that corruption has become widespread in the administration due to a lack of oversight and implementation of existing regulations.

Experts highlight that despite having enough regulations to prevent corruption, they are not enforced. This lack of oversight allows corruption to flourish at all levels of administration. The government has often failed to take action against corrupt officials due to insufficient surveillance, with information about their corruption and illegal wealth mainly coming through social media and the mainstream media.

They also note that punishments are often politically motivated, resulting in minor penalties for significant crimes. This lack of exemplary punishment creates a favourable environment for corruption within the administration.

Due to the government’s inaction, the High Court intervened on July 2 instructing the government to enforce the ‘Government Employees (Conduct) Rules, 1979’ to ensure proper accounting of assets by government employees and their families.

RULES AND PENALTIES TO PREVENT CORRUPTION

According to the ‘Government Servants (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 2018’, civil servants can receive minor and severe penalties for various offences, including corruption. Minor penalties include reprimands, withholding promotions, and demotions, while severe penalties include forced retirement, removal from service, and termination.

The rules specify that employees believed to be corrupt due to acquiring financial assets beyond their known sources of income or living beyond their means can be punished. However, despite these provisions, there is no recent precedent for severe punishments for corruption among government employees.

The ‘Government Servants (Conduct) Rules, 1979’ require government servants to file asset statements every five years and obtain permission to acquire or sell immovable property. However, these rules are not enforced, and government servants are not held accountable for failing to account for their assets.

LACK OF SURVEILLANCE

Officials and former bureaucrats argue that the main issue is the lack of surveillance and enforcement, not a shortage of laws. Former senior secretary Abu Alam emphasised the need for law enforcement, stating, “The law that exists is fine, but if the law is not enforced, it is of no use. The law must be implemented.”

The prime minister’s directives on zero tolerance against corruption and drug eradication are not being followed due to weak state institutions and inadequate monitoring. The administration shows extreme weakness in surveillance, with no strict action against irregularities, he said.

This former secretary of the local government division said, ‘Now a big corruption has created a stir. People complain when they go to take any service. They have to pay extra money for services in various fields. Not a single sector is found where the service recipient gets the service at no additional cost. In all cases, we see extreme weakness in surveillance. There is no example of strict action against any irregularities. Whoever is punished to date is based on ‘choose and pick’ and political decisions.

Abu Alam said that he does not see any lack of sincerity of the Prime Minister to prevent corruption.

Former secretary Muhammad Fawzul Kabir Khan highlighted that corruption has become normalised, stating, “We have all accepted corruption now.” He criticised the insignificant punishments for significant crimes and the lack of oversight, which allows corruption to continue unchecked.

“Public servants are supposed to submit a statement of assets, but no one is doing so. No one is watching it, there is no oversight. In other countries, the homes and offices of corrupt officials are raided, and they are caught red-handed. Corruption is so rampant here that if you raid the sub-registrar’s office or customs house, you can catch many. But those who are supposed to do it remain idle.

Fawzul Kabir also said, “Earlier five to ten per cent of people used to indulge in corruption. Everyone else in the society had a bad impression about them. Now the corrupt are leading the society. One who takes more bribes holds more influence on the society.”

GOVERNMENT’S STANCE

The government claims that only a few officials are involved in corruption and insists that no sympathy will be shown to those proven to be corrupt. Cabinet Secretary Mahbub Hossain stated, “Not everyone engages in corruption. A handful do, and everyone else is embarrassed by those few.”

He emphasised that the government’s mechanisms are always cooperating to take action against corruption.

COURT INSTRUCTIONS AND RULES ISSUED

The High Court issued a ruling on July 2 directing the proper implementation of rules for declaring and filing property statements of government employees and their families (Government Servant Conduct Rules, 1979).

The court asked for a progress report within three months and inquired why the lack of necessary policies to prevent illegal asset acquisition should not be declared illegal.

PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION SECRETARY’S RESPONSE

When asked about the increase in corruption due to lack of surveillance, Senior Secretary of the Ministry of Public Administration Mohammad Mezbah Uddin Chowdhury declined to comment over the phone, requesting to schedule a direct conversation through his private secretary.

Despite multiple attempts, no time was provided for the discussion.

Mezbah’s private secretary Mohammad Bariul Karim Khan was contacted in this regard, he said, “I will tell you the time after talking to Sir.”

But he did not give the time. When contacted again, Bariul said, “I could not match the schedule.”