Bangladesh: Truth commission sparks shift
By P R Kumaraswamy for ISN
In one sweeping move, Bangladesh's neutral caretaker government has brought about more far-reaching change than anyone in the country could have imagined. On 25 May the government, headed by Chief Adviser Fakhruddin Ahmed, approved the establishment of the Truth and Accountability Commission (TAC), which the official spokesperson told the media would "let people voluntarily admit to their corruption, deposit ill-gotten wealth to the exchequer and seek mercy."
For a country whose name is synonymous with corruption, this is revolutionary. From 2001 to 2005, anti-corruption watchdog Transparency International ranked Bangladesh as the fifth most corrupt country in the world. In 2006 it rose to third, grouped with the Democratic Republic of Congo, Chad, Sudan and Guinea.
While the specifics are still being constructed, some broad constituent parameters of the TAC have become apparent. For example, those who are currently facing corruption charges will be offered a plea bargain, escaping prosecution and possible prison terms, in return for admitting guilt and returning all their "ill-gotten" wealth to the state.
Under the proposal, those granted amnesty by the TAC would be barred from contesting Jatiya Sangsad [Bangladeshi parliament] or local elections for five years. They would also be prevented from holding any public office or executive positions in associations or financial institutions.
With elections slated for December, the government has kept the tenure of the TAC to five months. But there's a catch: Commission proceedings will continue until the outcome of cases is decided.
It is a difficult choice for Bangladeshi politicians accused of corruption: accept guilt or fight the charges in court.
With this masterstroke, the caretaker government hopes to silence, marginalize and eventually remove from the political scene most prominent figures in the country. At present, over 200 political leaders, businessmen and senior officials face a variety of corruption charges. A number of those were arrested following the declaration of a state of emergency in January 2007, including such prominent leaders as Awami head Sheikh Hasina, Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) leader Khaleda Zia and Jamaat leader Motiur Rahman Nizami.
There is a nagging suspicion that the current government of technocrats wants to transform the political landscape of Bangladesh. While the Constitution set a timeframe of 90 days for the caretaker government to stay in power, Fakhruddin's administration is still in control after 16 months. Furthermore the Constitution explicitly states that the purpose of the caretaker government should be "to provide to the Election Commission all possible aid and assistance that may be required for holding the general election of members of Parliament peacefully, fairly and impartially."
On the contrary, capitalizing on popular discontent with the corrupt political leadership, the neutral government has embarked upon a number of serious, if long overdue, changes: the separation of the judiciary from the administrative control of the executive; electoral reforms; the wholesale revision of electoral lists; and the initiation of an anti-corruption drive.
Some earlier attempts by the caretaker government to sideline political personalities were not successful. Intimidation tactics against Hasina and Khaleda did not yield much and their anticipated marginalization within their parties did not materialize. For example, while there is a split in the BNP, it is small.
There were also suspicions that the caretaker government was propping up Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus to form a new political party. Eventually, the caretaker government announced the TAC.
Naturally, political parties are up in arms; they have much to lose. Having members plead guilty under the Commission's terms would destroy their reputations and remove them from the political scene. Five years is an eternity in politics, especially when public or semi-public offices are off-limits.
At the same time, rejecting amnesty and challenging corruption charges is risky. With the judiciary separated from the executive, the verdicts are no longer assured. Any government which comes to power after the December Jatiya Sangsad election would not be able to manipulate the judiciary as before. Furthermore, it is still not clear if those under indictment would be prevented from contesting the December elections.
The final verdict in this new twist, however, depends upon the silent Bangladeshi population. Despite initial misgivings and nostalgia regarding the 1990 agitation for the restoration of democracy, Bangladeshis have largely accepted the legitimacy of the caretaker government and endorsed its actions. Even when its moves are extra-constitutional, the public has not reacted negatively. For a country that breathes on hartal (public strikes), this is no mean accomplishment. Thus the Truth and Accountability Commission could well turn out to be the crusade against corruption in Bangladesh that the country has needed for so long.