Opinion

Bangladesh Bank: Journalists can't enter but loan defaulters can?

Referring to the ban on journalists entering Bangladesh Bank, Awami League's general secretary, minister for road transport and bridges Obaidul Quader, said at a press briefing on Saturday, "Can journalists enter the central bank in any country of the world? Everything you want to know is on the website. Why do you need to enter the bank?"

At the same event, the journalists asked the bridges minister whether the government was worried that the country's reserves had dropped from 48 billion dollars down to 13 billion dollars. In reply, he said, "Who said it is 13 billion dollars? Where was it in the news? We have the figures."

A journalist said, "The Bangladesh Bank governor said there was around 13 billion usable dollars." In reply, the Awami League general secretary said, "Then ask the governor -- why it has fallen to this level. We don't know about that. We know that the reserves are around 19 to 20 billion dollars."

On one hand the Awami League general secretary questioned why the journalists needed to enter Bangladesh Bank, and on the other he told them to go to the Bangladesh Bank governor to ask him about the reserves. If they can't enter Bangladesh Bank, how can they ask the governor? By email? Over the phone? What guarantee is there that he will reply to the email or answer the phone?

The journalists didn't ask for free access to Bangladesh Bank. They wanted a continuation of the rule that had been in place so long regarding the entry of journalists to the central bank. The journalists would enter their details in the register placed at the reception area on the ground floor of the bank, collect a pass and then enter. They would have to return the pass when leaving. This system had been in place from the very beginning.

Then around a month ago, the central bank executive director and spokesperson Md Mezbaul Haque told journalists, "Bangladesh Bank has decided that from now on journalists can use the temporary pass only to meet the spokesperson. If any official gives a journalist a pass, the journalist can only meet with that particular official. The journalists can no longer freely go to any department of the bank as before."

Journalists never went freely to Bangladesh Bank. They would go with the temporary passes. They would meet the relevant persons for information or to verify any information. They would talk to them. But Bangladesh Bank now wants to first determine who the journalist will talk to, after determining that, only then will they give them permission to meet that particular person.

Even the secretariat doesn't enforce such a degree of strictness. If a journalist has an accreditation card, they can enter the secretariat and meet with whomever they need to meet. Of course that depends on the approval of the concerned minister or official. In Bangladesh Bank too, if the official with whom the journalist want to meet doesn't give permission, then he can't meet him. So why the new rule?

Bangladesh Bank enforced this unwritten rule at a time when all sorts of news regarding bank mergers and default loans have emerged in the media. Some of the banks that Bangladesh Bank has set up for mergers, have been objecting. There are questions regarding a merger between a state-owned bank and a private bank. If this new ban has been imposed because the journalists have been reporting on these issues, then it is very unfortunate.

In February when the central bank announced a roadmap to cure the banking sector of its "diseases", the media took this as a positive measure. The banking sector problems are very old, but no governor had taken such measures before. It is the present governor who took up these steps.

An action plan on 17 issues was taken up in the roadmap, significant among which are - reducing the default loans, halting loans in false names and fraud, ensuring appointment of qualified directors, appointing independent directors, and merging weak banks with strong ones.

The journalists do not want any more that the access that they were provided during military rule, during democracy or even during partial democratic rule. The central bank, too, has all along cooperated with the journalists.

Bangladesh Bank said they have three objectives: 1. To bring down the overall bank default loans, now a bit less than 10 per cent, to under 8 per cent. 2. To bring down the default loans of state-owned banks to 10 per cent and of private banks to 5 per cent, which are at present 22 per cent and 7 per cent respectively. 3. To bring down to zero, loans outside the loan limits, loans given in false names for vested interests and loans provided by fraud and cheating, in order to ensure good governance in the banking sector.

In 2009, default loans were around Tk 220 billion (Tk 22,000 crore), which now exceed Tk 1.55 trillion (Tk 1 lakh 55 thousand crore). Given the circumstances, the media is considering Bangladesh Bank's roadmap to be positive. So what could the reason be for this new bar on journalists?

Bangladesh Bank's responsibilities include preparing and implementing the monetary policy and loan policy; supervising and controlling the banks and non-bank financial institutions; managing the country's foreign exchange reserves, issuing currency (notes and coins), controlling and supervising repayments, etc.

If these tasks are in the interests of the people and the country, then the journalists have the right to inform the people of these matters. It cannot be expected that Bangladesh Bank will provide all detailed information on its website, as claimed by the Awami League general secretary. Such disclosures are made in countries where there is full transparency and accountability in the functioning of government institutions. Even then, it is the duty of the journalists to provide the people with unknown information.

No authority has posted anything on the website about the loan scams that took place during the present government or the past government. The journalists dug up the dirt and revealed these scams to the people. In many cases, action was taken against certain quarters based on leads provided by the news media.

When the journalists get information from various sources, they need to go to Bangladesh Bank to clarify these stories. If this is seen as conspiratorial or if attempts are made to conceal the facts, this will not bode well for Bangladesh Bank either.

Obaidul Quader once upon a time was in journalism himself and his columns were popular too. Had Bangladesh Bank imposed such restrictions back then, would he have written in support of such prohibitions? I leave this question to his conscience.

The journalists do not want any more that the access that they were provided during military rule, during democracy or even during partial democratic rule. The central bank, too, has all along cooperated with the journalists. Even the writer of this column visited Bangladesh Bank twice at the behest of a former governor.

The Awami League general secretary spoke of other countries. But in those countries, the loan defaulters don't control the central bank. They cannot change the laws at their will. In those countries the central bank's website declares what measures are being taken against various persons. That is not done here. In fact, many things remain a secret.

In our country, it is the loan defaulters who fix interest rates and the tenures of the bank directors. The central bank provides loans to commercial banks to salvage them from bankruptcy. This is unprecedented anywhere else. Everything will go ahead according to the Bangladesh way, only when it comes to journalists will the western way be followed!

Journalists have protested against Bangladesh Bank's new restrictions. They have spoken to the governor of Bangladesh Bank. But to no avail. Recently state minister Mohammad Ali Arafat reassured journalists that the problem will soon be resolved. And then the Awami League general secretary comes up with his contention: "Everything is there on the website for you. Why will you go inside?"

It may be recalled that in February 2016 hackers used the SWIFT system to make off with USD101 million (USD10 crore 10 lakh) of Bangladesh Bank's reserves kept with the US Federal Reserve in New York. The government formed an inquiry committee headed by former Bangladesh Bank governor Mohammad Farashuddin and they submitted their report in due time. Now if the journalists want to know about that report, is that an unrightful ask?

Obaidul Quader once upon a time was in journalism himself and his columns were popular too. Had Bangladesh Bank imposed such restrictions back then, would he have written in support of such prohibitions? I leave this question to his conscience.

* Sohrab Hassan is joint editor of Prothom Alo and a poet  

* This column appeared in the print and online edition of Prothom Alo and has been rewritten for the English edition by Ayesha Kabir