The recommendation to repeal the ordinance on the appointment of Supreme Court judges and the ordinance on an independent secretariat, and to suspend the ordinances on the National Human Rights Commission and the prevention of enforced disappearances under the pretext of review, is disappointing.
Overall, the human rights situation, justice, equal rights for all, the independence of the judiciary, independent judicial appointments, and an independent judicial secretariat are all very important. Ignoring these fundamental reform areas, even after past experiences, is suicidal for all parties represented in the national parliament.
The people, as well as all the political parties represented in the current parliament, especially the ruling party, have gone through the experience of the previous authoritarian period. They are expected to learn from that experience. Nearly all of them have been victims of multidimensional rights violations caused by legal weaknesses in those areas, particularly due to the politicisation and resulting ineffectiveness of state institutions like the judiciary and the Human Rights Commission.
If they have truly learned from the experience of authoritarianism and the bloody mass uprising in July, then they should prove it to the people by immediately taking steps to approve these ordinances in parliament in the form of bills without alteration. However, the concern remains: where is that learning reflected in reality?
The ruling party’s election manifesto clearly emphasized the independence of the judiciary and the prevention of corruption. Therefore, neglecting these issues in this manner is deeply concerning. It creates a sense of frustration among people as to why the current government or parliament is ignoring those fundamental areas of reform that are essential for establishing an accountable system of governance. This does not align with the expectations on which they were elected to parliament.
There has been a dilemma regarding the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) ordinance. This is because the ordinance formulated to amend the ACC law contains many weaknesses. We raised these concerns at the time it was drafted. There were negotiations with the interim government on these issues, and at one point they had agreed. However, they later backed away, mainly due to resistance from within, particularly from the bureaucracy.
Now, that same situation is recurring. Personally, I believe the ordinance on ACC reform needs reconsideration. For that reason, I agree with the decision to suspend it for now. However, this suspension must not become a permanent arrangement.
All the proposals of the ACC Reform Commission that were unanimously agreed upon by all political parties, including BNP, without any note of dissent, and were incorporated into the July Charter, as well as many other ACC-related proposals outside the July Charter that also had consensus among all parties, should be used as benchmarks. Based on those, and through stakeholder engagement, the ACC ordinance should be revised immediately. Then, based on those revisions, it should be enacted into law.
Questions have also arisen about the message the government is sending by effectively rendering the ACC dysfunctional through creating a situation that led to the resignation of its chairman and commissioners. As a result, the government now bears a special responsibility to promptly revise the ordinance and, based on that, take immediate steps to establish a new ACC.
Similarly, for the remaining ordinances recommended for suspension, including those related to the ACC, the Police Commission, and the Right to Information (Amendment), they must be reviewed with the involvement of relevant stakeholders and swiftly enacted into law.
* Dr. Iftekharuzzaman, Executive Director, Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB)