The members of parliament in Bangladesh are entrusted to make laws and to formulate policy on any issue including development. It is not their job to implement those development projects. This separation of authority is a universal practice, for all countries and communities. But during the rule of the BNP-Jamaat coalition government in Bangladesh, the practice of handing over funds to MPs emerged.
The objective was to implement local development projects. That was the beginning of an opportunity to curb local government representatives’ power by the MPs. It clearly created division among the people's representatives.
It is unfortunate that this trend has been institutionalised over the last decade. This has created a gap between the elected representatives of the local government and the MPs. The constitutional concept of local development by local representatives has been obstructed. It did not stop here.
Jatiya Sangsad can tackle the matter in two ways now. First, it may end the discussion by politically attacking the TIB as in the past. Second, it can form a parliamentary inquiry committee.
The anti-corruption watchdog, Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB) has recently published a research report titled 'challenges of good governance in the implementation of parliamentary seat-based allocation and infrastructure development project'. If what is revealed in it is correct, it is insulting to the Jatiya Sangsad. People usually expect that there will be more transparency, less irregularities in projects where MPs are involved, apart from systemic errors. But the outcome is quite different.
According to TIB's research, about one-third of the work done to develop rural infrastructure by the MPs is of poor quality. On top of that, they even take commissions for the work and even payment of bills.
Overall, the parliament should take the findings of TIB research very seriously. Due to the questionable election, the very moral basis of the parliament is at stake. Now the data says, the actual bills for more than six hundred projects are not correct. Tis can lead to embezzlement of 400,000 to 650,000 taka for each bill. The amount of total corruption could be more than 410 million taka, a figure that is specifically stated in the report.
We believe the policy of involving MPs in the implementation of development projects is not only wrong, it proves to be terribly detrimental to the public interest.
Jatiya Sangsad can tackle the matter in two ways now. First, it may end the discussion by politically attacking the TIB as in the past. Second, it can form a parliamentary inquiry committee. In the Fifth Parliament, we witnessed the formation of such a committee of inquiry into allegations of corruption by a minister, the publication of a huge report on it and the lively discussion in parliament. That practice could not proceed further, but it needs to be revived.
The utmost requirement is political reassessment. In parliamentary democracy, the punishment for the corruption of politicians is ultimately in the hands of the people. People will ultimately reject the person who loses their trust. But with the weak voting system, people’s power is no longer relevant.
We believe the policy of involving MPs in the implementation of development projects is not only wrong, it proves to be terribly detrimental to the public interest. No democracy in the world expects MPs or ministers or their dependents to engage in any form of business or unconventional financial transactions with the state or government. That is why in many countries MPs have to make statements about conflicts of interest while taking oath. There is a written code of conduct for MPs. They are removed from the parliament in many countries for violating these rules.
It is not acceptable in any way what is happening in Bangladesh. The situation could improve somewhat if it were made mandatory for public representatives at all levels to adhere with a written code of conduct and to publish a statement of conflict of interest. It is important to find a political solution to this. It would be difficult to change the situation if we only look to institutions like the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC).