ACC chairman appointment draws criticism from legal experts, advocates

The appointment of retired High Court judge Justice AKM Asaduzzaman as chairman of the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) has drawn criticism from legal experts and anti-corruption advocates, who have questioned its constitutionality and implications for judicial independence.

Ridwanul Hoque, a professor of Law at the University of Dhaka, criticised the government's appointment in a Facebook post, saying that appointing Justice AKM Asaduzzaman as chairman of the ACC violates the Constitution and undermines judicial independence.

Hoque based his argument on Article 99(1) of Bangladesh's Constitution, which states that a retired or removed judge "shall not... hold any office of profit in the service of the Republic" that is not a judicial or quasi-judicial office.

He said appointing a former judge to head the ACC directly breaches the principle of judicial independence.

Hoque also criticised the appointment in the context of democracy, saying the government was "clearly in the path opposite to democracy".

He acknowledged that a similar appointment had been made several years ago, indicating that the practice was not without precedent, while maintaining his concerns over its constitutional implications.

Echoing these concerns, Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB) Executive Director Dr Iftekharuzzaman questioned the appointment of retired High Court judge Justice AKM Asaduzzaman as ACC chairman, saying it creates a potential conflict with the Constitution and raises serious questions about the commission's functioning.

Speaking to The Business Standard, Iftekharuzzaman said the BNP government had repeated a "bad precedent" set in 2004, when another retired judge was appointed as the first ACC chairman.

He said the appointment appears to conflict with Article 99(1) of the Constitution, under which a retired judge cannot hold any office of profit in the service of the Republic except in a judicial or quasi-judicial body.

"ACC is not a judicial or quasi-judicial body," he said.

He also noted that retired judges are barred from pleading or acting before any court.

"The appointment therefore creates a double-edged problem," Iftekharuzzaman said.

"On the one hand ACC is not a judicial or quasi-judicial body, and on the other hand, as an investigative agency, an ACC headed by a chair who is a former judge will not only suffer from conflict of interest, but also, by implication, violate the Constitution on a daily basis as long as it remains headed by a former judge."

He said the issue also raises a moral dilemma for the retired judge himself, particularly over whether accepting the position is consistent with the values and integrity expected of a former Appellate Division judge.

"In the most likely scenario of the government ignoring these implications, the question that looms large is about the moral dilemma that the honourable judge would confront, particularly whether the values and integrity he is expected to uphold as a former justice of the Appellate Division is consistent with his acceptance of this position and serving as such," he said.

The Cabinet Division announced the appointment in a gazette notification on 17 August under Section 6(1) of the Anti-Corruption Commission Act, 2004.

Alongside Asaduzzaman, the government appointed Dr Jahangir Alam and Dr Sazzat Hossain Bhuiyan as ACC commissioners.

Asaduzzaman will receive the salary, allowances and status equivalent to a judge of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, while the two commissioners will receive status and benefits equivalent to judges of the High Court Division.

The appointments were made by the president on the recommendation of a selection committee formed on 22 June.

The appointments restored permanent leadership to the ACC, which had been without a permanent commission since the previous commission resigned on 3 March.

The ACC is a statutory investigative agency established under the ACC Act and is mandated to inquire into, investigate and initiate prosecution for corruption offences. It is not a judicial or quasi-judicial body, with trials and adjudication carried out by formal judicial bodies, including the Special Judge Courts.

The new commission is expected to accelerate long-standing investigations and strengthen the agency's institutional capacity. It will also face scrutiny over its independence, impartiality and effectiveness as it takes over an institution that has operated without permanent top officials for several months.