THE decision of the Anti-Corruption Commission to carry out a further investigation in a case filed against seven people on charges of ‘corruption conspiracy’ in hiring consultants for the Padma bridge project is welcome. The people alleged to have been involved in the ‘corruption conspiracy’, in the case that the commission filed on December 17, 2012, included the then Bridges Division secretary Mosharraf Hossain Buuiyan but did not name the key suspects, former communication minister Syed Abul Hossain and former minister of state for foreign affairs Abul Hasan Chowdhury as accused. The commission closed the corruption case on September 17, 2014 with a final report, noting that evidence of the crime having been committed was found but there was no adequate evidence to accuse any particular individuals. The agency cleared all the seven accused of the charges. All this ensued after the World Bank on June 29, 2012 had pulled out of the project to build the bridge, cancelling a $1.2 billion credit for the bridge, with other lending agencies such as the Asian Development Bank and the Japan International Cooperation Agency following suit. The government of the Awami League, which was toppled in a mass uprising on August 5, 2024, built the bridge, which was opened to the public on June 26, 2024, on its own finance.
A decade after the Anti-Corruption Commission’s having closed the case, the agency on December 31, 2024 decided to reopen the investigation, noting that it has obtained evidence of irregularities. A director general of the commission has now said that the accused in collusion with each other provided work orders in exchange for bribes for one of the bidders in the tender to high consultants for the bridge construction. This is a welcome decision in that the mystery that surrounded ‘corruption conspiracy’ of the Padma bridge project would now be resolved and the people at play, if any, could be held to account. This would not only set a precedent and deter any recurrence of such crimes but also uphold the rule of law. It would also ensure reparation of a sort of the ignominy that the ‘corruption conspiracy’ brought down on the nation. The commission’s decision on reinvestigation of the case does show that a clearance of the accused from the Padma bridge corruption concern that time does not mean that the Awami League government of the time, or any other government for that matter, is immaculate and free of the menace. This would also help the government to root out corruption, encourage the institution of accountability, which appears to have acted in partisan interests during the Awami League government, to get down on any irregularities and somewhat hold people in the ruling quarters from getting involved in corruption.
It is heartening that the commission’s move would establish the truth and hold to justice any perpetrators found involved in the ‘corruption commission.’ But there have always been, majorly, popular allegations of corruption in the power and energy sector and the communications sector. The commission should look into other popular allegations of corruption that have so far raised their head.