Clarification, Our Reply
Barrister Omar Sadat, the lawyer who filed a writ petition of a former district anti-corruption officer of now defunct Bureau of Anti-Corruption (Bac), has sent some clarifications to a Daily Star report headlined "Moudud's sudden move stays graft body work" which was published on Saturday.He said the functions of the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) has not been stayed by the November 1 order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court. "The Commission is as able as ever to act against anyone it chooses, within the framework of Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2004. In fact ACC carried on with all its activities and initiated action against various people during the High Court stay order granted exactly in the fashion of the Appellate Division between 5.3.2006-24.8.2006 passed in this very same case," said barrister Omar. The case is not a step to prevent the ACC from commencing actions against corrupt ministers during the tenure of the caretaker government and that this is simply a case between two groups of Bac, he added. Barrister Omar further said involvement of former law minister Moudud Ahmed in the case was coincidental, due to the unavailability of Khondker Muhbubuddin Ahmed, who was engaged as the senior counsel to represent the petitioner before the Supreme Court. "We would like to make it clear and unequivocal that Mr Moudud's involvement in this case is neither political nor personal. It was purely professional. Therefore your headline suggesting that Mr Moudud Ahmed is making moves to stifle the ACC is incorrect." Barrister Omar termed wrong the information that the matter was heard by Justice Joynul Abedin in the High Court Division. "The matter was heard by him only in the Appellate Division as a Chamber Judge," he said. OUR REPLY
We agree that the Appellate Division did not stay the function of ACC as an institution. However, the order stays the function of 33 anti-corruption officers who are now the deputy directors in-charge of 33 sections of the ACC. So in effect, the work of the whole institution comes to a halt because of the order of the Appellate Division. That is what was meant in our report. Barrister Moudud Ahmed's appearing against the ACC is curious because it was his bill that created ACC about whose work he spoke so enthusiastically as minister. The cause list dated August 23 shows that the case was listed with the court of Justice Joynul Abedin. Our report was based on that cause list.
| 
