THE PATRIOT AND HIS FRIENDS
How long can a minister remain in the cabinet? The answer is simple– as long as he enjoys blessings of the Prime Minister. The situation can be compared to what used to exist long ago in some countries including the United Kingdom under the rule of kings. The king in the UK had enjoyed the unfettered powers of hiring and firing anybody. He did not need to answer to anybody for his actions. For many years, the king was above the law. The common perception was that the king could do no wrong. In modern democracy, the Prime Minister in Bangladesh holds the same power. The constitution itself provides him/her with such powers while the current political culture gives him/her the authority to remain as the supreme and unquestionable leader both in the ruling party and in the government. Save for Bangladesh, it is difficult to find another such example.
Sheikh Hasina has emerged as the first Prime Minister who enjoys some unfettered power in both the cabinet and the ruling party. And if she certifies anybody as honest, none in the government machineries can dare to challenge that. She had certified former Communications Minister Syed Abul Hossain as a “patriot” after his resignation from the Hasina's cabinet in July 2012 following his alleged link to a graft conspiracy in the Padma Bridge project.
There was widespread speculation that Abul would not face a tough time as he was in the good books of the Prime Minister. Public perception was correct as Abul was not named in the graft charges. The government had also continuously been denying that there was no conspiracy of graft.
Finally the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) has recently given a clean chit to all the seven accused in the Padma bridge project. The anti-graft watchdog admitted its failure to collect enough evidence and interrogate several key accused in the conspiracy case. Yet it has concluded that no conspiracy took place in the project. The ACC has recently given its final report to the court that has led to the acquittal of all the seven accused. With their acquittal, Abul may claim that the corruption allegation against him was wrong and he was the real patriot that the prime minister had claimed him to be.
But three of the seven accused are facing trial in a Canadian court. Of the three, one is a Bangladesh origin Canadian, one India origin Canadian and the other a Canadian national. They are officials of Canadian firm SNC Lavalin, which was selected for the Padma bridge project's consultancy job. But in clearing them from the charges, the ACC did not think what will happen if the Canadian court decides the case otherwise.
The World Bank had shared with the ACC some information showing Abul Hossain and the accused persons were indeed conspiring to award the project's consultancy job to SNC Lavalin in exchange for bribe. The WB was to finance the project along with several other development partners. But in June 2012, the Bank cancelled its $1.2 billion funding, saying it had proof of a "corruption conspiracy" involving Bangladeshi officials, executives of a Canadian firm and some individuals.
In a letter to the ACC in 2013, the WB external panel of experts said it considered that the evidence suggested a criminal conspiracy that included the former Minister of Communications as the most senior official personally involved. His name and the indication of payment of 4% were subsequently included in a list of people that were to receive compensation for their alleged involvement in the conspiracy. The panel said that the ultimate award of the contract likely required Abul's approval. He met with SNC Lavalin management at the request of the former secretary which was likely in furtherance of the negotiations for an illegal payment. The WB panel was also of the view that Abul should be named in the case and investigated for a fair probe into the case. But the ACC did neither.
Abul and the seven accused have been made winners. But the ACC's credibility is mired in controversy once again. Its failure to gather evidence in the Padma bridge case has again proved that the anti-graft watchdog fails to go ahead with the case against individuals enjoying the blessing of the government high ups. Recently, the ACC has also given a clean chit for many ruling AL MPs and leaders by claiming that their involvement in corruption has not been proved. The ACC however keeps performing well to take actions against some opposition politicians.
The writer is Senior Reporter, The Daily Star.
Comments