Graft Enquiry, Probe by ACC: No harm if same official does both

The High Court in the full text of a judgement has upheld the rule that allows the Anti-Corruption Commission to assign the same officer the task of conducting both the inquiry and investigation of a corruption case, observing that there is no scope for the officer to become biased in doing this job.

"It is the Commission who may delegate or assign its power to its subordinate officer by a gazette notification to inquire or to investigate into the case…. In the process of tacking decision in submitting investigation report before the court concerned the investigating officer has nothing to do. Entrusting the same official to act as informant and investigator as well does not readily leave space of causing bias," the HC bench of Justice M Enayetur Rahim and Justice Md Mostafizur Rahman said in the verdict.

The full text of verdict was released on Thursday night.

On December 8 last year, the bench had delivered the short judgement rejecting a writ petition filed challenging the legality of an amended rule that allows the ACC to appoint an officer to conduct both the inquiry and investigation of a corruption case.

The writ petition was filed by former chairman of Ekushey Television (ETV) Abdus Salam, an accused in some corruption cases.

In the full text of the verdict, the HC observed that the question raised by the writ petition about unfairness of the trial as the same ACC official is informant and investigation officer of a case filed against him does not have any merit.

"It is to be noted that a case initiated on allegation of any scheduled offence of corruption chiefly rests upon documentary evidence on initial appraisal of which FIR [first information report] is lodged to set the law on motion and accordingly the task of investigation goes on and eventually report recommending prosecution is submitted.

"In such case, even if the informant and the investigation officer is the same person or official of the Commission, there can be no space of recommending concocted arraignment, going beyond the documentary evidence collected.

"Thus, it may be justifiably deduced that mere fact that the informant and the investigating officer is the same official of the Commission does not readily taint the fairness of trial started on the basis of such investigation report and also there lies no room to apprehend that trial of the case shall be prejudiced," read the verdict.

The HC judges in the full text of the verdict said an accused must get the opportunity to diminish the fairness of investigation in trial by cross-examining the investigation officer and other witnesses as well.

"In view of the above, we have no hesitation to hold that there is no reason whatsoever to doubt the credibility of the informant and the investigation report solely on the ground that the informant himself has investigated the case," the bench said.

The question of failure of justice should be left to the discretion and vigilance of the courts, it added.

Speaking to The Daily Star, ACC lawyer Khurshid Alam Khan said the ACC rule is valid and the commission can appoint an officer to conduct both the inquiry and investigation of a corruption case following the HC verdict and there is no legal bar for the commission to proceed with the corruption cases against Abdus Salam.

Salam had filed the writ petition with the HC in September last year challenging the legality of an amended rule of the Anti-Corruption Commission Rules, 2007 that allows the graft watch to appoint an officer to conduct both the inquiry and investigation of a corruption case.

In the same petition, Salam prayed to the HC to scrap the proceedings of the corruption case filed against him by the ACC.

The ACC filed the case with Ramna Model Police Station on March 13, 2017 against Salam on charges of amassing illegal wealth worth Tk 32.20 crore.

ACC Deputy Director Md Shamsul Alam conducted both the inquiry and investigation of the corruption case against Salam.