Politics of litigation

OPPOSITION leader Begum Khaleda Zia has accused the government of filing false cases against her party men, and also made no secret of her plan to adopt the same strategy of cornering political adversaries with a barrage of litigations, when her party comes to power again.
Her purportedly sarcastic remark that the BNP is taking lessons from the ruling party in using litigation as a political weapon depicts how the two major parties are interested in trading charges and counter charges rather than being serious about combating corruption. Change of guard invariably leads to piling up of cases against political rivals. Many of these cases fail to stand judicial scrutiny and fall through cracks of weak prosecution. Small wonder also that corruption does not subside when the ruling party targets the opposition and much of the force of the anti-corruption drive is spent on politically motivated litigations.
The culture of drawing political opponents into legal battles also makes it necessary for the ruling party to try and have control, obviously unlawfully, over the entire justice dispensation system. Only that can explain why they have always tried to emasculate the Anti-Corruption Commission, instead of strengthening it. It is the ACC which can, and should, play a pivotal role in the fight against corruption provided it is allowed to work independently. Yet, the report on the ACC Act 2004 finalised by the government-formed committee last month includes 23 amendment proposals, six of which have been objected to by the ACC chief himself. It is really not possible for the ACC to enjoy functional freedom if it has to take the government's permission, as proposed, to initiate legal proceedings "under certain circumstances." If the government tries to control the ACC by incorporating such provisions in the ACC Act, the ant-corruption body will degenerate into a toothless organisation as fighting corruption remains a far cry.
Both the ruling and the opposition leaders, aspiring to be back to the helm of power, have to not only admit but also insist on the truth that the ACC needs to function neutrally without any interference by the executive if transparency and accountability of the government is to be fully ensured. It seems they realise it a bit when they are out of power, but forget everything once they are in power. It is really a sad reflection on our politics that the politicians are eager to take only the counter-productive lessons from their rivals.