[🇧🇩] Corruption Watch

[Saif]

Corruption case backlog rises

The Anti-Corruption Commission is grappling with a growing backlog of cases as 8,330 corruption cases remain pending with various courts across the country.

www.newagebd.net

Corruption case backlog rises

Over 8,000 cases pending with courts, disposal rate falls

Solamain Salman

File photo

The Anti-Corruption Commission is grappling with a growing backlog of cases as 8,330 corruption cases remain pending with various courts across the country.

The backlog has been increasing every year, with around 2,000 additional cases piling up at courts over the past five years due to a poor disposal rate.

Besides, the disposal rate has also been declining gradually in recent years, also causing the backlog to keep rising.

Experts, including lawyers, said that the number of pending cases is going up mainly due to the non-appearance of witnesses and delays in trial proceedings caused by graft suspects through various means, including filing writ petitions against ongoing trials.

According to the latest ACC data, a total of 8,330 graft cases were pending across the country from 2004, when the ACC was established, till February this year -- with lower courts, the High Court and the Appellate Division.

In the backlog, 335 graft cases filed two decades ago -- during the now-defunct Bureau of Anti-Corruption -- are also pending with various courts while trial proceedings of 484 cases have been kept stopped following stay orders by the apex court.

The number of pending cases was 8,306 in December 2025, compared with 7,689 in December 2024, 7,278 in December 2023, 6,667 in 2022 and 6,373 in 2021.

Although special judge courts exist to deal with corruption cases, judges are often delaying graft cases as they simultaneously handle cases under the Negotiable Instruments Act and narcotics laws.

According to experts, judges tend to prioritise NI Act and narcotics cases as these are comparatively easier to dispose of within shorter time periods and help show better performances.

They also alleged that despite the ACC being an independent body, successive governments appoint lawyers based on political loyalty rather than merit.

Due to such politically influenced appointments, many lawyers lack accountability and often act in line with government interests instead of protecting the commission’s position, they added.

Former ACC director general (legal) Moyeedul Islam told New Age that the backlog of graft cases was growing as there was no specialised court dedicated solely to corruption cases.Campus bites reporting

He said that although special judge courts exist, judges conduct trials of various types of cases and there is little accountability regarding the completion of ACC cases.

To ensure accountability, the High Court Division in 2016 directed judges of special courts to submit monthly reports on the number of disposed graft cases, but the directive is largely being ignored, he added.

He also stressed the need for exclusive courts for ACC cases, establishing a permanent prosecution unit with skilled lawyers and ensuring supervision by the High Court.

An analysis of ACC data also shows that the disposal rate of cases is now around 7 per cent, compared with about 10 per cent five years ago.

The disposal rate was 7.63 per cent in 2025, 8.65 per cent in 2024, 10.17 per cent in 2023 and 10.08 per cent in 2022.

Politicians, businesspeople, former lawmakers, and ministers, as well as serving and former government officials, make up the majority accused in these cases, which involve charges such as bribery, corruption, embezzlement of public funds and, money laundering.

Allegations also suggest that many accused are influential socially, politically and financially, and they attempt to influence trial proceedings in various ways, which is another reason for the growing backlog.

If the trial of a graft case is not completed on time, it leads to prolonged justice delays, increases the backlog of cases, and weakens public confidence in the anti-graft institutions, said experts.

ACC public prosecutor Mir Ahmed Ali Salam told New Age, ‘We are working our level best to complete the trial in every case on time, but proceedings in some cases are delayed due to the non-appearance of witnesses.’

He, however, claimed that the completion rate in ACC cases had neither decreased nor increased significantly.

The Anti-Corruption Commission was established in 2004 in accordance with the Anti-Corruption Commission Act after abolishing the Bureau of Anti-Corruption.​

 

[Saif]

Govt must strengthen ACC, anti-corruption efforts

THE growing backlog of corruption cases that the Anti-Corruption Commission handles reflects a system in distress. With 8,330 cases pending with courts, the problem is no longer simply administrative. It is now institutional. What is also concerning is a steady decline in the disposal rate...

www.newagebd.net

Govt must strengthen ACC, anti-corruption efforts

THE growing backlog of corruption cases that the Anti-Corruption Commission handles reflects a system in distress. With 8,330 cases pending with courts, the problem is no longer simply administrative. It is now institutional. What is also concerning is a steady decline in the disposal rate, which has declined from around 10 per cent to little more than 7 per cent in recent years. This downtrend signals not only inefficiency but also a waning capacity to deliver justice in time. Delays are attributed to a range of factors, including the frequent non-appearance of witnesses, procedural stalling by defendants through writ petitions and undue influence exercised by the accused who are powerful. More than 300 cases dating back two decades, alongside hundreds stalled by stay orders, illustrates how deeply entrenched the crisis has become. Although special courts exist to deal with corruption, judges are often burdened with multiple responsibilities and tend to prioritise cases that are easier to dispose of quickly such as those under the Negotiable Instruments Act or narcotics laws. The practice, driven partly by poor performance of the commission, leaves complex corruption cases languishing.

All this results in justice not only being delayed but increasingly denied, eroding public trust and undermining anti-corruption efforts. The commission’s struggles also appear to be rooted in structural and political shortcomings. Experts have repeatedly pointed out that the absence of dedicated courts solely for corruption cases slows down proceedings. The High Court’s directive requiring monthly progress reports on corruption cases has largely gone unheeded, exposing a lack of oversight and enforcement. Also troubling is the allegation that the appointment of prosecutors is influenced by political considerations rather than merit. Such practices compromise the integrity of the legal process as lawyers may prioritise political interests over the commission’s mandate. The situation is exacerbated by the influence exerted by many of the accused, who often possess significant political, economic or social power. Their ability to manipulate legal proceedings contributes significantly to delays and weakens the prospects of fair resolution. All this is compounded by the commission’s current leadership vacuum. For about a month, the commission has been without the chair and commissioners, effectively paralysing its decision-making capacity. This absence of leadership not only halts ongoing work but also highlights a glaring legal gap as laws do not clearly define how the institution should function in such circumstances.

The government must, therefore, address the crisis with the urgency it demands. Restoring leadership to the commission is an immediate priority, but it must be done with a commitment to appoint individuals of proven integrity, competence and independence. Structural reforms are imperative, too. Establishing exclusive courts for corruption cases, ensuring merit-based recruitment of prosecutors and enforcing accountability measures are essential steps to improve efficiency.​