Tackling corruption in Bangladesh remains a significant challenge due to institutional shortcomings, socio-political dynamics, and inadequate accountability systems. A major contributor to rampant corruption in Bangladesh is the direct support from political parties and bureaucrats.
Following a strong mass movement in July and August 2024, which led to a change in the autocratic regime, there was hope that the level of corruption would decrease.
However, the current interim government, under state control, has largely failed to implement effective monitoring and control measures to combat corruption. Even with the efforts of government officials and civil society, corruption continues to weaken governance, impede development, and erode public trust.
According to the 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) published by Transparency International, Bangladesh ranks 151 out of 180 nations, earning a score of 23 out of 100. This is a decrease from its 2023 ranking of 149, with a score of 24.
CORRUPTION PERCEPTIONS INDEX OF TRANSPARENCY INTERNATIONAL 2024
The CPI rates countries on a scale where 0 denotes high corruption and 100 indicates an immaculate status. Bangladesh's score in 2024 is notably lower than the global average of 43, reflecting a strong perception of corruption within the public sector.
Bangladesh is the second-lowest-ranked country in South Asia, coming just ahead of Afghanistan, which scored 20 in 2024. Bhutan tops the region with a score of 68, followed by India at 39, Nepal at 35, Sri Lanka at 34, and Pakistan at 29.
The 1971 Liberation War against West Pakistan aimed to establish a just and equitable society free from corruption, injustice, and inequality. However, after 55 years, Pakistan's level of corruption is reportedly lower than that of Bangladesh, which is surprising.
Bhutan, another small nation in South Asia, is often acknowledged as one of the least corrupt countries in the region. In the 2024 CPI, Bhutan scored 68 out of 100 and is ranked 26th worldwide, significantly ahead of its neighbouring countries. The nation's effectiveness in combating corruption is credited to robust governance, cultural principles, and effective institutional frameworks.
Bhutan's royal family and successive administrations have strongly emphasized good governance, integrity, and accountability as core national principles. The country's political leaders consistently highlight the importance of transparency and ethical conduct, establishing a standard throughout all tiers of government.
Singapore’s transformation
Another country in Southeast Asia, Singapore, is widely acknowledged as one of the countries with the lowest levels of corruption, frequently appearing in the top three of Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index.
Singapore, a nation that achieved independence just six years prior to Bangladesh, currently ranks first not only in economic success but also in social equity, human dignity and development, earning a reputation as one of the most powerful democracies globally.
Its achievement in managing corruption is credited to a comprehensive approach that merges rigorous enforcement, robust governance, and accountability to the public.
The World Bank (2022) indicates that Singapore’s low level of corruption stems from efficient and transparent governance. For instance, public procurement and licensing are handled through clear, online platforms that minimize human intervention. Bureaucratic hurdles are reduced, which limits the chances for rent-seeking behaviour. Public agencies are subject to audits, scrutiny, and regular assessments.
This practice is nearly unachievable in Bangladesh, where bureaucratic red tape poses the most significant challenges for officials and political leaders.
The extensive measures taken by Singapore in establishing a strong rule of law and judicial integrity, promoting civic education and awareness alongside ethical cultural values and reforms, ensuring swift and decisive penalties for any state misconduct, and maintaining rigorous regulatory and financial oversight have positioned this Southeast Asian country among the best in the world, which is a dream for a nation like Bangladesh.
I would like to present a table of Singapore’s competitive position compared to other Southeast Asian countries, or specifically, Bangladesh:
Factor | Singapore | Typical developing country (Bangladesh) |
Anti-Corruption Body | Independent (CPIB) | Often contested or politicized |
Political Commitment | High and consistent | Variable or rhetorical |
Public Sector Pay | High and competitive | Often, low corruption is seen as compensation |
Enforcement | Swift and strict | Delayed or selective |
Transparency | Digitalized, low discretion | Bureaucratic, high discretion |
Public Trust | High | Low |
Since Singapore's independence, under the early leadership of Lee Kuan Yew, anti-corruption has become a national priority tied to Singapore’s development and legitimacy -- a goal that Bangladesh has yet to achieve; it is perhaps a distant dream.
What goes wrong in Bangladesh
In Bangladesh, political leaders have been significantly compromised by corruption since gaining independence and have prioritized the interests of influential stakeholders to maintain their grip on power, frequently overlooking public sentiment regarding corruption at the grassroots level.
If Bangladesh’s political parties that have held power intermittently since the nation’s independence had consistently taken a strong and clear stance against corruption, Bangladesh could potentially have emerged as another Singapore in this region.
Political parties pose a significant challenge in developing nations such as Bangladesh, as they frequently serve to sustain and entrench corruption, whether directly or indirectly. Although they are vital elements of democracy, they often engage in corrupt activities that undermine governance, skew public policy, and diminish public confidence.
However, it's essential to acknowledge that even in developed nations, significant corruption persists at government levels, including within political parties, which should not be overlooked.
However, in developing nations like Bangladesh, political parties often rely on clientelist systems, where allegiance is exchanged for personal or material rewards, including employment, business contracts, financial loans, or public services.
This practice leads to the misallocation of public resources for political advantage instead of being utilized fairly. International researchers, such as Kitschelt and Wilkinson (2007), characterize this as “patron-client linkages” that weaken both democratic accountability and the integrity of institutions. For instance, in Bangladesh, ruling parties have been accused of offering government jobs, social safety net assistance, and even electricity connections in return for political backing.
Political financing and vote buying in Bangladesh have historically been a dangerous manipulation process of the local and national elections. The absence of transparency in political funding enables parties to support their campaigns through illegal means, including misappropriated public funds, bribes from wealthy business figures, or contributions from foreign entities.
This leads to a cycle of corruption, where politicians subsequently reward their financiers with favourable policies, licenses, or government contracts. Pinto-Duschinsky (2002) refers to this as the “hidden cost of democracy” in developing countries.
Dismantling institutions for political gain, often with the assistance of corrupt bureaucracies, is a prevalent strategy in Bangladesh. For instance, ruling parties might meddle with anti-corruption agencies, the judiciary, law enforcement, or electoral commissions to protect themselves or their allies from facing repercussions.
This weakens checks and balances, enabling corruption to flourish. Seligson (2006) states that the politicization of institutions “undermines democratic legitimacy and increases tolerance for corruption,” which is indeed the case.
In Bangladesh, the mismanagement of state resources and public procurement is a prominent illustration of corruption, where government funds are frequently exploited without accountability.
For instance, ruling political parties often leverage public contracts and development financing to favour their allies and penalize their adversaries. This results in inflated costs, subpar infrastructure, and kickbacks within public initiatives. Rose-Ackerman (1999) examines how corruption becomes entrenched in the relationships between the state, political parties, and businesses in environments characterized by weak regulatory frameworks.
In Bangladesh, the issue of political immunity also poses a significant challenge. For instance, leaders and members of political parties often possess either de facto or de jure immunity from legal prosecution, especially when they have control over law enforcement or the judiciary.
This creates an environment of impunity, allowing political elites to engage in corrupt activities without the fear of repercussions. Researchers, such as Khan (2005), describe this phenomenon as “elite capture,” where a small group holds political and economic power for their private gain.
In Bangladesh, it can be reasonably stated that corruption functions as a political tactic. In weak democracies, political parties may intentionally utilize corruption to strengthen their authority by bribing adversaries, manipulating media, or financing misinformation efforts -- this positions bribery as a tool, rather than a mere coincidence.
For instance, Levitsky and Way (2010) describe this as “competitive authoritarianism,” where elections occur, but are significantly biased in favour of those in power through corrupt means, as seen in Bangladesh.
Key challenges in controlling corruption in Bangladesh
- fragile institutional structures
- political interference and clientelism
- bureaucratic obstacles and rent-seeking behaviour
- corruption in government contracts and initiatives
- insufficient transparency and limited information access
- minimal public awareness and civic participation
- worldwide illicit financial outflows and capital flight
- judicial backlogs and ineffectiveness
While the corruption index shows only a slight decrease in corruption, nevertheless, public concern in Bangladesh is that the country is in a vicious cycle of controlling corruption at the grassroots levels. Without addressing these structural and cultural challenges, anti-corruption efforts are likely to remain ineffective or symbolic.
After the uprising in July and August 2024, which led to the fall of an autocratic government, I published a series of articles expressing my deep concern about the need to work constructively with all national and international stakeholders to see a stable and prosperous Bangladesh.
My suggestion was to uphold the spirit of the mass movement and honour the lives lost in the struggle for a new Bangladesh, like the Liberation War of 1971. Unfortunately, not much looks to have changed since then.
The most fundamental reason for not achieving the desired goals of the mass revolution was a lack of coordination, insufficient experience in running the state, and inadequate portfolio appointments in the interim government.
People had high hopes for the interim government in Bangladesh to bring about significant changes. However, over the past 11 months, the citizens of Bangladesh have not been particularly pleased with the government's efforts, despite some minimal successes.
Most of the reform committees established have struggled to offer constructive solutions or innovative strategies to transform the state’s traditional system. This has led to considerable frustration among the public in Bangladesh.
If Bangladesh does not succeed in achieving significant transformation following the massive movement in July and August 2024, it is unlikely to become a corruption-free nation any time soon. After 1971, there was optimism for a new country characterized by social justice and equality, along with democratic and voting rights for its citizens. However, after 55 years of independence, little progress has been made.
What has been achieved is trivial compared to the firm hopes of millions of the nation’s people. It is now essential to focus on constructively establishing social justice in Bangladesh, particularly by addressing the eradication of corruption, which remains a significant obstacle to creating an equitable and just society.
Dr ASM Anam Ullah (PhD) is an Australian academic, human rights activist, political analyst, and OHS and industrial relations expert.
