Clarify methods of prosecuting money launderers

We are extremely disappointed to learn of the failures of the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) and other government agencies in submitting detailed information about money launderers to the High Court, as directed. Reportedly, an HC bench has been holding hearings on a suo motu rule and a writ petition for the prosecution of money launderers for over a year now, but couldn't pass any order in the absence of proper information—names, addresses, their deposits in overseas banks, properties abroad, etc.

According to a 2020 report by the Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB), around USD 3.1 billion, or Tk 26,400 crore, is being illegally remitted from Bangladesh every year, while a Global Financial Integrity (GFI) report listed Bangladesh as one of the top 30 countries in the world in terms of illicit financial flows. Names of Bangladeshi money launderers and corporations were revealed in the Panama Papers and Paradise Papers published in 2016 and 2017, respectively. In 2020, the foreign minister also admitted that government officials were buying luxurious homes abroad. Following these revelations, the HC issued a suo motu rule and directed intelligence agencies to take measures to stop money laundering. Sadly, the court's order fell on deaf ears. Since then, the HC has issued several directives to the relevant authorities, including the ACC, but to no avail.

The ACC, however, did submit a "compliance report" to the court last year which contained the names of 43 people, but failed to provide any findings of its own. The question is: Why couldn't they? According to a lawyer of the commission, they sought information about the launderers from the foreign and home ministries as well as the Bangladesh Financial Intelligence Unit (BFIU), but did not receive any. Again, why is that? Apparently, as per the foreign minister, his ministry is not responsible for finding money launderers. There is only so much a court can do if none of the relevant bodies accept their responsibility.

Clearly, there is a serious lack of coordination among the state agencies concerned when it comes to finding information about the launderers and bringing them to justice. It also indicates that those laundering money abroad are powerful people against whom the agencies do not want to move the needle. 

We think, while the ACC must be held accountable for not performing its duty, our intelligence agencies must also be questioned for their inaction regarding the issue. If the ACC, with help of others, could at least give details about the accused launderers, the HC could have issued necessary directives to bring them under the law. Money laundering has become a serious threat to our economy, and it must be prevented by bringing the offenders to justice. To do so, all state agencies concerned must work together.