ACC vs. bureaucracy

Now with the independence of ACC, the political and bureaucratic establishments are not willing to let its power be undermined and hence the formation of the commission has been on weaker terms of references keeping it dependent on the same bureaucracy. What more, the very first move in the commission's attempt to investigate the missing vehicles which the higher echelons in our administration take for granted until their retirement, is being thwarted in its infancy. The message is simple -- the commission dare not take its objective to fight corruption in government literally and seriously.

The ACC is already a mess without the right terms of reference and may well embrace the same fate as BAC did, if the commission fails to exercise its authority at the very outset, regardless of consequences. I do not know whether our lawmakers or legal minds ever keep track of similar developments in other countries. The first of such commission was set up in Australia in the early 90s and this ICAC (Independent Commission Against Corruption) did not spare the rich and the powerful in its investigation of corruption. Hong Kong later copied the system to fight corruption in the country. Our lawmakers should have studied the same before introducing the ACC.

The average citizen in the country saw a ray of hope with the recent crime busting by Rab and if ACC could do the same in fighting corruption, we could live a little more peaceful life. But will the so called civil society and the establishment allow us, the hard working majority, that freedom, instead of taking satisfaction in mere publication of reports or interfering in the welcome efforts of Rab or ACC?