Interview with revenue chief Abdul-Muyeed Chowdhury:

Corruption has its roots in societal psyche

(excerpts from Daily Star, Dhaka, 30 April 1999)

Revenue chief Abdul-Muyeed Chowdhury sees solution in a social revolution to change the mind-set, the culture of corruption - both in politics and bureaucracy. Revising the rates only won't do, nor will plugging the loopholes in the system, he tells Toufique Imrose Khalidi in an exhaustive interview.

Abdul-Muyeed Chowdhury, the chairman of the National Board of Revenue, admits that there are corrupt collectors as there are evasive payers. But the system has to keep going, he insists, because things cannot be changed overnight. "Generally corruption has grown at an appalling rate in the government system. Tax administration cannot be isolated," he says. "I know where the problems lie. The problem is discretion. When you have discretion, you don't need to explain to anyone."

DAILY STAR (DS): Revenue collection seems to have been a problem these days. What is exactly happening?

Abdul-Muyeed Chowdhury (AMC): Revenue collection is not a problem these days. Revenue collection has always been a problem in Bangladesh. People in Bangladesh want to get everything for free. So it is time to change that mentality. The problem is with the attitude and mentality.

The system is also defective. It is defective because of two reasons. One is, we have inconsistencies in our structure. Secondly, the system has given too much discretion to the officers. As a result, many, not all, of them take advantage and that leads to corruption.

DS: What are you doing about the system - about too much discretionary powers, too much corruption?

AMC: Well, things cannot be changed overnight, but we are now working to take care of the problem. One is reduce discretion. Another is reduce client-bureaucracy interface as much as possible. Remove as many of the inconsistencies as possible without seriously endangering the revenue situation.

We want to widen the tax base, basically income tax and making the system easy. In United States, you submit your tax forms, you receive whatever you have to. If there is any discrepancies, you receive a letter. In our country, you have to appear. You have to hire a tax lawyer, another burden. We suggest that this interaction be minimised. Many want to have white, not black, money.

DS: But nothing is happening. There are a lot of complaints from the tax payers. In fact they are afraid of tax collectors, tax officials. Nothing is happening. We have been hearing about all these things for many years, but nothing has changed.

AMC: I don't know what you have heard in the past, but I am here since August. We have brought about some changes and hope to be able to give something to taxpayers and the country in the coming months.

DS: Then there are strong reservations about the rates, which are often termed impractical.

AMC: I wouldn't say impractical because there has been a reduction in the rate. Previously the rate was much higher. That has been reduced. The situation can't be changed over night. It is a gradual process. The process is on. There is a realisation in the government that reduction should be brought about.

DS: What is the revenue collection situation so far this fiscal year?

AMC: This fiscal year, the situation was initially not very good because of the very long-lasting flood situation. We, at one stage, thought that we might have a very serious problem. But things have improved. In fact, in the month of March we had achieved almost 99 per cent of the collection target for the month. And from July (1998) to March it was around 93 per cent which was quite good. Things are improving.

DS: Why do you think things are improving?

AMC: I think because we have brought about some improvements in the system, and possibly, we are supervising it better.

DS: Do you have any long-term plans about cleaning up the tax administration? Tax administration and corruption are synonymous in this country.

AMC: Generally corruption has grown at an appalling rate in the government system. Tax administration cannot be isolated. There is talk of long term restructuring of the tax administration, re-organisation of the tax administration, overall improvement of the tax administration. We are right now finalising a nine-year Revenue Administration Modernisation Project or RAMP as we call it in short. The first part of this project will be a three-year tax administration modernisation project which will be funded by the World Bank. This is in the final stages. This project should take off this year in the next couple of months. The nine-year project will bring about changes in the laws, rules, working procedures and overall tax structure. If this project, which has been conceptualised and the preliminary preparations has been done, is implemented in earnest, then the total revenue collection will go up. And at the same time, the environment of hostility that exists between the tax-payers and the tax collectors should change.

DS: Isn't it too late? Don't you think it should have come much earlier?

AMC: I don't think it is too late. If we don't do it, it will stay like this. Any change at any point of time is desirable. I cannot guarantee its implementation because I will retire in August 2000. If I stay in NBR up till that time, I will do my best to implement whatever is possible in that time frame.

The matter needs time. This is felt by the donors, by the government, the political leadership. And the business community is definitely playing a very important role in determination of policies nowadays. That has brought about a major change in the thinking of the government.

DS: You express some apprehension as to whether it will be implemented or not. Why is this apprehension? Are you already facing any resistance from within?

AMC: No, I am not facing any resistance. I must be very honest and clear about it. Whatever I am planning to do now, I am not facing any resistance. But obviously there will be vested interests in the organisation who will try to frustrate it. And it will depend on the senior leadership in the bureaucracy... how they handle it.

DS: Ours is a system that often breeds or nurtures tension and conflicts. Is there any conflict of interests in the NBR? For instance, you do not belong to the revenue department. You come from the administration. Is there any tension?

AMC: There may be. I am not aware of it. Rivalries are there, but this necessarily is not a good thing. I have never worked in the Finance Ministry. I don't see any major problems. Some small problems are there. Like, for example, someone who has worked for income tax knows the income tax ordinance and rules... so he can quickly refer to a rule of a section of the law which obviously I can't. I have to open the book, ask someone. But decision making is a totally different thing. I don't do assessment of income tax returns. My job is management. The management specialist, if he knows his job, can manage anything.

On this question of management, I can tell you I have managed various things in my career. Each one is unrelated to the other. For example, I was Managing Director of Bangladesh Biman. I was never in civil aviation industry before, but I managed it for three financial years when Biman made operational profits. Then I worked at the Jamuna Bridge Division. It was an engineering project and I am not an engineer.

DS: That's something that refers to individual capability and efficiency. You are an efficient person, but what about the system?

AMC: Well, if one is trained as a manager, one shouldn't have any problem.

DS: Back to assessment issues, what can you do if you don't know how the assessment is done?

AMC: I didn't say I don't know how assessment is done. I said I don't need to do assessment because I am not an assessing officer. But if something related to assessment comes to me, I surely attempt to deal with it.

DS: Then, you probably don't know the loopholes through which most of the corruption takes place.

AMC: I know where the problems lie. The problem is discretion. When you have discretion, you don't need to explain to anyone.

The changes we are now introducing will improve the situation. We are now examining a system which will make it possible for the assessee to submit his own assessment and return which will be automatically accepted. In that system we will provide for audit of a return. That will be a very tough audit. If we can introduce this system... in the system if someone is found to have given false information, wrong information, cheated on his taxes, he will be dealt with very severely.

DS: The tax evasion rate seems to be too high. A leading businessman told us in a pre-budget discussion last year that the leakage could be as high as 500 per cent.

AMC: It's like fishing. The fish that got away is the biggest. I don't think it is 500 per cent evasion. Definitely evasion is there. It is not only in terms of income tax, but also in customs, VAT. Out taxable income is Tk. 60,000 per year. Anyone who makes Tk. 60,000 or more must pay taxes. You look at the situation all around you. In Dhaka city, if we take a very conservative estimate, at least 10 lakh people should pay income tax.

There is something called tax-payer's identification number. TIN we call it. There is a total of 677,678 TIN numbers issued in the country. Of those, only 294,226 filed tax returns. Of this, 280,397 actually paid income tax. People pay 100 taka, 500 taka, 1000 taka income tax, and their number is very large.

For example, those who pay tax up to 5000 taka, the number is 211,802. Above 5000 taka up to 15,000 taka, it is only 31,929. Between 15,000 and 30,000, there are only 12,265 tax payers. Above 30,000 up to 50,000, only 4,937. Only 3,984 people pay tax for more than 50,000 to a maximum of 100,000.

It is because of both evasion and corruption. There are instances where people want to pay taxes, but are discouraged by the officials. It is also true that there are officers who would like to collect tax fairly. You can't put all the blame on one party. Both the parties are to be blamed. The total system needs modification.

DS: So there is no dispute that many of the tax collectors are corrupt. Have any of these collectors ever been punished?

AMC: Yes, of course.

DS: How many?

AMC: I can't give you the numbers, but I know, over the last few months, we have definitely punished people. Maybe the number is not large enough. The problem is you also have to keep the system going. For example, we have a target of Tk. 16,700 crore for this fiscal year. So how is the money going to be collected if the people are not working? How did more than Tk. 13,000 crore come into the government treasury if the tax collectors are not working? If the people hadn't paid, this money wouldn't have come.

Basically direct tax collection is very poor. Look at the income tax. Indirect taxes constitute more than 60 per cent of our taxes. It is not at all good to keep direct taxes lower than indirect taxes.

DS: There are a lot of anomalies in the tax structure. There are distortions.

AMC: Yes, there are inconsistencies and these need to be rectified. The levy structure in the tax area can encourage investment, economic growth. We have to look at the totality. We can promote economic development, larger governmental revenue. At the same time we can discourage smuggling. Personally I believe that this can be done. I am working in that direction. I believe that the Honourable Finance Minister is very supportive of such measures.

DS: There are complaints that local industries don't get adequate protection. In fact, business is not asking for excessive protection but adequate protection as provided by the neighbouring countries. Why aren't you responding?

AMC: We are responding. If you have talked to FBCCI and other chambers recently, I am sure they will tell you that we are responding. We are reviewing anomalies in the tax structure.

There are problems. Some materials can be used as raw material in some areas and used for other purposes as well. This creates a problem. They bring in material as raw material and use it for other purposes. The duty is not levied on the use. That leads to corruption.

DS: What about introducing TIN cards which will entitle the payer certain privileges like he'll get the passport earlier than others, special treatment at the airport etc.?

AMC: We are thinking about it, to encourage people to pay. But it's easier said than done. Somebody holding a card should be getting special handling at the airport, but it will depend on the people at the airport how they handle it. It could be that a card holder travelling economy class can jump the queue and be served at the executive class counter. We are thinking of things like that, but nothing has been finalised. There is a problem like someone might pay tax for one year, get the card and thereafter never pay taxes. Can we find him to take the card back? The card could have a validity date, but wee haven't finalised anything yet.

DS: Another complaint is that tariff value is not updated.

AMC: It is very difficult to change tariff value with the change in the international market. There is a mechanism for changing the tariff value. There is a committee where NBR is represented. The committee meets every three months. The composition of the committee is not very good so we are in the process of modifying the composition so that it becomes more functional. And we will have more meetings of the committee.

There's one more thing about tariff value. Under the WTO, we had to move to the transactory system. We had no choice. We cannot delay it by five or six years. Only in certain areas we can delay. We have to do this by 2001. Anyway, tariff value will not remain a problem within the next couple of years.

There will be a lot of improvement in this. People say that when they are manufacturing, selling, it will not be necessary for the government to collect revenue by taxing them. The business community will have to realise why the government collects taxes. Even income tax is collected at the Port of Entry. Why does the government have to do it? Because people are not paying taxes when they should pay properly. If people paid taxes properly, regularly, then duty, customs would definitely go down.

DS: Then again, the fact that people don't want to pay taxes underlines the weaknesses in the revenue collection mechanism. Doesn't it prove that the problem lies more with the system in which people can get away with not paying taxes?

AMC: That's not true. The system is not payer friendly... I accept that. But those who are paying, why are they paying?

There is confusion, conflict of interests. If we try to make the system too stringent, then there will be more corruption. If we make it more liberal, there will be more tax evasion. So we have to strike a balance somehow. In a country where the formal sector is probably lagging way behind the informal sector, it's very difficult to find a balance. This is the whole problem.

For example, you go to any country in Europe or you go to the United States, you buy something and you have got to pay VAT. The teller automatically deducts VAT and it is recorded. So there's no problem. But in Bangladesh, where do you get these machines?

DS: That's what I was trying to tell you. When you're talking about VAT - people have to pay VAT, the businessmen have to pay VAT - why aren't you thinking about introducing these machines here? Have you thought about it?

AMC: It is the business which has to do it ...

DS: But you've got to tell them at one point that you have to start by this date, by this month... you've got to start somewhere ...

AMC: It is a problem. It means all ports, all shops and restaurants doing business will have to have these machines. It's not feasible at this stage. Maybe large shops in Dhaka and Chittagong in their own interests can switch over to these modern machines.

DS: You have to start somewhere, at some stage. Do you have any plans to launch it?

AMC: I really haven't thought about it. But I think if we try to force people to do it, they will possibly buy a machine. But then all the transactions will take place under the table. What can we do? We really can't do anything.

DS: So it's more of a cultural problem?

AMC: Yes, it's a cultural problem. Tax evasion is a cultural problem. I personally feel it is very sad but my realisation is that this is the truth. We want to get rich overnight by hook or by crook. In the process, we don't mind trampling the rights and interests of others, defrauding the government... cheating the customers. We are ready to do it as long as our bank account keeps going up.

So a social movement has to be started for identifying people who are tax evaders, who cheat people and they must be made to feel that money cannot buy respect. Unfortunately, in Bangladesh, it's the other way round. You have money, you throw a party and you find people from all areas going to attend that party. A major change in the society cannot be forcibly brought about by the government. It will have to come from within (the society).

DS: But don't you think that social movement will be a far cry in a society that doesn't respond to such situations as a tax inspector or a police inspector owning palatial houses or several apartments in the capital? How about conducting a survey of all houses and apartments and trying to find out whether their owners paid taxes properly?

AMC: It is very sad. But if you really conduct a survey of all the apartment houses in Dhaka City, you will find most of these have been purchased by people with black money. I would say bribe is black money as much as evaded taxes are or unlawful business transactions are. Black money is anything that is not on the table. Unless there is social awareness, it can't be stopped. Unfortunately again, all these things are done by the educated people. And the educated are the ones who control the society or mould the opinion.

DS: Being a senior civil servant, don't you feel bad when you see your neighbour who may be an inspector leads a better life, can send his children abroad for education?

AMC: No. I really don't feel bad or (suffer from) a sense of jealousy. Rather I pity that person. because he owns that property but he can't say 'this is my property'. He lies about it (his son's education abroad) because he can't say I am funding it. At the end of the day, he loses that child. I don't think the child comes back. If he goes to America or some other country, lives there or studies there for a period long, then he picks up some of the values of that society. So he doesn't come back. If he comes back, he finds he is a misfit to be part of his family. It is causing brain drain also.

DS: How about applying law on these corrupt people? You talked about punishment in a different sense. But law is law. Can something be developed to strictly apply law on these people?

AMC: This is my personal view. As a civil servant, it's a little delicate issue for me to talk about. But I think without a total change in the political culture of the country. Because politics leads everything else in this society. If the political system is not made corruption free, whatever you try and however you try, you will never have a corruption free society. This is my conviction. I firmly believe in this. And so it is the political leadership across the board that has got to bring about a change in the political culture. Without naming anybody in particular, whatever government it is, if the minister is corrupt, then down the line everything will be corrupt. If the minister is honest, then there will also be corruption in the bureaucracy but then he will be able to take care of it, rectify it and take measures. With the first situation, nobody can do anything.

DS: Which means changing the attitude is important? Should we concentrate more on that?

AMC: That is my view. We collect tax to let the government function properly because the government has huge expenditure to meet. You have to have a government strong in decision making.

DS: There have been certain changes in our political establishment. Are the political institutions developing? Are we moving ahead?

AMC: Well, there's been one major change. For example, we now have a caretaker government. The very fact people had to fight to have a caretaker government permanently for any change of government is a proof of what I said ... that the political system is not functioning properly. That's why the politicians and the people at large feel that we should have a neutral caretaker government to oversee a general election. That is definitely a good thing that has come about in our cultural context.

DS: But that in a sense reflects the inherent weakness in our political establishment. Our politicians are not trusted by their opponents.

AMC: It's not the question of opponents. Across the board, no one trusts anyone else. But I think for removing corruption, for bringing about a corruption-free society, clean politics - if I may use the word -- is of paramount importance. I am a bureaucrat, I am a secretary to the government. I can only recommend policies, but the ultimate decision is always taken by the political leadership. If the political leadership says the decision is in the best interests of the country, not with any other motivation, then those decisions will be good decisions. That is what is needed.

DS: Do you see any hope?

AMC: I am an optimist. I think this country has gone to the maximum extent it can go down. There is only one thing that can happen. It has to go up. Maybe slowly, but it has to go up. I think public awareness is bringing about that change. The NGOs have a definite role in awareness building. I wouldn't say the NGO administration is free from corruption, but by and large the NGOs have behaved responsibly. Now people can talk about these things. Definitely that culture has been started by the NGOs.

DS: But recent floods have exposed the vulnerability of the NGOs. In fact, I'm quoting a government document. It's there in the aide memoir for the Development Forum.

AMC: I haven't seen that document. Well, NGOs have certain amount of vulnerability. Because the NGOs are dependent on aid. Very few have done anything to generate revenue from within the country. So that is one problem. Another is that the NGOs have concentrated their activities on health, education and other things. Their funds are given by the donors, tied to a specific project or programme. Now there is a flood. It disrupts everything. So obviously, they will have some disadvantage. The government can divert funds or resources. The NGO does not have that flexibility.

DS: So you feel that a strong civil society is emerging that should give us some hope.

AMC: I said earlier people now talk about it. I wouldn't say a strong civil society, but a gradually emerging conscious civil society. That is extremely important. Our bureaucratic culture also needs a major change. Previously, it was only "we-they". That has to change. The bureaucracy has also to imbibe a culture of "we" and not "we-they".

DS: But changing the bureaucracy has proved to be a difficult task. Whenever there is an attempt to change, it has never been successful. The blame is squarely put on the bureaucracy.

AMC: I strongly disagree with that. You cannot find one instance where the government wanted to do one thing and the bureaucracy successfully resisted it. I don't think it's possible, at least not in Bangladesh.

The bureaucrats may try and partially succeed in delaying the process, partially succeed in frustrating the objectives. The government may say we will do this and we will do it like this. They may not like this but they can't stop it.

DS: There have been so many recommendations from so many committees, so many commissions trying to reform the bureaucracy. There's a big one in 1993 - the UNDP Commission came up with a comprehensive set of recommendations to change the ways of civil service. Nothing has happened to date.

AMC: I was a part-time member of the Nurunnabi Committee for two years. We worked very seriously. A lot of recommendations have been given. But who will take the final decision? The political leadership. In the previous government, there was a Council Committee -- a Cabinet committee headed by one of the honourable ministers. That committee did not possibly hold a single meeting to examine any of the recommendations. So the fault is not with the committee, with the members of the committee who are all serving or retired bureaucrats, but with the leadership which was supposed to decide, examine.

One reason is that the ministers are so harassed from practically dawn to midnight. They have to attend the people. Because everything has become centralised. Our political culture has become such that a minister or a member of parliament wouldn't say that it can't be done. They will call someone and say 'I'm sending so and so and do this or that'. They know it can't be done, even then they will go through this exercise so that the person goes back satisfied 'he has listened to me, he has tried to help me'. So he will write down a recommendation on the body of application. This person will go down running from pillar to post with his application, possibly not getting anything in the end. This has generated a culture of corruption. In my career, I have received phone such calls.

DS: Has there been any such occasion when a minister has called you to settle a particular tax dispute?

AMC: No, no. I must be very honest. This type of requests does not come, at least not to me.

DS: That goes to a much lower level?

AMC: I don't think so. Because major problems, I don't think, can be solved by people down below. They should come to me. Sometimes, there's a reference that 'there is a problem like this and it has come to my notice. If it is true, whether you can take corrective measures.' This sort of thing helps. Otherwise, how would I know or my minister would know that something is wrong?

Feed back is very important. It can come from anyone. It can be from a newspaper report. A journalist giving a report in the newspaper objectively analysing the situation. I welcome such things. But then, sometimes there are totally distorted, false, fictitious reports in the newspapers. One newspaper said that I was under tremendous pressure and that I was on the verge of resigning. This was a baseless report.

There was another report in another newspaper. The government has given me some responsibility where I am working to resolve certain matters of the Jamuna Bridge. There is a facilitation process going on and I am one of the facilitators. We are working on weekends now for the last month and a half. Now a newspaper report says, the head of NBR is spending more time on his previous job than the collection of revenue. That is very unfortunate. The person who made the report could have checked to find out what was happening.

DS: The fact remains that the newspapers are also part of this society which has so many problems. Not all newspapers or all journalists have the similar standards.

AMC: That's what I told you at the very beginning that it is the whole society's problem, not just a tax problem, not business problem, not political problem, not newspaper's problem. It is the society. It's in its totality. The corrective process can be started and moved forward effectively if the political culture is rectified first.

DS: Some changes are being brought about in the local government institutions. There is a kind of consensus for strengthening them. How about decentralising tax and revenue collection systems... giving more powers to local institutions, let them raise their own funds and pay for development for which the government is toiling hard to raise revenue?

AMC: I strongly support that. I feel that a strong local government, which is answerable to the people, receptive to people's needs and aspirations, is needed in Bangladesh where we have a largest number of unlettered people. But what we do over the years is try to create a local government institution which is an extended arm of the government, dependent on the government for doles. So that it does the government's bidding.

DS: Are recent steps any change in the right direction? Decentralisation of authority...

AMC: I don't think decentralisation or devolution of authority has taken place as yet. I personally believe that we should change the unitary nature of the state and have four or more provinces. The authority will go to the provincial towns. People will not have to come to Dhaka. The judicial system will be decentralised. So more cities will grow. That will be good for the country. Maybe the time is not yet right.

For example, the upazila system. It was abolished by the previous government. As bureaucrats, we said it was wrong. I am happy the present government is brining it back.

DS: Is it a political statement?

AMC: No I am saying this as a citizen. No, it is not political. And while reviving the system, we must try to learn from the lessons of the past and see what was wrong then. Those things will have to be corrected, so that this time upazila becomes a more viable local government institution.

DS: Going back to bureaucracy in Bangladesh, what do you think are the problems?

AMC: The problem with bureaucracy is that the individual bureaucrats don't want to take risks. They want to play safe, mostly that I know of. If you want to take decisions and not face the consequences, you can't take good decisions. You take a decision at a particular point of time on the basis of available information in the best interests of the country. It's like a battlefield. When the battle is over, one can do the post-mortem and find out what was wrong. You may be told that your decision was wrong. It's perfectly all right. You can't be expected always to take right decisions. You take wrong decisions also. It's a question of percentage. The basic point is: Was it a mala fide decision? If you take a mala fide decision, then you must pay for it. If it is a bona fide decision and a wrong, then you must be able to face it. If you have too many skeletons in your cupboard, if you have not built up your reputation, then you will be afraid to take decisions.

DS: But going by the rules is all that matters. And decisions have to be based on the rules of the government, which at times can impede quick or bold decisions.

AMC: Personally, I don't think rules can create impediments. It is the interpretation of the rules. The issue is whether you are looking at the rules as the vehicle for decision making, whether you are looking at the ultimate objectives of the rule or you are just following the letters of the rule. I frequently overrule the recommendations of my junior colleagues when I find they have followed the rules not in spirit but in form.

DS: That's because they are afraid of being punished at a later stage?

AMC: Possibly. So they take the easy way out.

DS: Which means there is a lack of commitment in the bureaucracy. Why? Is it because they are not well paid?

AMC: Salary-wise, the compensation package is definitely not very good. But then, the government cannot pay more because the size of the bureaucracy is more than what I need. I personally feel that the size of the bureaucracy should be reduced, if not by half, definitely by one third.

DS: Still the government keeps recruiting unnecessary manpower. Why should an assistant secretary or even a deputy secretary have three personal staff?

AMC: We should change. The assistant secretary should be a self-contained unit. He should use his own word processor or computer, and type things himself. That's how it should be. I was chairman of a committee in 1989 and recommended abolition of more than 30 organisations. Only some of them have been implemented and some are now being implemented.

DS: Modernisation could be the solution. Some say modernising is costly, but won't it be cost effective in the long run? What about higher levels of computerisation?

AMC: It is costly and the government has resource limitations. It cannot overnight change everything. We are looking for donors. And the World Bank and other donors are very interested. They feel that modernisation of the administration will bring about a lot of changes. They have found it one of the more important issues in their discussions with the government of Bangladesh.

DS: You said the recommendations towards reform have not been implemented. Is it because they are not politically accepted... because they would entail high political costs for the party in power? Is it because the politicians didn't see any immediate gains out of those?

AMC: These would pay the government more in the long run, even in the short run. The people will understand the decision is being taken in the interests of the country. I don't think it would cost the government. No government can take decisions which will please everyone. We all talk about our motherland but in our heart of hearts, we don't really feel for it.

DS: The recent flood was a good test for our system, our administration and management capability, ability to perform...

AMC: See, it was the same bureaucracy. I am glad that you raised this question. If the leadership can lead properly, the bureaucracy can function well. During the floods, the leadership led and the bureaucracy delivered. The handling of the floods was very good.

DS: To have a good system calls for good human resources. In real terms, we are not spending much on education.

AMC: We need to spend much more on education. We need to change the system. We have a large number of graduates. They can neither go back to manual work, not can they get good jobs. We should make higher education restrictive. Only persons who are very bright should go to the universities.

DS: What about the judiciary? Much of the crisis stems from the system here.

AMC: People talk about the separation of the judiciary from the executive. In doing so, they want to give an impression that the judiciary will be independent if all the magistrates go under the Ministry of Law. I don't think so. The Ministry is a administrative section of the government. If you really want an independent judiciary, you must place it under the Supreme Court. In the Nurunnabi Committee we had recommended setting up of a separate secretariat for the judiciary, which would be under the Chief Justice. The appointment letters would be issued by the government, but once they join the service, the executive government should have nothing to do with them. Then only will you have true independence of the judiciary.

The judicial officers should not be cadre officers or they will have to maintain equality of pay. They must have a separate salary structure. I wouldn't say in the next few years in Bangladesh we can give a salary structure so that everyone can be above corruption. But they should be given salary and facilities so they need not be corrupt out of necessity.

DS: Are the judicial officers equipped to handle financial matters?

AMC: Tax matters do not go to the judiciary other than the Hon'ble High Court.

DS: We hear that revenue collection is hampered because of so many cases lying with the courts?

AMC: Yes, we have a very large number of cases pending with the High Court. We in the National Board of Revenue have a tax structure. The tax structure by itself is not a big thing. We have reduced the tariff value. Previously the tariff value was high. Somebody goes to the court wanting to pay lower taxes which were previously there and the lower tariff value that is there now. He wants to get the best of both. This type of cases also go to the court. Maybe ultimately the court will give a decision in favour of the tax authority, but till it is decided the collection of revenue remains suspended.