WIDESPREAD and unabated corruption and irregularities in the selection of beneficiaries for social safety net programmes, as exposed by a Transparency International Bangladesh report, reflect a troubling failure in the management of these initiatives. While the programmes are designed to help the poor, the vulnerable and the marginalised, corruption and irregularities undermine them by excluding the deserving and rewarding the undeserving. The consequences are severe, espeically for vulnerable people from ethnic minority communities, already pushed to the margins by geography, politics and weak legal recognition. The report reveals a pattern that has become disturbingly familiar. Vulnerable people entitled to social safety support are compelled to pay bribes simply to access allowances meant for them. The study, which covered eight plains and three hill districts across the eight divisions, finds that minority elders pay between Tk 500 and Tk 10,000 to have their names enlisted in the old-age allowance programme and the Vulnerable Women’s Benefit food programme. The report says that a chain involving union council members, chairs, village police and social service officials, the people entrusted with delivering government support for the vulnerable, is behind the extortion.
Corruption and irregularities in social safety net programmes are facilitated by opaque selection procedures, weak documentation systems and an accountability structure that rarely punishes wrongdoing. Beneficiary lists are largely unpublished or outdated, giving officials scope for malpractice. Officials often include relatives, political supporters or individuals willing to pay bribes. The report notes cases where living beneficiaries were falsely marked as deceased to make room for others — a striking illustration of the impunity with which the system operates. Irregularities and targeting errors are magnified by structural discrimination against ethnic minority communities. Their limited participation in planning and selection committees means that the programmes are designed and implemented without understanding local needs or diversity. Logistical barriers in remote hill areas such as poor connectivity, limited outreach and insufficient staffing further widen the gap. When internet access and electricity are unreliable, online application processes become exclusionary rather than empowering. The broader national picture reinforces this failure. Earlier studies have repeatedly showed high rates of wrongful inclusion and exclusion, sometimes nearly half of all beneficiaries being wrongfully enlisted, yet reforms have been cosmetic at best. The National Social Security Strategy remains largely unimplemented, allocation for social protection continues to shrink in proportion to gross domestic proeduct and political will to confront entrenched corruption remains weak.
The government should, therefore, design effective plans to cleanse the beneficiary selection process. In so doing, the authorities should ensure transparency in lists, community representation in selection committees, independent audits and strict penalties for corruption. Above all, rights of minority communities and the vulnerable should be recognised not rhetorically but through fair, corruption-free access to social protection.
