On February 10, the Transparency International (TI) released the annual Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) 2025. Bangladesh has scored 24 out of 100, the 13th lowest in the world, one step lower, counted from the bottom, compared to 2024. This score is only one point higher than what it was in 2024, and the ranking from the top is 150th, one rung higher. The result shows a relatively positive perception of the successful July uprising that defeated kleptocracy, but a negative assessment of the prospect of “dekleptification” due to reform setbacks, sustained corrupt practices, and deficits in transparent and accountable governance during the period after August 5, 2024.
Bangladesh’s score is two points lower than its own overall average during 2012-2025. It is five points less than the average for 59 authoritarian regimes of the world, six points lower than the average for 29 countries with Closed Civic Space (30), and eight points lower than the lowest-scoring region of Sub-Saharan Africa (32). In the newest CPI, Bangladesh remains the second lowest in South Asia, better than only Afghanistan. Bangladesh is also globally in the lowest quintile within the list of 182 countries, among 122 that scored below 50, and among 96 that scored below the global average of 42. Accordingly, Bangladesh is in the company of those having a “very serious corruption problem.”
To be clear, corruption remains a global menace, and, as on previous occasions, no country has scored full marks. Over 67 percent of countries (or 122) scored below 50 percent in 2025, and 96 countries, or nearly 54 percent, scored below the global average. This means that, like Bangladesh, over 80 percent of the world’s population live with a “very serious corruption problem.” Overall, global scores have declined compared to 2024. The scores of 68 (37 percent) countries have declined, while 64 countries (35 percent) have retained their previous score. Only 48 countries (26 percent) have achieved an improved score. For a longer-term analysis, only 21 countries, or 11.53 percent, have “significantly” improved their standing in the CPI since 2012, and 111 countries (or 61 percent) have remained stagnant. Bangladesh is among the 50 countries whose standing has significantly worsened since 2012.
Among Bangladesh’s South Asian neighbours, Bhutan continues to be the best performer, scoring 71 and ranking at the 18th position from the top. In the rest of the region, scores have remained well below the global average: India and Maldives both scored 39, Sri Lanka scored 35, Nepal scored 34, Pakistan scored 28, and Afghanistan scored 17. This year’s worst performers are South Sudan and Somalia, who share the bottom rung with a score of nine, followed by Venezuela scoring 10, and Eritrea, Libya, and Yemen each scoring 11. At the other end, the list is topped by Denmark (with a score of 89), followed by Finland, New Zealand, and Norway.
The key global message of CPI 2025 is that corruption is worsening worldwide, even in countries claiming to be democracies, due to deteriorating standards of compliance and enforcement. This is also accompanied by a pattern of increased restriction on media and civic space, stronger barriers against openness in public interest decisions, and lack of transparency and accountability. Globally, public frustration is heightened due to corrupt leadership, inequality, and failing public services, while people, especially the youth, are taking to the streets against these evils.
However, CPI 2025 also shows that corruption is not inevitable. Many countries have proved that progress is possible if political leaders and governments act with integrity and take action to tackle corruption beyond rhetoric, implement robust institutional and political reforms for transparent and accountable governance, effectively prosecute the corrupt (especially those engaged in political, governmental, and corporate corruption), end attacks on media and civic space, and dismantle the secrecy structures and networks that enable illicit flows of corrupt and swindled money within and across borders.
Looking at Bangladesh’s performance more closely, a score of one point higher compared to the previous CPI represents a recognition of the power of the July uprising that caused the collapse of kleptocracy and created aspirations of “dekleptification.” However, the failure to carry forward and build the foundation for transformation has also been evident. Post-uprising Bangladesh has witnessed sustained corrupt practices in political and governance spaces nationally and locally. The failure of the interim administration to set examples of governmental transparency, integrity, and accountability, as well as setbacks in the reform process, also denied us a better overall score.
This is no unique experience, though. Many countries that previously scored similarly to or even lower than Bangladesh (examples include Nepal, Laos, Vietnam, Timor-Leste, Ukraine, and Angola) have successfully managed to improve their CPI standing thanks to sustained efforts to push comprehensive and strategic institutional reforms and carry out robust digitalisation of public services in tandem with effective prosecution of high-level corruption, especially political, governmental, and corporate. On the other hand, many countries that had around the same CPI score as Bangladesh (or even higher), such as Myanmar, Thailand, Mexico, or Mozambique, have seen worsened scores over the last decade due to democratic backsliding, institutional decay, enforcement deficits, structural erosion of checks and balances, and lack of strategic approaches against corruption.
In the same manner, Bangladesh’s interim government has failed to adopt a comprehensive and strategic approach in determining the reform agenda in general and anti-corruption in particular. There was no reform implementation plan, no risk analysis, nor any risk mitigation strategy. The foundation for state reform that has been created through various ordinances has been rendered fragile due to “ad-hocism,” political and bureaucratic resistance, and a pick-and-choose approach. Almost nothing has been done to reform the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC), leaving the aspirations for its independence, accountability, and effectiveness only a pipe dream. The government’s failure to walk the talk of transparent, accountable, and conflict-of-interest-free governance has been clear. Inaction and even resistance from the ACC, in collusion with the government bureaucracy, to strategic reform recommendations have largely sabotaged reform prospects. All these against the backdrop of widespread extortionist capture of politico-governance spaces across the country have unfolded an “our turn” syndrome that presents ominous indications of the resistance capacity in the kleptocratic ecosystem.
It will be for the upcoming power-holders to prove that what they have been preaching in their election manifesto and campaigns will be practiced. To do so, they may find some magic bullets in the whole set of recommendations for a corruption-free ACC with a specific focus on its independence, accountability, and effectiveness. Proposals for the constitutional criminalisation of abuse of power, National Anti-Corruption Strategy, Beneficial Ownership Transparency and Public Register, conflict of interest management, Common Reporting Standard, and transparency in political and electoral finance must be components of a delivery plan. These should be in sync with examples of concrete success in holding corruption to account, especially at the highest levels.
No less important is the depoliticisation of all professions and state institutions in order to ensure professional integrity and institutional effectiveness, especially at the judiciary, bureaucracy, law enforcement, and intelligence agencies. No country has been able to control corruption without ensuring media freedom and an open civic space. Above all, Bangladesh needs leadership that will transform the culture and practice of treating political and governmental positions as licenses to abuse power for private gains.
Dr Iftekharuzzaman is executive director at Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB).
Views expressed in this article are the author's own.
Follow The Daily Star Opinion on Facebook for the latest opinions, commentaries, and analyses by experts and professionals. To contribute your article or letter to The Daily Star Opinion, see our guidelines for submission.
