Introduction:

Integrity is a fundamental value required of all judiciaries and judges, and it plays a crucial role in effectively combating corruption. “Judicial integrity” may thus be understood as a broad concept that denotes the ability of the judiciary and its members to withstand corruption while upholding the fundamental values of judicial office. The effectiveness of any legal system rests not only on its constitutional framework but also on public confidence that justice is administered free from any improper influence on judges. In this context, judicial integrity is essential, as it ensures that justice ultimately prevails in decision-making. Judicial integrity acts as a safeguard against corruption, as the two cannot coexist, and ensures that corruption cases are addressed independently of improper external influence while effectively remedying the harm caused to victims and to society at large. In Bangladesh, the judiciary holds a particularly significant role, with courts serving as the ultimate protectors of constitutional guarantees. However, in practice, the principles of ethics and transparency have often failed to produce the desired outcomes.

The Normative Connection between Judicial Integrity and Public Confidence:

In the context of judicial integrity, the nexus between it and public trust is not only valuable, but also a structural requirement for a just society. As pointed out by the international documents on the topic, courts gain legitimacy through their efforts at remaining neutral, accountable, and transparent, thereby confirming the norm according to which nobody should stand above the rule of law. Yet judicial integrity needs to be visible in order for the aforementioned conditions to be met, as otherwise there might still prevail an impression of impropriety. When judges act independently and follow ethical standards, they make it clear that decisions are based on law, not personal gain, political pressure, or corruption. This helps people accept court decisions, even when the outcome goes against them. However, for Bangladesh, the problem of judicial “invisibility” has become particularly acute. The empirical data support the severity of the issue. According to the findings from a recent survey, around 63.5% of the participants expressed negative attitudes towards judicial integrity, while those who had lost confidence blamed it on corruption and inefficiency/.

 

Structural Weaknesses: What Makes the Existing Standards Ineffective

There are various national and international rules and practices that regulate the conduct of judges in Bangladesh. However, they are not fully effective for three main reasons. First, the system for selecting judges lacks transparency and hence violates principles of neutrality. For decades, there have been concerns regarding the involvement of the executive in judicial appointments and insufficient attention to the merit of the candidates. While measures such as passing the Supreme Judicial Appointment Ordinance 2025 seek to provide clear procedures, the transparency of the procedure of following these guidelines is vital not to undermine their effectiveness.

Second, systemic corruption during the selection process affects judicial integrity more severely than isolated incidents involving prominent figures. Allegations of corruption practices in the form of bribes when making petitions and acquiring decisions have emerged. It corresponds with academic studies indicating that judicial corruption affects poor individuals more than others.

Third, lack of accountability gives rise to an environment of impunity. Although judicial independence requires that there is no undue influence on judges, lack of any kind of internal supervision makes it possible for any form of misconduct to go unnoticed.

 

Case-Based Insights: Integrity on Trial

The recent court cases in Bangladesh show that judicial decision significantly influence public perception of integrity issues. For example, the acquittal in the Zia Charitable Trust Case (2018), after prolonged hearings, gave rise to doubts about the consistency and standards of evidence in corruption trials. An acquittal is a normal judicial decision; however, the absence of  clear rationales behind it can lead to speculations about the political interference in the judicial proceedings. In a similar vein, Dr. Muhammad Yunus Labour Case (2023-2024) highlighted the importance of strictly following due process, especially in high profile matters that attract international attention and scrutiny.. Moreover, Masdar Hossain Case (1999) Created separation between judiciary and the executive branch; though, delayed implementation diminished its effectiveness in securing judicial independence. Likewise,  Bangladesh Italian Marble Works Ltd. Case (2010) declared the Fifth Amendment unconstitutional; bolstered constitutional supremacy yet provoked fears about selective constitutional enforcement. Furthermore, Abdul Mannan Khan Case (2016) confirmed the power of the Anti-Corruption Commission; yet, the inconsistent rulings in subsequent cases undermined public faith.

 

Ethics without Transparency: Just a Half-Measure

Within the debate on judicial reforms in Bangladesh, a key criticism is that while emphasis is often placed on ethics, the importance of systemic transparency is sometimes overlooked. This is a critical gap, as transparency is essential for both preventing corruption and maintaining public confidence in the judiciary. There are several reasons why transparency is important, including preventing corruption and assuring citizens of fairness and accountability.

Transparency does not simply mean openness in a general sense. Rather, it includes clear and accessible information on how judicial decisions are made, the publication of disciplinary proceedings, and the declaration of assets by judges, among other accountability measures. On the other hand, public trust can be strengthened through greater use of open court proceedings, increased adoption of technology in judicial processes, and consistent disclosure of judges’ financial interests.

 

Steps Towards Context-based Reforms: A Flexible Model

The proposal towards the suggested way forward is the shift from formal integrity towards perceived integrity. It is significant to highlight the difference between the two forms of integrity because despite the fact that the judiciary follows the code of ethics, lack of transparency can impact the perception of the trustworthiness of the system.

The reforms proposed based on situational awareness include:

• Transparency in Appointments: This will involve the presence of an independent body in charge of the process, which is open for scrutiny by the general public.
• Transparency of Lower Courts: Considering that this is the court in direct contact with the citizenry, the reforms include the digitization of the records as well as automation and case tracking procedures.
• Judicial Accountability: This will involve creating an accountability framework that ensures judicial independence while making sure unethical conduct is checked.
• Development of Reason-giving Habit in Public: This will involve educating the citizens regarding the process.

Conclusion

The preservation of judicial integrity in Bangladesh can neither rely solely on ethical principles nor be achieved merely through ethical pronouncements. It must be established through procedures that are observable and enable the public to see justice being delivered.

It is important to recognize that legitimacy is performance-based and must be demonstrated rather than assumed. Ethics and transparency, therefore, do not operate on parallel tracks but complement each other. The sustainability of the judicial system of Bangladesh lies in maintaining a balance between these components.

 

 

Tonima Binta Saidur is a Master of Laws (LL.M.) student at Jahangirnagar University.