BCB President announces appointment of independent audit firm, citing corruption
On the day Faruque Ahmed was elected as the president of the Bangladesh Cricket Board (BCB), he spoke out against corruption.
In his first press conference as president, he stated that the cricket board is not exempt from the corruption prevalent in every sector of Bangladesh. He expressed his desire to reduce corruption within the board.
A few days later, Faruque directly acknowledged that corruption had occurred within the BCB. Consequently, the former national team captain announced the appointment of an independent audit firm.
The 12th board meeting was held on Thursday at the BCB office in Mirpur’s Sher-e-Bangla National Cricket Stadium.
This was Faruque’s first board meeting as president, and several important decisions were made, including the appointment of an independent audit firm and the cancellation of the Sheikh Hasina Stadium tender.
Faruque stated that there is no external pressure on the BCB despite the recent change in government.
The board is operating independently, allowing him to focus on preventing corruption from the outset. Referring to the corruption that occurred under the leadership of former BCB President Nazmul Hassan Papon, Faruque said, “We all know that some corruption did take place. We cannot deny that.”
Papon assumed the role of BCB president in 2012 when he was appointed by the government. He was elected president in October 2013, a position he held until his recent resignation. During his lengthy tenure, there were numerous allegations of corruption, financial irregularities, and commission trading against his administration.
Faruque mentioned that the independent audit firm would investigate these issues and take necessary actions.
He also noted that the Anti-Corruption Commission might intervene if needed, stating, “We will appoint an independent audit firm very soon. It will be one of the top four firms, and they will conduct the audit. If corruption is found, the Anti-Corruption Commission will certainly intervene. However, our responsibility is to find out whether corruption occurred, to what extent, and in what form.”
