What does BB hope to achieve by keeping journalists away?

On 25 April 2024, something unprecedented happened. Never before in 53 years after independence have journalists been formally barred from collecting news from the Bangladesh Bank. However, on this day, Bangladesh Bank imposed a strict restriction on journalists' access to its building.

According to the new directive, journalists will no longer be able to freely enter any department of the central bank as before. The unofficial restrictions were in place since the beginning of the month, but now they have been formalised.   

There is no doubt that the country is going through a hard time. Bangladesh keeps failing to meet the IMF's foreign reserve condition, the stock market keeps falling, the financial sector is in shambles, 38 banks are weak, and the forced bank mergers are not going well. 

Amidst such troubles, issuing a ban on journalists raises the obvious question: What does the central bank achieve by doing this?

First, let's get the excuse out of the way. The ban was not a spontaneous decision to prevent unethical or false reporting. It was unofficially enforced before Eid. 

In the past, journalists were granted access to the central bank through the registration desk on the ground floor of all buildings, where they were required to provide identification and sign a register, to collect a special pass. This pass granted them access to all areas. Before the introduction of the pass, journalists could simply walk into the premises.  

The timing of the restriction is particularly troubling. Bangladesh is currently in negotiations with the IMF for a critical loan package. Transparency and public trust are paramount during such talks, and limiting journalists' access to information surrounding these negotiations fuels speculation and weakens public confidence

BB ordered the pass issuance to be stopped before Eid. Surveillance was increased, more CCTVs installed, and higher-level officials - including four deputy governors and executive directors - had been reportedly instructed not to talk to journalists.

Finally, on 10 April, when the media reported on the BB's finding that 38 banks, including six state-owned banks, were weak lenders, BB restricted journalists' access to the bank's premises. 

If any official issued a pass to the journalists, he was sent a show-cause notice. 

Initially, the BB spokesperson promised a resolution within a week, later extending the time frame to until Eid al-Fitr. Eid passed, but the restrictions remained in place. 

During the World Bank-IMF Spring Meetings on April 16, 2024, the Governor expressed his intention to address the issue upon returning to Bangladesh. The Economic Reporters' Forum (ERF) formally requested a meeting with the Governor on April 22, 2024, to discuss the access limitations. The governor initially declined an immediate meeting but eventually agreed to a session on April 25th. 

During the meeting with the Economic Reporters' Forum (ERF) on April 25, 2024, the governor refused to lift the ban entirely, requiring journalists to obtain permits for access to specific officials. 

The BB has scheduled a team meeting regarding the IMF loan package on May 8. Before that, the governor is unwilling to even consider relaxing the ban. Following this, a workshop on banking sector sensitivity is being planned for journalists.

If the whole saga feels like a way to enforce a media blackout and shield the supreme banking regulatory body from public eyes, it is exactly that. The question is bound to arise — does such action benefit the country?

This unethical and authoritarian decision hinders the legal right of people to access information and potentially undermines efforts to address the various crises plaguing the banking sector. 

The timing of the restriction is particularly troubling. Bangladesh is currently in negotiations with the IMF for a critical loan package. Transparency and public trust are paramount during such talks, and limiting journalists' access to information surrounding these negotiations fuels speculation and weakens public confidence. 

They need to know whether the IMF is satisfied with the progress or not, and whether the next loan installment will be delivered without any complications. 

The enforced bank mergers are not going well for the banks. The banks acquiring weak banks are losing shareholder trust, and public trust is declining in the banking sector. The higher-ups of the acquiring banks were not given any choice; the central bank pressured them to accept the merger. 

Furthermore, the banking sector itself is facing numerous challenges, including bad debt, financial fraud, and a lack of overall good governance. 

Dr Salehuddin Ahmed, former governor of the Bangladesh Bank, feels the central bank is trying to ensure there is less negative press coverage about their management. 

"There are talks about the foreign reserve; the bank mergers are not working well the way the Bangladesh Bank had hoped; the capital adequacy of many banks are being questioned — all of these are not good news. Also, negative news erodes confidence among depositors. They are withdrawing their deposits. So, the Bangladesh Bank wants to control some of the negative news," he said.  

But the question remains - is it not the right of citizens to know about the current situation? Why try to censor that information? 

Such concerns were aptly expressed by Dr Iftekharuzzaman, the Executive Director of Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB). In a press release on 26 April, he asked, "Should we assume that the Bangladesh Bank is working to ensure the protection of the criminal circles involved in the irregularities of this sector?" 

He raised further questions, "Is this initiative to conceal information about their own failure to establish good governance in the banking sector, which has reached the edge of the abyss? Or is it an attempt to protect the interests of those responsible for the crisis in this sector, including defaulters and fraudsters?"

And such questions will keep on arising. 

Issuing a ban on the journalists is not just a ban, it is a warning to the BB officials as well. This is sending a message to the officials — Don't talk to the journalists, or else. 

Dr. Iftekharuzzaman is also of the same opinion. He said, "Not only is there an insurmountable ban on the collection of information, but as a result, Bangladesh Bank officials at any level will want to refrain from giving interviews to journalists.  It's clear that officials may face harassment in the guise of administrative accountability if journalists publish reports after the meeting." 

The official notices of the BB do not always provide the bigger picture. It is the journalists who dig deeper into the matter and unearth the information for the public. 

Professor Dr Md Golam Rahman, former Chief Information Commissioner of Bangladesh, is also of the opinion that journalists should be granted access to the BB. 

"Bangladesh Bank is a public office. So it is only logical that journalists have access there." 

Such an attempt to ban journalists was done only once in the past. It was after $101 million was stolen from the central bank. In its aftermath, there was a restriction on journalists' entry into BB. However, journalists and the civil society protested vehemently, sensing a coverup, and the ban was lifted a few days later. 

So, if journalists sense something is not right, they are on the right track. After all, the stolen reserve is yet to be fully recovered, and it has remained one of the greatest national embarrassments for the country on the international stage. 

Imposing secrecy in such a climate can pose even greater dangers. It gives the wrong message to the masses and creates the impression that the BB is not able to control the situation. So, they are trying to keep the people in the dark from knowing that things are spiralling out of hand. 

Dr Iftekharuzzaman made the same observation in the press release. He said, "When questions of trust in the banking sector are circulating in the public's mind, or when the central bank itself appears confused about bank consolidation in the name of protecting the interests of bank customers, the imposition of secrecy can pose even greater dangers."