Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB) on Tuesday defended the methodology behind its recent governance report, rejecting claims that the findings were based solely on newspaper reports and welcoming responses from the government, parliament and police authorities.

In a statement, TIB said it was encouraged by remarks from the home minister, discussions in parliament and reactions from police regarding its report titled “100 Days of the Government after the 13th National Parliamentary Election: Review of the Implementation of Good Governance and Anti-Corruption Commitments.”

The organization said such responses help make its work more effective and impactful.

“TIB is not an investigative agency,” the statement said, noting that the organization conducts research-based advocacy on anti-corruption and good governance issues through public awareness and citizen engagement.

Responding to comments by Home Minister Jahangir Alam Chowdhury that TIB does not conduct investigations, the watchdog said its studies follow nationally and internationally recognized social science methodologies. 

It added that information is collected from both qualitative and quantitative sources and undergoes rigorous verification before being included in reports.

TIB said the sections of the report relating to law and order were based on data from Bangladesh Police and three well-known human rights organizations, all of which were cited in the report. Therefore, it said, claims that the report relied exclusively on newspaper clippings were unfounded.

While acknowledging that media reports are used where relevant, TIB said such information is subjected to credibility assessments and cross-checked with data from government and non-government sources.

The organization also noted that police authorities did not dispute its key finding that the law-and-order situation remains concerning, although they suggested comparisons with previous governments. TIB said such comparative analysis was beyond the scope of the report and therefore inappropriate for comment.

—