ACCA has long operated a double standard. Its public relations driven blurb makes references to high ideals, but the practice is something else.

The latest evidence is provided by the words of ACCA President, Jonathan Beckerlegge (click here )

 Mr. Beckerlegge calls for more transparency, but can't seem to connect this to ACCA's own practices. Here are some examples of what it does not do:

Of course, if ACCA's leadership  had any sincerity about its public utterances, it would put its own house in order first. It always opposes change. It opposed the call for open council meetings, but subsequently had to embrace the idea (not necessarily the practice in full). It has no strategy for openness and democracy. The strategy is how to expand and make money in developing countries, something which harms the developing countries by not enabling them to develop their local infrastructure.

ACCA leadership is not known to be reflective. The council is ineffective and is unable to check the power of management.  The unelected leadership is weak. The magazine carefully censors out all dissenting comments. Can anyone really take ACCA's call for  transparency seriously?