We called him to account for his long absence.
The English phrase “to account for X” can be used in both positive (or neutral) and negative contexts. But the Japanese sentence definitely suggests that “we” are accusing of his long absence.
弁明 is interchangeable with 釈明（しゃくめい）and 説明（せつめい）. Both 弁明 and 釈明 are used in negative contexts only, so 説明 (explanation in a neutral way) would be a better translation for the English sentence with “account for”.
I am not a native English speaker, but “being called to account for” an absence, sounds like it implies a good explanation is needed.
Rather I do not see the “we called him” part.
I would have translated, maybe “I asked him for an explanation (a good explanation) for his long absence”.
@mike-lima
弁明 probably sounds much stronger than you imagined.
The nuance of the “call for” part is already covered by the verb 求める. The question here is not about “call for” but the difference between “accountability” and “responsibility”.
弁明/釈明を求める = Whatever the reason is, that’s unforgivable and you owe us an apology (and compensation from the damage). = You should take the responsibility.
説明を求める = You owe us a clear explanation. = If your reason for the long absence is an unavoidable one, we may understand your situation.
If “we” in the example sentence are his client, and the client lost money due to his absence, 弁明を求める is probably okay.
If “we” are his boss and colleagues, use 説明を求める instead. He might go to a small island on vacation, and a typhoon hit the island and caused a regional blackout. In this case, he couldn’t be back to work or even make a phone call to his workplace. “We” don’t know the reason yet, so 弁明 isn’t appropriate in this context.
Thank you for the explanation, this kind of things cannot be learned by just reading definitions in a dictionary.