Highlights:
- Dhaka court set 3rd January 2024 for submitting probe report
- The ACC had previously filed a case against Dr. Muhammad Yunus and others on May 30 for their alleged participation in the misappropriation of funds
- Grameen Telecom’s transactions since 1996 have raised suspicions, according to a complaint
- It is noted that approximately Tk2,977 crore worth of suspicious transactions have been conducted within Grameen Telecom’s subsidiaries to date
Dr. Muhammad Yunus and a dozen others stand accused of misappropriating Tk 252.2 million from the Workers’ Profit Participation Fund of Grameen Telecom. In Dhaka, a court has officially set January 3, 2024, as the deadline for the submission of the investigation report for this matter. This prominent case highlights the pressing importance of transparency and accountability within organizations that wield substantial social influence.
You Can Also Read: DR. YUNUS FACES ACC FOR MONEY LAUNDERING PROBE
This case serves as a powerful reminder that no one is immune to the law, and allegations of corruption should be subjected to rigorous examination. As the legal proceedings advance, they will establish a precedent for future cases and underscore the vital importance of upholding principles of justice and financial integrity.
The ACC’s Allegations
The Anti-Corruption Commission has issued a summons to Professor Dr. Muhammad Yunus and 12 others for questioning regarding a money laundering case. They were instructed to appear at the ACC office at 12:30 p.m. on October 5, as indicated in the notice. These 13 individuals are being summoned due to their alleged involvement in the misappropriation of more than Tk 25 crore from the company’s Workers Profit Participation Fund (WPPF).
According to ACC sources, Deputy Director Gulshan Anwar Pradhan, the case’s investigating officer, dispatched this notice on September 27. The ACC had previously filed a case against Dr. Muhammad Yunus and 12 others on May 30 for their alleged participation in the misappropriation of funds. The ACC asserted that the case was initiated after an investigation confirmed the “veracity of the embezzlement and money laundering allegations.” This case has been filed under the Money Laundering Prevention Act.
On July 23, 2022, the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments (DIFE) officially requested the ACC to investigate allegations of workers’ money embezzlement against Nobel Laureate Dr. Muhammad Yunus.
13 individuals
- Prof. Yunus, Chairman of Grameen Telecom.
- Md Nazmul Islam, Managing Director of Grameen Telecom.
- Md Ashraful Hassan, former Managing Director of Grameen Telecom.
- Parveen Mahmud, Director of Grameen Telecom.
- Nazneen Sultana, Director of Grameen Telecom.
- M Shahjahan, Director of Grameen Telecom.
- Nurjahan Begum, Director of Grameen Telecom.
- Professor S M Huzzatul Islam Latifee, Director of Grameen Telecom.
- Advocate Md Yousuf Ali.
- Advocate Jafrul Hasan Sharif.
- Md Kamruzzaman, President of ‘Grameen Telecom Sramik Karmachari Union.’
- Md Firoz Mahmud Hassan, Secretary of ‘Grameen Telecom Sramik Karmachari Union.’
- Md Mainul Islam, Union’s representative.
The Importance of Transparency
This high-profile case, featuring a Nobel Laureate, highlights the vital role of transparency and accountability in financial affairs, especially within organizations that wield substantial societal influence. It reinforces the notion that no one, regardless of their stature, can evade the law, emphasizing the need for a thorough examination of corruption allegations.
Major Charges Against Yunus
- The case was initiated after an ACC investigation verified allegations of embezzlement and money laundering against the accused. Yunus was accused of embezzling over Tk 25 crore and 22 lakhs from the workers through ’embezzlement and money laundering.’ The defendant presented evidence of a settlement agreement outside of court, documented on May 9, 2022. The case also raised concerns that the workers’ dues had been transferred to the bank accounts of several union leaders without their prior knowledge before dividend distribution.
- The allegations against Grameen Telecom encompass several key issues, including the misappropriation of five percent of the dividend designated for employee distribution due to irregularities, the unauthorized deduction of six percent labeled as lawyer’s fees and other expenses when disbursing employee dues, and the transfer of a total of Tk 2,977 crores from Grameen Telecom to various subsidiary bank accounts for the purposes of money laundering and embezzlement, amounting to Tk 45 crores, 52 lakhs, 13 thousand, and 643, which includes interest allocated to the workers’ welfare fund.
- Dr. Yunus, an economist, donated a sum of Tk 76 crores, 73 lakhs, 34 thousand to three institutions known as Yunus Trust, Yunus Family Trust, and Yunus Center Trust. The Deputy Commissioner of Taxes imposed a total tax of Tk 15 crores, 39 lakhs, 16 thousand, and 800 during the three fiscal years from 2011 to 2013.
- Grameen Telecom, an entity under Yunus’s supervision, filed misleading annual returns with the Registrar of Joint Stock Companies and Firms (RJSC). In their annual return, Grameen Telecom falsely asserted that no dividends had been distributed by the company, despite having distributed substantial sums of money to Grameen Kalyan over the years. Such a false statement in the annual return constitutes a violation punishable under Section 397 of the Companies Act, 1994.
- As a consequence of Grameen Telecom transferring its dividends to Grameen Kalyan, it forfeited its non-profit status under Section 28 of the Companies Act, and the license of Grameen Telecom is now subject to potential cancellation under Section 28. The Registrar of Joint Stock Companies and Firms (RJSC) holds the authority to revoke this license in accordance with the law.
As this case unfolds, it serves as a reminder of the paramount significance of transparency and accountability.
Conclusion:
The allegations and investigations surrounding Dr. Yunus and his associates highlight the critical importance of accountability and transparency in organizations with social influence. This case serves as a stark reminder that allegations of corruption should be thoroughly scrutinized, as it sets a precedent for upholding principles of justice and financial integrity in the future.