"The financial crimes of Dr. Yunus."

Dr. Yunus, internationally acclaimed, faces accusations in Bangladesh for financial crimes. Despite global recognition, he is implicated in misusing funds from Grameen Bank, transferring profits unlawfully to Grameen Kalyan, and smuggling money abroad under the guise of social business. Documents reveal a pattern of financial irregularities, triggering legal actions and hundreds of cases.

Is Dr. Yunus a criminal or innocent? On one side, Dr. Yunus and his close associates claim he is innocent worldwide. On the other hand, Bangladesh's law states he is a criminal. He has faced legal action under Bangladesh's labor laws. Even after clear evidence of someone's crime, there is no way to label them as innocent. Yet, many are trying to call Dr. Yunus innocent. His crimes have repeatedly angered the government in Dhaka.

In the documents related to Yunus' cases, it is found that he committed various irregularities such as financial smuggling, misappropriation of workers' funds, self-interest in the welfare fund, and transferring funds of collaborating institutions unlawfully. Hundreds of cases have been filed against him. The plaintiffs in these cases are not just the government, but also employees of his institutions.

Dr. Yunus does not own any stake in Grameen Bank. He was simply a full-time worker there. When establishing Grameen Telecom, he unlawfully took a donation of 240 million taka from Grameen Bank. And when establishing Grameen Kalyan, he unlawfully took 4.47 billion taka from Grameen Bank. Until 1999, Dr. Yunus destroyed and usurped various lands of Grameen Bank.

Despite clear legal provisions, Dr. Yunus transfers 42.65% of his profits, gained from his 34.20% shares in Grameen Telecom, to another entity called Grameen Kalyan each year.

At the time of Grameen Telecom's establishment, the organization received loans of 5.362 billion taka from Grameen Kalyan. According to the law, Grameen Kalyan had no authority to accept this amount from Grameen Telecom. Yet, Dr. Yunus paid Grameen Kalyan more than 5000 crore taka as an annual 42.65% profit share.

There is no legal provision for providing funds from Grameen Telecom's profits to Grameen Kalyan. There is no legal authority to accept these funds in Grameen Kalyan's name. Despite this, Dr. Yunus illegally transferred more than 5000 crore taka, some of which were smuggled abroad under the guise of social business.

On the other hand, more than 57.35% of Grameen Telecom's profits, which amount to more than 70 billion taka, have been transferred illegally, mostly abroad under different names and non-names as 'social business'.

Dr. Yunus has also misused foreign aid, not just once but multiple times. In 1996, he transferred 3.4718 billion taka of NORAD's grant to Grameen Kalyan. This was an unethical act. Later, under pressure from NORAD, this money was returned by Dr. Yunus.

In 1996, Dr. Yunus concealed the matter of transferring funds from NORAD. This amount, kept secret for some time, has grown into several thousand crore taka over time. This substantial amount, transferred unlawfully, was smuggled abroad under the guise of social business.

Shouldn't there be punishment for any crime? Dr. Yunus has also been punished before. But now, he brings Sheikh Hasina's wrath upon himself for his crimes in Dhaka.

The question is, if Dr. Yunus had committed no crime, then whose authority was it to punish a powerful individual like him? He did not have the authority of the Prime Minister, nor was he a friend of the American President with personal connections. He may have acted unlawfully, but it is possible to bring him within the bounds of the law.

When a person becomes internationally recognized and famous, should they be above the law in their own country? Should they obtain a license to act outside the boundaries of the law, cheating others? Yunus is Bangladesh's only Nobel laureate; there is no debate about that. Isn't he also a friend and confidant of many influential people worldwide? Do we know the name of any person who has profited by exploiting workers and employees in profitable businesses?

Yet, even after all this, can his crimes be denied? Can we overlook that he has destroyed the rights of workers, blocked the benefits of employees?

Share This Article