Photo : Messenger
In a significant turn of events, Nobel Laureate Dr. Muhammad Yunus, renowned for his pioneering work in microfinance and social entrepreneurship, along with three top officials of Grameen Telecom, was sentenced to six months in jail by a Dhaka court for labor law violations. The Dhaka Labour Court's decision resulted in fines of Tk 5,000 and Tk 25,000 for each of two different sections. The court has given them one month of bail on condition that they appeal against the verdict in the High Court.
The main contention of the case is that Dr. Yunus allegedly broke financial agreements with labourers, which led to the workers' lawsuit. The case, which finished arguments on December 24, saw Dr. Yunus facing over 100 additional allegations connected to labour law violations and alleged graft. The charges stemmed from the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments (DIFE) observation of various violations during an inspection at Grameen Telecom, such as failing to make 101 workers' jobs permanent, failing to establish a workers' participation and welfare fund, and failing to allocate 5% of the company's dividend to workers.
The severity of the punishments, together with the fines imposed on the defendants, underscores the seriousness of the alleged labour law violations. This necessitates a critical analysis of Dr. Yunus' internal methods as well as the larger ramifications for socially aware businesses. Undoubtedly, the verdict from a labour court has sent a strong message to the violators of labour laws. At the same time, the way for the workers of Grameen Telecom to get their fair rights as per the labour law has been eased through this judgement.
It would not be an exaggeration to call this judgement a milestone in the protection of labour rights. Since the beginning of this case, the lawyer of Dr. Muhammad Yunus and some of his well-wishers at home and abroad have repeatedly said that the case has been filed to tarnish the image of Dr. Yunus, a Nobel laureate personality. Many well-known people from the country and abroad have also given statements on behalf of Dr. Yunus. He even launched a global signature campaign and published it in an international newspaper, spending millions of taka. Various misleading reports have been published in foreign and local media as part of a smear campaign against the judiciary of Bangladesh. However, in the verdict, the court clearly stated that Dr. Yunus is not being tried as the Nobel Prize winner; he is being tried as a man responsible for labour law violations at Grameen Telecom. In the eyes of the law, there is no difference between a Nobel laureate and a labourer.
It’s essential to understand that being a prominent figure or a Nobel laureate does not grant someone immunity from legal responsibilities or exempt them from following the law. Nobel laureates are subject to the same laws and moral standards as everyone else. The verdict is a reminder that everyone, regardless of their accomplishments, is subject to the same standards of ethics and the law. The verdict also sends a strong message to the powerful people of Bangladesh that no one is above scrutiny or the legal consequences of their actions if they are found to have violated the law.
It is imperative to acknowledge that the trial of Muhammad Yunus is being conducted independently and in accordance with the established laws of Bangladesh. The judiciary of Bangladesh makes decisions impartially, on the basis of facts, and in accordance with the law, free of any inappropriate influences, inducements, pressures, threats, or interferences, direct or indirect, from any quarter or for any purpose. According to Article 94(4) of the Constitution of Bangladesh, judges are completely independent in their judicial work.” Indeed, the Constitution is explicit on this matter, making it abundantly clear that no one, regardless of their position in state governance, not even the Prime Minister, holds any jurisdiction to meddle in the sanctity of the judicial process.
The controversy surrounding Dr. Muhammad Yunus and his organisation is not new. Grameen Telecom's top management faces a number of allegations, including the misallocation of 5% of the employee distribution dividend due to irregularities, the unauthorised deduction of 6% labelled as lawyer's fees and other expenses when disbursing employee dues, and the transfer of Tk 2,977 crores to various subsidiary bank accounts for money laundering and embezzlement, totaling Tk 45 crores, 52 lakhs, 13 thousand, and 643, inclusive of interest allocated to the workers’ welfare fund. The rights of workers in Bangladesh are a persistent source of worry for the US and the West. This verdict indicates that the Bangladesh government takes labour rights abuses seriously and maintains impartial justice regardless of the power or position of the offender.
Professor Muhammad Yunus's trial becomes the focus of global media headlines because he is a Nobel Prize winner. But the reality is that the Nobel Prize cannot work as a shield to cover misconduct. Winning a Nobel Prize doesn’t guarantee a person’s behaviour or moral conduct; individuals from all walks of life can make mistakes or engage in wrongdoing. Several Nobel laureates have faced legal or ethical issues and have been convicted of unethical activities. Ales Bilyatsky, the Belarusian recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, was given a 10-year jail term in 2021 for his suspected role in smuggling money into Belarus to finance opposition operations. The Nobel Peace Prize winner, Aung San Suu Kyi, was criticised and accused of helping to persecute the Muslim Rohingya minority in Myanmar when she was in office. Henry Kissinger, the former U.S. Secretary of State and Nobel Peace Prize laureate, has been criticised for his role in the U.S.’s foreign policy decisions, including those during the Vietnam War and the secret bombings in Cambodia. Nobel Physics Prize winner John Robert Schrieffer received a two-year jail sentence for killing one and injuring several others in a car accident. All these examples prove that a Nobel Prize is not immunity from offences and crimes.
Legal principles and due process should apply to everyone equally to ensure a just and fair society. ‘None is above the law’ is fundamental in democratic societies. This principle helps ensure fairness, accountability, and justice within a society. When people believe that some individuals or groups are exempt from the law or are granted special privileges, it can erode trust in the legal system and lead to inequality. So, it is the duty of the judiciary to ensure that none is beyond accountability or the rule of law. The verdict on Prof. Yunus reinforces the notion that all individuals are subject to the same laws and legal processes regardless of their position, status, accolades, or achievements. We hope Dr. Yunus realises his mistakes and, rather than lobbying the Western influencers, contributes significantly in his area of expertise for the sake of the country's development.
The writer is an assistant professor and chairman, Dept. of Criminology and Police Science, University of Chittagong.
Messenger/Fameema
