Unveiling Justice: A Comprehensive Legal Analysis of Prof. Muhammad Yunus Vs. The State

Md. Shawkat Alam Faisal: The legal case, labeled as “Prof. Muhammad Yunus Vs. The State 17 SCOB [2023] HCD 162″, involves Professor Dr. Yunus, the country’s sole Nobel laureate. In addition to his Nobel recognition, Dr. Yunus has received numerous domestic and international accolades. Notably, a recent case was resolved in the Labor Court of Dhaka, concerning allegations against both Grameen Telecom and Dr. Yunus.

This case has garnered significant attention due to statements from 160 world leaders and Nobel laureates, which suggest that Yunus is facing judicial harassment. Various professionals and politicians within Bangladesh have engaged in discussions regarding the perceived interference of foreign leaders in the country’s independent judiciary.

Multiple legal cases against Professor Muhammad Yunus are currently in progress, with a recent case in the Labor Court raising significant controversy. This particular complaint, filed in September 2021, alleges violations of labor laws. An open letter, signed by 160 global figures, including notable personalities like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, has been sent to Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, requesting the suspension of proceedings in the ongoing case. Furthermore, more than a hundred Nobel laureates have expressed their concerns.

Deputy Attorney General Emran Ahmad Bhuiyan has intensified the debate by asserting that Dr. Yunus is facing judicial harassment. He has also declined to sign a statement opposing the open letter. Additionally, Bhuiyan remarked on the unusual pace at which the Labor Court case against Muhammad Yunus is progressing.

Examining the content of the Labor Court case, it involves allegations against Grameen Telecom, stating violations of specific sections of the Bangladesh Labor Act of 2006 and Labor Policy of 2015. These violations encompass:

• Failing to make laborers and employees permanent upon completing their apprenticeships (a violation of Section 4(7) of the Bangladesh Labor Act),
• Not granting workers and employees annual leave or wages in lieu of leave (contrary to Section 117 of the Bangladesh Labor Act), and
• Non-payment of 5 percent of profits to labor welfare under the Labor Welfare Foundation Act of 2006, as well as the non-establishment of labor welfare and workers’ participation funds.

In response to these allegations, Dr. Yunus has contended that Grameen Telecom employees work on a contractual basis and, therefore, are not required to be made permanent. Upon completing their six-year contracts, the employees receive leave with wages or one month’s full wages in lieu of leave.

Regarding the Labor Welfare Fund, it is argued that Grameen Telecom, registered as a non-profit organization, is exempt from the obligation to contribute 5 percent of its profits.

The case against Dr. Yunus includes accusations of violating specific sections of the Labor Act, with potential penalties involving imprisonment or fines. Dr. Yunus attempted to have the case dismissed in the High Court under Section 561 of the Criminal Procedure Code, but his petition was denied and upheld by the Appellate Division.

A pivotal issue raised in the Appellate Division is whether Dr. Yunus should have initially pursued a civil case instead of a criminal one, given the existence of civil remedies for the alleged violations. The Appellate Division has highlighted that criminal actions should not be taken when alternative civil penalties or remedies are available under the Labor Act.

In conclusion, it appears that the charges against Dr. Yunus could potentially be addressed through civil remedies, which prompts reconsideration of the pursuit of criminal action against him, in accordance with the precedent set by the Supreme Court and the provisions of the Labor Court.

Md. Shawkat Alam Faisal is an LL.B (Hons.) Graduate and LL.M (International Law) Candidate at the Department of Law, University of Rajshahi