Prof Dr Muhammad Yunus was brought in by the "Zen G" to help build a transparent, corruption-free and prosperous Bangladesh. But, during his tenure as Chief Adviser of the interim government, he is reported to have secured significant benefits for institutions affiliated with him, including Grameen Bank, Grameen University and other entities under the Grameen Trust.
According to findings of an investigation, Yunus, while holding the highest executive office, used his position to facilitate a range of policy, financial and administrative advantages for these institutions. The developments have raised serious concerns among legal experts and policy analysts over possible conflict of interest, abuse of power and violations of constitutional obligations.
One of the most debated decisions during his tenure was the granting of a five-year income tax exemption to Grameen Bank through a gazette issued on October 10, 2024. The exemption, effective until December 31, 2029, allows the organisation to operate without paying income tax during this period. Based on previous records, the bank used to pay around Tk 200 crore annually in taxes. As a result, the total revenue loss to the government over five years is estimated to exceed Tk 1,000 crore, at a time when Bangladesh is already facing a significant revenue deficit and struggling with a low tax-to-GDP ratio.
Economists and policy observers have pointed out that such exemptions contradict ongoing fiscal reforms and commitments made to international financial institutions, including the International Monetary Fund, which has been urging Bangladesh to reduce tax exemptions and expand its revenue base. Although a later legal provision required parliamentary approval for future tax exemptions, Grameen Bank received the benefit before that requirement came into effect.
The investigation also highlights the rapid approval of Grameen University, an initiative under the Grameen Trust. While applications from at least 22 other private universities remained pending for years, the approval for Grameen University was granted within just three months. This unusually fast process has raised questions regarding fairness and due diligence.
Further scrutiny arises from apparent inconsistencies with the Private Universities Act, 2010. The law requires a minimum reserve fund of Tk 50 million for establishing a university in the Dhaka metropolitan area, but the approval letter reportedly mentioned a requirement of Tk 150 million, which experts say is inconsistent with the legal framework. Officials from the Ministry of Education and the University Grants Commission failed to provide a clear explanation regarding this discrepancy, with some stating they were not responsible for the matter and others claiming they could not recall the details.
In addition to policy decisions, Yunus is reported to have obtained extensive financial benefits through organisations such as Grameen Welfare Trust. These include a tax waiver amounting to Tk 666 crore and alleged tax evasion involving approximately Tk 1,043 crore, which remains under legal scrutiny. In some cases, tax liabilities were either reduced or annulled through court verdicts, further intensifying the debate over whether undue influence played a role.
The investigation also alleges that at least seven legal cases, including a high-profile corruption case, were withdrawn during his tenure. Alongside this, several long-pending administrative approvals were processed with unusual speed. Grameen Employment Services Limited, which had reportedly been awaiting approval for 16 years, obtained its manpower export licence and membership in the Bangladesh Association of International Recruiting Agencies within a short period in 2025. Similarly, Samadhan Services Limited, an e-wallet service linked to Grameen entities, secured its licence within months after remaining stalled for years.
Legal experts have expressed concern that such actions may constitute a clear conflict of interest. Senior Supreme Court lawyer Manzil Morshed stated that individuals entrusted with running the state must ensure that there is no overlap between personal interests and public duty. He argued that holding a constitutional position while facilitating benefits for affiliated entities could amount to a breach of oath and a violation of public trust. He further criticised the actions, saying they reflect a pattern of using state power for personal or institutional gain.
Another legal expert, Dr Shahdeen Malik, referred to Article 147 of the Constitution, which prohibits individuals in constitutional positions from engaging in profit-making activities. According to him, the extent to which associated institutions received benefits during Yunus's tenure raises serious questions about compliance with constitutional provisions and ethical standards.
The investigation also provides a detailed account of the financial footprint of Grameen-linked organisations. Grameen Kalyan Fund reportedly holds Tk 2,053 crore in 122 fixed deposits across 26 bank accounts, while Grameen Telecom maintains Tk 2,721 crore in 128 fixed deposits across 24 accounts. Other funds include Tk 72.15 crore under Professor Yunus Trust, Tk 6 crore in the Professor Yunus Foundation and Tk 5 crore in the Yunus Family Trust.
In addition to financial assets, the report highlights significant property holdings, including a luxury apartment in Gulshan valued at Tk 9 crore under the Family Trust, another apartment in Paris, equity shares in two private banks and a resort named "Naiorshog" established on 68 acres of land in Purbachal. Additional land assets include five acres in Uttara and another resort project along Marine Drive in Cox's Bazar. The investigation also mentions that land worth at least Tk 6,000 crore has reportedly been acquired nationwide under various Grameen entities.
Questions have also been raised regarding the utilisation of foreign grants and aid received in the name of Grameen Bank, with allegations that numerous Grameen-branded organisations were established and substantial amounts were spent annually under operational expenses without sufficient transparency.
The report further outlines alleged tax irregularities across multiple Grameen-linked entities, including Grameen Kalyan, Grameen Telecom Trust, Grameen Shakti, Grameen Water Ltd., Grameen Motso and Poshu Sampad Foundation, Grameen Trust and Grameen Agriculture Foundation, involving hundreds of crores. It also notes that Yunus himself faced a personal income tax dispute amounting to Tk 12.76 crore, which was later settled after a court ruling.
Despite formally stepping down from affiliated organisations before assuming office, as required by law, Yunus is reported to have resumed involvement in these entities after leaving his position. Legal experts argue that even if procedural requirements were technically met, the sequence of decisions taken during his tenure raises serious concerns about ethical governance, transparency and accountability.
Two senior Supreme Court lawyers have reportedly submitted opinions alleging conflict of interest and constitutional violations, stating that benefiting oneself or related institutions while holding public office goes against the oath of office.
However, those associated with the institutions have maintained that all actions were conducted in accordance with the law, rejecting allegations of wrongdoing.
Overall, the findings have intensified debate over governance standards and accountability, with growing calls for further investigation into the decisions taken during the interim administration and their broader implications for public trust.
