Is This the End for Muhammad Yunus?

In today's Bangladesh, even a Nobel Prize can't protect you from persecution.

BY DAVID BERGMAN | MARCH 15, 2011

The last hope for Muhammad Yunus, Bangladesh's Nobel Peace Prize winner and founder of the path breaking microcredit institution Grameen Bank, rests with a hearing in the appellate division of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh that on Tuesday was postponed for two weeks.

Last week, after three days of argument, a lower court, the High Court upheld the legality of an order given the previous week by the country's central bank that required him to leave his post of managing director because he was over 60 years of age. Yunus is now 70, and the High Court held that Grameen Bank's own staff regulations required employees to retire at 60, including him.

Yunus's own lawyers reject that interpretation of the law and hope now to persuade the appellate division that the High Court decision was "entirely perverse," "a total departure from all ordinary norms of practice," and "a total denial of justice," as they write in their appeal filing.

If the High Court decision stands, not only will Yunus be out of a job, it will also mean that at the time he received his Nobel prize in October 2006, he was illegally holding the position of managing director at the bank. Who knows what would be the legal status of decisions and agreements that Yunus made since 1990?

The charge that Yunus unlawfully stayed in his post is just one of the government's many allegations.

Last week, Sajeeb Wazed, the prime minister's son, who has also been appointed as her advisor, sent out an email setting out a series of allegations against the bank including  "fraud," "theft," "tax evasion," "draconian" methods of loan recovery and "embezzlement." He admitted that the source of these allegations -- which are forcefully denied by Grameen Bank -- are government legal papers.

The government and its supporters portray the government's action against Yunus as simply part of its commitment to "rule of law." 

The law is clear, they say: Yunus simply should not have been managing director of the bank since he turned 60. The government's current action is only directed at correcting that illegality, they claim. If he committed crimes he should be brought to account.

There is certainly some support for this position. As one High Court reporter told me, "Our sentiment is that Yunus's Nobel prize has nothing to do with his professional conduct and this prize does not give him any immunity from the music of law."

Nayeemul Islam Khan, the editor of the influential Bengali language newspaper Amader Shomoy argues that the government's action not only reflects a principled decision on the part of the government but should be applauded by the international community.

"By taking actions against the illegal activities/irregularities/unauthorized actions by Dr. Yunus and the Grameen Bank board, the government in fact is enhancing the image of the country by giving out the strong message that there is zero tolerance from [the] present government on corruption and irregularities," he wrote recently.

Others say the attack on Yunus is politically motivated.

There are few people more critical of microfinance's contribution towards alleviating poverty than Nurul Kabir, the editor of the English language newspaper New Age, and one might well have expected him to support the government in its attack on Grameen.

However in his view, the government's action against Yunus has nothing to do with principle or the rule of law -- it's a vendetta.

"Hundreds of Awami League party men are committing innumerable illegal actions across the country with absolute impunity from the government," he says, referring to the ruling party of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina. "The first thing that the government did after coming into government was to withdraw corruption charges against the ruling party leaders. So, we have no reason to believe that the government is serious about fighting allegations of corruption."

Those who share Kabir's view point to two key events to explain the government's move against Yunus.

Since 1997, when, during her first term, Hasina signed the Chittagong Hill Tracts peace treaty bringing an end to a decade-long internal military conflict, the prime minister thought that she should get the prize. She even sent senior foreign office officials around the world in search of nominations. Hasina is therefore said to have been none too pleased that Yunus received all the international acclaim.

This may not have mattered much, were it not that six months after wining the award, in March 2007, Yunus announced that that he would set up a new political party, called Nagorik Shakti (Citizens Power). He wanted, he said at the time, a "complete emasculation of the established political parties" in order to "cleanse the polity of massive corruption."

It happened during a controversial two-year period when the country was in a state of emergency, with the interim government, supported by the army, advocating a new kind of politics without the leaders of the two main political parties.

Though it was a short-lived effort on Yunus's part, some claim that Hasina saw his intervention as a direct personal attack on her and the Awami League. "She thought that he was involved with the army in trying to remove her and [opposition party leader] Khaleda Zia from politics. That the army's plan to remove her was also his plan," a former bureaucrat said.

Now, however, all eyes will be on Yunus's appeal -- which looks to many like a foregone conclusion. In the two years that the current Awami League government has been in power, the government has yet to lose an important political case in the courts. Though the independence of the judiciary is enshrined in Bangladesh's constitution, governments of all types may have significant leverage over judges -- particularly if they require confirmation of their permanent judicial status, want promotion to the appellate division, or are seeking appointment as chief justice. Lawyers here commonly talk about this leverage being used on occasion -- though there is no direct evidence.

So unless the appellate division looks kindly on Yunus's legal arguments, and more significantly feels able to take a position that will set them in opposition to the government, Grameen Bank will soon be looking for a new managing director.

MUNIR UZ ZAMAN/AFP/Getty Images

 SUBJECTS: EAST ASIA
 

David Bergman is special reports editor of the Bangladesh daily newspaper New Age. He also happens to be married to one of the members of Muhammad Yunus’s legal team.

FGT5RY

5:07 AM ET

March 15, 2011

 

ARYABHAT

11:10 AM ET

March 15, 2011

'Hillary Adarsha' and other Frauds of Mr Yunus

Yunus has been locked in a dispute with the government since November last year when a Norwegian documentary claimed he had misused aid funds from the Norwegian government and diverted $100 million from Grameen Bank to an NGO Grameen Kalyan which was not related to microcredit.

The euphoria generated by the media after Yunus won the Nobel Prize got dissipated following reports appearing in a section of press highlighting high interest rates charged by the Grameen Bank, tough payment schedules and inhuman recovery methods leading to miseries including suicides committed by the poor loan defaulters.

The international community has long been made to believe that Yunus was lending money to rural poor people in Bangladesh, especially women, at a very comfortable and low interest. In fact, Grameen Bank has been receiving grants and loans from various international agencies on a regular basis for this purpose. The highest amount of annual interest on any foreign loan that Grameen Bank receives is 3 percent. Moreover, a major segment of the foreign loans or grants received by it are absolutely free of interest. But, Yunus is lending money to poor people at a rate ranging between 40-70 percent per year.

This bloodsucking show was revealed when the ’Weekly Blitz’, published a series of investigative reports on Yunus. A reporter Zahid Al Amin of the weekly visited the village Jobra near Chittagong. Jobra is claimed to be the model of 'success story' of Yunus and his Grameen Bank. He interacted with the villagers and collected information as well photographs, to verify the truth in what Yunus and his Grameen Bank were claiming as their success.

Yunus displayed a documentary on a woman’s fortune at the Nobel Prize awarding ceremony in Oslo, Norway, on October 13, 2006, putting up the success story of Grameen Bank. The documentary mainly focused on the first borrower of Grameen Bank, Sufia, showing her as owning a two storey building after rising from a miserable condition.

Though Yunus and Grameen Bank claimed to have helped Sufia in erecting her own building, in reality, she used to live in an almost broken hut, where her family members are living even now. The house, which is shown by Yunus and Grameen Bank as Sufia's in the documentary is actually owned by one Jabel Hussain who lives in Dubai. The owner Jabel Hussain has, from Dubai, instructed his relatives in Bangladesh to sue Yunus and Grameen bank if his two storey house is again shown as Sufia's in future. There had never been any response or comment or statement from Yunus and his Grameen Bank though the widely read ‘Weekly Blitz’ published series of reports about Sufia and ownership of the two storey house.

Investigative and award-winning Danish documentary film maker Tom Heinemann’s documentary titled “Caught in Micro debt’ released in last November also dug out the harsh reality Sufia met. Sufia's daughters Halima and Nurunnahar said that they were left absolutely pauper and have to beg for survival. On investigation, it was found that when Sufia died due to extreme poverty the local people had to collect donations for her burial.

Uday Kumar Barua, a resident of Jobra village told ‘Weekly 2000’ that, even a single person in the Jobra village has not benefited by Yunus. Most of the borrowers turned completely pauper and they even had to sell their homes for paying the loan interest and left the village. Many of them even ended up as beggars.

The weekly Blitz also reported that Yunus took former US first lady (now Secretary of State), Hillary Clinton at Grameen Bank's project situated at Rishi Palli at Moshihati in Bangladesh, where Yunus initiated a project named 'Hillary Adarsha' (Hillary Model) and started distributing loans to the locals. Although Hillary Clinton was deeply impressed and given assurance of providing soft-term loan to the poor villagers, in reality, the villagers were made to pay 30-40 per cent interest. After the visit of Hillary Clinton, the entire village turned into a land of horror. Extreme poverty due to high interest charged by the Grameen Bank pushed them towards starvation, poverty and compelling many of them to commit suicide. Child marriage is very common in that village. A large number of females from the village ended up in local and neighboring brothels, as they were virtually sold by parents due to poverty. Now, Hillary Model village has turned into a big joke to the locals. But Yunus has been successful in tactfully suppressing this fact from the attention of Hillary Clinton.

 

ARTFUL AID WORKER

3:06 PM ET

March 15, 2011

@ARYABHAT

You make some pretty heavy assertions my friend. I hope you are not simply a puppet for Yunus's many enemies. This sort of character assassination is both odious and typical in pathologically corrupt countries - there's plenty of parallels with Indonesia in the 90s and early 00s, and Thailand (then and now).

But then your note has far more detail than the original post. Maybe you are telling the truth. Can you refer us to some reputable investigative reporting on the usurious practices of the Grameen Bank?

I find in my own work that a mythology has formed around microcredit.

Microcredit is simple - but the repayment discipline takes at least nine months to instill. And that's way before you can expand the debtor base.

Microcredit is a cheap option for small-holding farmers. As you point out, the interest rates are oppressively high. I am not surprised that the appetite for credit in debtor communities (hardly remarkable in poor countries, certainly not amongst subsistence farmers) is matched by the tide of misery that ensues.

Donors like anything that is presented as a magic bullet. In this, Yunus is peerless in his ability to present microcredit as that panacea to poverty. The other thing donors like about microcredit is how it seemingly evades the tentacles of avaricious public officials. It looks like a quick fix.

In one sense, I hope you are a puppet for Yunus's enemies and that you are lying. That this 'new' idea of sucking people into usurious credit schemes is now causing such widespread misery, stripping communities of the little that they have, and forcing young women and girls into prostitution and trafficking is appalling.

 

ARYABHAT

7:50 AM ET

March 16, 2011

@ARTFUL AID WORKER

Firstly, I have nothing against Mr Yunus personally. There was a time when I thought he was an angel, bringing relief to a section of people who needed help the most. It is my disappointment that made me provide this response.

Kindly allow me to provide supporting information and where to find it pls, as follows:

1) With regards to diversion/return of Norwegian funds : http://www.weeklyblitz.net/1166/what-happened-with-the-money-tom-heinemann

2) For Sufia's plight, please read the actual interview of her daughters Halima and Noor by Zaid Amin here: http://www.weeklyblitz.net/444/the-way-dr-yunus-befools-the-world

 

ARTFUL AID WORKER

5:04 PM ET

March 15, 2011

Maybe You're Right: Maybe You're Not

As with many quarters within the aid/development industry, there is a persistent bias in favour of entrepreneurialism.

Unfortunately, I would submit to you that there is not a lot of evidence to back up this presumption. There is a sense I get whenever this debate comes up that poor people - quite unlike local populations in modern or middle-income countries - are all potential self-starting entrepreneurs and with some small start-up capital they will become self-employed; and then everything will be ok!

And your comparison to commercial/corporate finance is obtuse, sorry. Thirty percent (or more in many cases) compound interest on a USD100 loan may be a substantial amount for a family living hand to mouth.

As for your assertion that these businesses are 'good to go' (short "incubation periods" and so on), this is the exact kind of wishful thinking many donors and MFIs hold out as being the norm. I personally dont see this business dynamic in fragile, chronically poor, or post-conflict environments. I see a middle management class moving in with cheap goods and services, not the locals. That's where the jobs are for the locals, albeit at pittance wages. As for small-holding farmers, access to finance is part of the problem, not the whole problem; irrigation, the right seeds, integrated animal/pest management, and extension services are critical.

I also don't see the financial discipline, patterns of delayed gratification, and entrepreneurialism microcredit presumes of its potential debtor class. In short, I dont see your thousands of succes stories. Rather I see loads of crappy outcomes with a small number of over-publicised successes.

We all want to believe that throwing money in small volumes with acceptably high interest rates is the simple solution all of us have wilfully overlooked, the magic bullet we crave. What happens if we are wrong?

 

TOM BOONE

7:31 AM ET

March 31, 2011

Defend Yunus !

The Bangladesh government's smear and villification of Yunus is wholly without warrant. Attempting to remove Yunus from Grameen is equivalent to what historically would have been an attempt to remove Clara Barton from the Red Cross. Join the former President of Ireland and UN High Commissioner on Human Rights and the Friends of Grameen in protesting this outrage and demanding immediate justice for Professor Yunus. The Bangladesh governments actions is wholly unmerited. Attempting to remove Yunus from Grameen is akin to trying to remove Clara Barton from the Red Cross. Join Mary Robinson, former President of Ireland and UN High Commissioner on Human Rights, and the Friends of Grameen now. Protest this petty, vindictive, egregious abuse of power by disgruntled former Grameen employees who now dis-serve the people of of Bangladesh as its "government".