Yunus Administration faces mounting questions amid political uncertainty

Bangladesh faces serious economic challenges, public frustration

By Tajul Islam

The political situation in Bangladesh has entered an era of heightened complexity and instability, shaped most dramatically by the events of August 5, 2024. On that day, former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina fled to India, reportedly fearing for her life as the Meticulous Design movement intensified across the country. With mass demonstrations and violent clashes threatening thousands of lives, the sudden departure of Hasina created a power vacuum that was swiftly filled by Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus, who assumed leadership as Chief Advisor of the interim government.

While many initially viewed Yunus’s rise as an opportunity for reform and national healing, the months that followed have raised significant concerns about governance, transparency, and the rule of law. Actions taken by the interim administration have drawn critical scrutiny from political analysts, civil society groups, and segments of the public, all questioning whether the new leadership is living up to its promises—or replicating the flaws of the previous regime.

One of the most controversial actions of the Yunus administration has been the revocation of legal immunity previously granted to Muhammad Yunus during the Awami League era, including protection related to a major tax evasion case involving BDT 666 crore. While in principle, removing such immunity could have signalled a commitment to accountability, the reality proved more complex. Soon after revoking his own legal protections, Yunus granted extensive tax exemptions to 31 institutions under his ownership and control, shielding them from any tax obligations until 2029. For many observers, this move contradicted his publicly declared anti-corruption stance and raised serious concerns about preferential treatment.

The tax-exempt institutions encompass a broad network of organizations connected to the Grameen ecosystem and the Yunus family. These include the Social Advancement Fund (SAF), Grameen Trust, Grameen Telecom Trust, Grameen Fund, Grameen Energy, Grameen Distribution Limited (GDL), Grameen University, Grameen Fisheries Foundation, Grameen Agriculture Foundation, Grameen Business Development, Grameen Software Limited, Grameen Cybernet Limited, Grameen Kallayan, Grameen Shamogri (Grameen Products), Grameen Udyog (owner of Grameen Cheque), Grameen America, Grameen Foundation USA, as well as the Yunus Family Trust, Professor Muhammad Yunus Trust, and the Yunus Center. The exemptions also extend to major corporate entities such as Grameenphone and multinational joint ventures like Grameen Danone Foods. Critics argue that granting such extensive tax waivers to a large number of Yunus-affiliated institutions erodes public trust and undermines the principles of transparent and accountable transitional governance.

Another issue that has drawn attention is Yunus’s frequent international travel. Over the past 15 months, he has undertaken 14 foreign trips, each accompanied by sizable delegations funded by public money. At a time when Bangladesh faces economic challenges and rising public frustration, these expenditures have been widely criticized as unnecessary and irresponsible.

This criticism stands in stark contrast to Yunus’s own promises. During his first address to the nation as Chief Advisor, he pledged a government firmly committed to transparency, accountability, and anti-corruption measures. He announced that all advisors would soon publicly disclose their assets—a promise that has yet to be fulfilled. Instead, his administration has prioritized granting tax relief to institutions under his direct authority, creating an image of double standards.

Respected economist Dr. Debapriya Bhattacharya of the Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD) lamented the situation, highlighting an uncomfortable parallel with Sheikh Hasina’s unfulfilled pledge to disclose her cabinet’s assets. He noted that many had hoped the interim government would establish a new benchmark for transparency, but those expectations have so far gone unmet.

Meanwhile, the overall law and order situation in Bangladesh has continued to deteriorate since the political rupture of August 5, 2024. Despite efforts by the interim administration to project stability, incidents of violence, communal attacks, and mob vigilantism have escalated across the country. The gruesome exhumation and burning of the body of Nurul Haque—known locally as Nural Pagla—in Rajbari last September shocked the nation and exposed the growing erosion of state authority.

Attacks on Hindu communities have intensified, stoking fears among religious minorities. The increasing assertiveness of Islamist groups has also become a point of concern, raising questions about whether the interim government has failed to contain extremist elements.

A recent report from the human rights organization Manobadhikar Shongskriti Foundation (MSF) presents an alarming picture. According to MSF, November alone witnessed 43 incidents of mob lynching, resulting in 38 deaths. During the same month, 345 cases of violence against women and children were reported, along with 72 incidents of political violence. While the number of political retaliation cases remained unchanged, there was a significant increase in arrests of members of the banned Chhatra League, the student wing of the Awami League. Additionally, 11 statues were vandalized across the country, underscoring a rise in cultural intolerance and targeted attacks.

With national elections tentatively scheduled for mid-February 2026, the country waits anxiously to see whether the interim government will uphold its commitments. Although officials insist that elections will be held as planned, recent developments suggest uncertainty. The Election Commission, expected to announce the election schedule in early December, has delayed the announcement until the second week. Additionally, a high-level election workshop planned for December 3—titled “What to Do to Maintain Law and Order in a Smooth Election Process”—was abruptly postponed. These signs raise legitimate concerns about the government’s preparedness and willingness to conduct timely elections.

As Bangladesh looks ahead, the central question remains whether Muhammad Yunus will steer the nation toward credible democratic transition—or whether the interim government’s controversies will deepen the existing political and social crisis. (IPA Service)