Allegations of large-scale corruption, financial irregularities and overseas money transfers during the tenure of the interim government led by Dr Muhammad Yunus are coming under renewed scrutiny, with a number of complaints reportedly lodged with Bangladesh’s Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC).
Dr Yunus took charge as chief adviser after the Awami League government fell on 5 August 2024 following a mass uprising led by the Anti-Discrimination Student Movement. His administration entered office amid expectations that it would strengthen good governance, reduce inequality and tackle corruption. The record of the interim administration, however, has since become the subject of intense political debate, with critics accusing those in power of administrative irregularities and financial misconduct.
The allegations outlined in the report are serious but remain claims unless established through investigation and due legal process. The ACC has reportedly begun reviewing complaints and conducting preliminary assessments to determine whether there is sufficient evidence for formal investigations.
According to the information provided, at least 2,000 complaints concerning alleged corruption during the Yunus administration have been submitted to the ACC. A significant proportion of the complaints reportedly concern former advisers, senior officials and individuals described as being close to the former chief adviser.
One of the most prominent cases concerns former student adviser Asif Mahmud Sajeeb Bhuiyan. The ACC has reportedly opened an investigation into allegations involving Tk13,000 crore. The complaints cited in the report allege that funds were used to purchase land in Portugal, invested in the Dubai-based ‘Green Group’ and deposited in Swiss banks.
The allegations also claim that Tk4,500 crore was transferred to Dubai, Tk3,000 crore to Singapore, Tk2,000 crore to Australia and Tk1,500 crore to Switzerland. Taken together, the amounts cited in the complaints total Tk11,000 crore. The report also alleges that relatives of Asif Mahmud were involved in transferring substantial sums abroad.
Such figures, however, need to be treated as allegations rather than established facts. Determining whether the money was actually transferred, where it originated and who ultimately controlled it would require examination of banking records, property documents, company accounts and other financial evidence.
The report also claims that complaints have been lodged against several other former advisers. Allegations concerning Dr Yunus himself reportedly involve alleged transfers of more than Tk5,000 crore to the United States, France, Switzerland and Norway.
One complaint allegedly claims that Tk374 crore in Bangladeshi currency was deposited into an account associated with Yunus in Norway. It further alleges that the money came from Telenor, the multinational company associated with Grameenphone. The report also raises questions over alleged benefits received by Grameenphone during the period of the Yunus administration.
Former adviser Asif Nazrul is also named in a series of complaints. According to the report, around a dozen complaints involving alleged money laundering of Tk10,000 crore have been submitted to the ACC.
The allegations against Nazrul include claims of financial irregularities linked to the appointment and transfer of judges, legal officers and sub-registrars. Some complaints reportedly allege that money was collected through what they describe as ‘bail trading’ and transfer-related activities.
There are also allegations that Nazrul maintained a Swiss bank account and acquired undeclared assets in the United States. The complaints reportedly refer specifically to properties in New York and Florida. Whether any such assets exist, who owns them and how they were financed would have to be established through documentary evidence.
Another former adviser, Syeda Rizwana Hasan, has also reportedly faced allegations involving Tk8,000 crore. The complaints cited in the report allege that assets were sold and funds transferred overseas through her husband, Abu Bakar Siddique, with Dubai and London mentioned in connection with alleged business activities.
The report also refers to allegations concerning former adviser Nurjahan Begum. According to the complaints, a luxury property in New Jersey was allegedly purchased in the name of a close relative during her time in government.
An ACC official is quoted as saying that complaints have been filed against most of the advisers, apart from a small number of individuals. The report puts the total value of alleged corruption linked to Yunus and his advisers at at least Tk40,000 crore.
The commission’s reported procedure is to review the complaints first and launch formal investigations where preliminary evidence supports further action. That distinction is crucial. A complaint is an allegation, not proof of criminal conduct. Any individual named in a complaint remains entitled to due process until an investigation establishes otherwise.
The report also links the wider debate to the increase in deposits held by Bangladeshis in Swiss banks. It states that such deposits rose from about 59 crore Swiss francs in 2024 to 83.41 crore Swiss francs in 2025, an increase of roughly 41 per cent.
An increase in deposits held abroad does not, on its own, demonstrate corruption or money laundering. The source of the funds, the identity of account holders and the legality of the transactions must be established separately. Financial flows involving overseas jurisdictions can only be properly assessed through documentary evidence and cooperation between relevant authorities.
The allegations have nevertheless intensified calls for a closer examination of the financial conduct of those who held positions of authority during the interim administration. The political debate surrounding the Yunus government has been highly contentious, with supporters and opponents offering sharply different assessments of its record.
For the ACC, the challenge is to separate political claims from evidence. Bank statements, tax records, property registrations, corporate ownership documents and international transaction records could all play a role in determining whether the allegations have a factual and legal basis.
The public expectation is that the investigation should be conducted impartially, regardless of the status or political affiliation of the person concerned. If the allegations are substantiated, those responsible should face action under the law. If they are not supported by evidence, that should also be made clear.
The investigation involving Asif Mahmud and the complaints concerning other former advisers could therefore become a significant test of the ACC’s ability to handle allegations involving senior political and administrative figures. A transparent, evidence-based process would be essential to establish whether the sweeping claims of corruption and money laundering during the Yunus administration have substance, while ensuring that allegations are not treated as convictions before investigations are complete.
