Economists, rights activists and jurists saw the removal of Muhammad Yunus from Grameen Bank as a move to harass an individual instead of bringing remedy to people’s sufferings caused by the much-hyped micro credit.
Jahangirnagar University’s economics teacher Anu Muhammad said that the government’s action was not appropriate as it would not end the sufferings of the thousands of people who were caught in a cycle of debt because of micro-credit.
‘There was no move to assess the functionality of micro-credit and to investigate the anomalies in the
bank’s corporate process. What the government is doing will create an impression that it was being done out personal vengeance,’ he said.
‘Removing only Yunus or taking the bank under government control keeping the model and the structure intact would bring no good for the people,’ he said.
Dhaka University’s development studies teacher Mahbubullah said that the way Yunus was removed was indecent. ‘Yunus contributed a lot to establishing Bangladesh’s image in the global arena. Such an unceremonious exist of him does not look decent,’ he said.
‘Yes, there are so many points to criticise him such as the interest rate of the bank. But we should recognise that the bank’s activity had contributed to the empowerment of the poor too,’ he said. ‘We should also take into account the participation of a huge number of people in the Grameen network. Are all of them fool?’
The executive director of Nijera Kori, Khushi Kabir, said that the way Yunus was removed seemed to be a synchronised attempt to harass him. ‘I have been seriously critical of micro-credit for long and still believe that it could bring no good for the poor. But they way Yunus has been dealt with is not acceptable,’ she said.
One of the senior lawyers, M Zahir, questioned the bona fide intention of the Bangladesh Bank’s action.
He told New Age, ‘After so many years they are coming and saying this? The Bangladesh Bank knew very well that Yunus was the managing director and now they are suddenly waking up and saying that he does not have the sanction. It is not bona fide.’
‘Why, I ask, did Bangladesh Bank wake up so late and why against such a person as the Nobel Laureate?
Another senior lawyer said removing a person from his office without issuing a notice and giving any scope to defend himself was against the fundamental of the rule of law.
Friends of Grameen, a voluntary association chaired by former president of Ireland Mary Robinson in a statement said, ‘This new development appears as a renewed and immediate threat for Grameen Bank as an independent institution and a new step in the destabilisation campaign persuaded by the [Bangladesh] government.’
Courtesy of New Age
