In 2006, Nobel laureate Prof Muhammad Yunus stood on the grand stage to receive the Nobel Peace Prize, delivering a powerful pledge that resonated across the globe. He vowed to send poverty to the museum, a symbolic act that captured the imagination of many. Yunus, renowned as the god of microcredit, promised a future where poverty would be a relic, a subject of contemplation for generations to come. However, after 17 years, poverty still lingers, and the museum seems like a distant dream.
For Prof Yunus, the fight against poverty was not just a mission; it was a dream to establish a museum where future generations could marvel at the phenomenon of poverty. His vision was to prompt questions about a world with great wealth coexisting with pervasive poverty. The promise of sending poverty to the museum was greeted with hope and optimism, but today, that hope seems dimmed.
The extrication of Prof Yunus’ promise begins with revelations from Danish investigative journalist Tom Heinemann. In the mid-90s, Yunus allegedly transferred $100 million, mostly donated as grants from various countries, to a new company within the Grameen family. This company, primarily owned by Yunus’ family members, raised concerns about tax evasion.
Heinemann’s investigation also exposed Yunus for charging high-interest rates ranging from 21 to 37 percent from vulnerable poor female borrowers, despite receiving the majority of funds as grants from international sources. The microcredit model, hailed as a panacea for poverty, seemed to have a darker side.
One poignant example that Heinemann delves into is the story of Sufia Begum, the poster-woman of Yunus and Grameen Bank. Sufia, who received a loan from Yunus, became the face of the microcredit success story. However, Heinemann’s investigation revealed a different reality. Many borrowers, like Sufia, turned from poor to poorest, forced to pay exorbitant interest rates that led to financial ruin.
In Jobra village, where Sufia lived, a significant number of villagers became paupers, selling their homes to repay loans and some even ending up as beggars. Sufia, once celebrated as a success story, died in extreme poverty, casting a shadow on the microcredit narrative propagated by Yunus.
In 2010, Parminder Bahra highlighted irregularities in Yunus’ handling of foreign funds in an article in The Wall Street Journal. The scrutiny intensified as reports emerged of Yunus showcasing a project, named ‘Hillary Adarsha Palli’ (Hillary Model Village), to former US first lady Hillary Clinton. The villagers were promised loans, homes, and better lives, but in reality, they were burdened with high-interest rates, leading to extreme poverty, starvation, and even suicides.
Yunus’ attempt to impress Clinton included bringing people from other areas and presenting them as residents of the proposed ‘Hillary Model Village’. The aftermath of Clinton’s visit saw the village plunging into despair, with child marriages and women ending up in local brothels due to extreme poverty.
On January 1, 2024, a Dhaka labor court sentenced Yunus and three others to a six-month jail term for violating labor laws at Grameen Telecom. The case involved irregularities such as not regularizing staff, not establishing a welfare fund, and not paying dividends to workers. Yunus dismissed the verdict as a punishment for a “crime they had not committed”.
“If you want to call it justice, you are free to do so”, the controversial Nobel laureate told reporters on the court premises in response to a question.
“It was in our fate, in the nation’s fate”, he added.
According to the case documents, a team of the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments DIFE went on an inspection to the Grameen Telecom and found the violations of labor laws like not regularizing 101 staff, not establishing a welfare fund for the laborers, and not paying five percent of the company’s dividends to the workers, among others.
It is well-anticipated that, due to his global image of being the “Mother Teressa” of the poor, Muhammad Yunus shall succeed in manipulating the international media and use it against his imprisonment verdict thus branding it as a repressive act of the Bangladesh government. Influential friends of Yunus, including Hillary Clinton may also extend their hands of cooperation to him.
Prof Yunus, often hailed as the “Mother Teresa” of the poor, may leverage his global image to garner international support against his imprisonment verdict. However, journalists worldwide must uphold the ethics of their profession and investigate the entire case objectively. As Yunus faces legal challenges, the international community must question what happened to his 2006 pledge of sending poverty to museums.
The story of Prof Muhammad Yunus, the god of microcredit, is one of unfulfilled promises and controversies. While his vision of sending poverty to the museum captured the world’s imagination, the reality has been marred by financial irregularities, high-interest rates, and broken dreams for many borrowers. The tragic story of Sufia Begum and the questionable practices in showcasing projects to influential figures like Hillary Clinton raise serious concerns about the impact of microcredit.
As Yunus faces legal troubles and a jail sentence, the international community must reflect on the complexities of his legacy. Journalists play a crucial role in unraveling the truth, separating fact from fiction, and holding individuals, no matter how esteemed, accountable for their actions.
The pledge to end poverty is not a one-person mission; it requires collective efforts, transparency, and ethical practices to bring about real change. The journey to sending poverty to the museum may be long, but it is a journey worth taking with integrity and a commitment to the well-being of the most vulnerable.
The answer is – Prof Muhammad Yunus is just running a BIG BIG BUSINESS under the fasle pretense of eliminating poverty. He is no “god” of poor people. He actually is a cruel monster.
So this Yunus is a scammer?