"The government's mentality is reflected in its dealings with Prof. Yunus and Grameen Bank"
– Dr. Hossain Zillur Rahman, Executive Chairperson, Power and Participation Research Centre (PPRC) and former Advisor of the caretaker government
What do you say about the Dr. Yunus and Grameen Bank controversy?
It is a totally unfortunate incident. There are times when a strong moral stand exists behind certain incidents, but I can't find this in this instance. Grameen Bank has about 82 lakh members. This is a huge community. This is an inspiration. Everyone would have wanted this institution to be strengthened further, even the government. Narrow logic and administrative arguments may have been used to remove Dr. Yunus from Grameen Bank, but I do not find any clear stand of the government in this regard.
So who will benefit from this and who stands to lose?
Firstly, Grameen Bank will be harmed as an institution. Some feel that if Prof. Yunus, as a person, moves away, Grameen Bank will be harmed. My response to that is the person Yunus is not being removed through any transparent process. I see a huge media campaign against him. Important persons within the government are making such comments that it is obvious that there is a plan to remove him. Grameen Bank has thus fallen into deep risk. We must understand that micro-credit is basically a system of trust. It depends wholly on trust. If that trust is gone, the entire system will collapse. Some people talk about the rule of law, but it is clear that these are the persons least interested in the rule of law.
The rule of law isn't simply a series of steps. There has to be an objective. There are problems with the objective in this instance. I feel that Grameen is being placed at risk by the removal of Yunus and the entire country's image is being threatened.
As a researcher of social change, I feel that Bangladesh in the midst of poverty and a difficult situation, has used a development model and that is the effort to move ahead in a united manner. I see the current event as an attack on the multifaceted Grameen model. This does not bode well and the government should take this into consideration.
Prof. Yunus should remain at the helm for some more time in Grameen Bank. He has to exit in a manner that does not put the bank at risk.
What sort of risks would Grameen face if Prof. Yunus is removed?
It is not as if Grameen will not be affected with Yunus' removal. A former Grameen officer has been made the Chairman of Grameen Bank. His present activities make the risk all the more clear. The aggressive attitude and statements of certain responsible persons in the government have made this risk all the more potent. Their attack on Grameen is quite open and this is really an alarming matter.
What could the government's motive be behind this action?
The year 2011 is a difficult time for our economy. The fact that one crore 20 lakh families are direct members of Grameen and BRAC is significant. This is an important matter in rural economy. If the trust is put at risk, the situation can turn serious. People have already begun withdrawing money from the bank. If by removing Yunus from office on grounds of his age was a great instance of establishing the rule of law, people would deposit even more. Why would they withdraw their money?
What could the international repercussions be?
The donors may not interfere in our internal affairs, but at the same time, providing us with assistance and facilities is their internal affair. They will definitely evaluate our performance. Grameen's micro-credit is an international recognized model. This is unnecessarily being attacked and put at risk. They will certain take note of this. They may feel that democracy isn't being practiced here.
The entrance of our readymade garments in their markets is a matter of their political decision. A bill has to be passed in this regard. If they feel that democracy isn't functioning in Bangladesh, they just might say, block their garments. So they may poke their nose into our internal affairs, but in a roundabout manner. That is a matter of their internal decision and we can do nothing.
We are not an isolated country. We are a mid-income country and cannot simply be set apart in one corner. Our target is to strengthen various international relations to climb higher in this global world. We must lay stress on this. The government could have avoided messing around with Grameen and Prof. Yunus.
Why did the government enter into this controversy?
I can't say why it entered into this, but it does not bode well for anybody. It is not good for our efforts at poverty alleviation. More important than the government's objectives is the fallout of this action. Will this help the country in any way? Will it help the people in any way? Will it benefit Grameen, will it benefit the government? The answer is negative in all cases.
What is the future of Prof. Yunus?
It will be painful for him to see this institution, which has grown over the year, fall flat on its face. He has always striven to strengthen Grameen and to keep it unified. That is why he wanted a dignified exit.
The government has taken a very colonial attitude in saying it is in their jurisdiction to take a decision regarding Grameen. Yet the real owners of Grameen are 80 lakh poor members. The government is not looking into the rule of law here. The government's mentality is reflected in its dealings with Prof. Yunus and Grameen Bank
Times ahead are difficult for Prof. Yunus. This is a sad chapter for us indeed. This will not have good consequences. I can only hope for an amiable solution and that we will not proceed towards unfortunate consequences.
__._,_.___
