Dr. Yunus won Nobel Prize along with many other prizes, now what left is
enlisting his name into Guinness World Records for being the longest
serving Managing Director of any company in the world, TWENTY EIGHT
years. Why we will let that record go? Someone should take that
initiative to let that happen. Probably this did not happen before and
will not happen unless it is owned by someone personally.
He was appointed Grameen Bank Managing Director by Gen. Ershad in 1983,
since then:
* Ershad Government completed its NINE years
* Justice Shahabuddin Ahmed's caretaker government completed its
term
* Khaleda Zia completed her first five year term
* Khaleda Zia completed her second short term
* Justice Muhammad Habibur Rahman's caretaker government completed
its term
* Sheikh Hasina completed her five year term
* Justice Latifur Rahman's caretaker government completed its term
* Khaleda Zia completed her third full term
* Professor Iajuddin Ahmed - was compelled to resign on
11/January/2007
* Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed's military caretaker government completed its
two year term
* Sheikh Hasina's government running almost to its two and half year
What a world record for Dr. Yunus, since his assumption of power as
Managing Director of Grameen, TEN government has come and gone and the
eleventh is running But he is still in the helm of Grameen Bank,
congratulation to Dr. Yunus, many more to come, why not outshine eleven
more!
Thanks,
Shamim Chowdhury
Maryland, U.S.A.
--- In
alochona@yahoogroups.com, Isha Khan <bdmailer@...> wrote:
>
> *"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.
>
>
>
http://www.probenewsmagazine.com/index.php?index=2&contentId=6922>
