Home
+
Published : 03 Dec 2025, 12:53 AM
The Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) has responded after British MP Tulip Siddiq questioned the trial and sentencing in the plot corruption case involving her, her mother Sheikh Rehana, and her aunt, the deposed prime minister Sheikh Hasina.
In a statement issued on Tuesday through the ACC’s Public Relations Office, Chairman Md Abdul Momen said concerns raised in recent media reports “warrant a clear examination of the facts”.
“We have therefore conducted a thorough review of all prosecution materials filed against her by the Anti-Corruption Commission, an independent statutory body,” it read.
The fourth special judge of Dhaka Rubiul Alam on Monday found Tulip guilty and sentenced her to two years in jail.
Rehana received a 7-year jail term, while Hasina was jailed for five years.
The remaining 14 defendants in the case were each sentenced to five years in prison and fined Tk 100,000, with an additional six-month term if they fail to pay.
The court also ordered the cancellation of the Purbachal plot allocated in Rehana’s name.
According to the charges, Rehana secured a 669sqm plot in the Purbachal New Town project despite already owning residential property in Dhaka.
Investigators said she concealed this information and obtained the plot illegally.
Hasina was accused of helping secure the plot by “abusing” her office, while Tulip was accused of “influencing” her aunt to ensure the allotment for her mother.
In response to the arrest warrant issued against Tulip, in April, her lawyer claimed that the ACC had promised to investigate based on “authentic documents” but failed to present any evidence.
On Monday, Tulip described her two-year corruption sentence in Bangladesh as the outcome of what she calls a “personal vendetta” by interim prime minister Muhammad Yunus.
The Labour MP for Hampstead and Highgate in London said the entire process felt like “a complete kangaroo court… shambolic, a complete farce”.
She added, “My aunt [Hasina] is twice as old as me and 10 times more powerful than me. I want to see the evidence of how I influenced the prime minister.
“They also spread various allegations before they settled on this one. And this one is, I think, deliberately vague about me exerting political influence. And I really want to see the evidence.”
Responding to Tulip’s claims, ACC chairman said: “From the case records, it appears that each matter involves allegations of corruption relating to the allotment of plots in the names of [Tulip’s] aunt Hasina, her mother [Rehana], and her siblings and cousins.”
He added, “In one of the pending cases, it further appears that [Tulip] herself was allotted an additional plot during her aunt’s tenure as head of government.
“[Hasina], [Rehana], and other family members, including [Tulip], are currently absconding to evade the trial.”
On the concluded case, he said: “Of the three cases, the trial of the first has concluded, [Tulip] has been found guilty of corruption for influencing her aunt to secure plots for her mother and siblings.”
The ACC chairman highlighted that the prosecution examined 32 witnesses. “Several of these witnesses testified under oath that [Tulip], known to be very close to her aunt, used her influence to obtain the allotments in question.
“Their testimony, together with circumstantial evidence of plot allotments in the names of [Tulip], her mother, and her siblings indicate that she was deeply involved in the illegal process of securing plots -- not only in the case already decided but also on other occasions.”
Such conduct constitutes abetment of offences under Sections 161, 163, 164, 165(Ka), 201, 217, 218, 409, and 420 of the Penal Code, read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, he added.
As per the statement, this circumstantial evidence is further strengthened by the fact that Tulip also obtained a plot (Plot No. CWN (A)-27, later changed to Plot No. 05, Block NE(A), Gulshan, Flat No. B/201, House Nos. 5A and 5B, now renumbered as 115 and 11B, Road No. 71, Gulshan-2) by “abusing the influence she wielded over her aunt, the former prime minister”.
It should be noted that these are not remote parcels of farmland but extremely valuable plots located in one of the most expensive areas of Dhaka, it added.
The plots are large enough to accommodate substantial homes or apartment buildings. This government-owned land had been earmarked for housing to ease population pressures in Dhaka but was instead allocated to those closest to the prime minister, thereby continuing to contribute to the accumulation of familial wealth, the graft buster said.
Momen said, “[Tulip] has been linked to a number of London properties purchased with the assistance of offshore companies. This raises a fundamental question: how do individuals in public service acquire the resources necessary to purchase multiple properties and parcels of land in two major world capitals?
“We were eager to hear answers to that question and others from [Tulip], but unfortunately, she was tried in absentia.”
Speaking to Sky News after the verdict, Tulip said she was “baffled” that authorities never contacted her despite allegations circulating for over one and a half years.
She hired British lawyers who “repeatedly” wrote to Bangladeshi officials, but “they haven’t responded”.
The UK MP added that she later tried to appoint a lawyer in Bangladesh, but “they intimidated him and threatened him and he withdrew”.
Responding to these claims, Momen said Tulip’s assertion that she was denied a chance to respond is “simply untrue.”
“She was afforded the opportunity to attend the trial and present her case. She declined to attend or to be represented.
“Taken together, we believe these facts clearly and unequivocally demonstrate [Tulip’s] continued involvement in aiding and abetting corruption under the laws of Bangladesh.”
“In light of these facts and circumstances, there is no basis to suggest that she was not involved in corruption or that she is innocent of the charges brought against her,” he added.
Tulip resigned from her position as the UK’s anti-corruption minister in January amid criticism over reports that she had received a £700,000 flat in London as a “gift” from a developer allegedly linked to her family and the Awami League.
Her name had previously surfaced in allegations of corruption tied to the Rooppur Nuclear Power Project.
Controversy also arose over a flat in Gulshan, which Tulip had transferred to her sister Azmina Siddique Ruponti in 2015. The Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) claimed the notary used in the transfer was “fake”.
