Home
+
Published : 08 Jan 2026, 02:55 AM
British Labour MP Tulip Siddiq, convicted in absentia by a Bangladeshi court in a corruption case linked to the allocation of government land plots, is considering legal action against the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC), according to Hindustan Times.
Citing a person close to her, the Indian daily reported that the niece of ousted prime minister Sheikh Hasina, is “taking legal advice” on pursuing action against the Bangladeshi authorities.
A Dhaka court on Dec 1 last year sentenced her to two years in prison over allegations of corruption linked to the allocation of a 10-katha (nearly 31.25 decimal or 13, 610 square feet) plot in Purbachal New Town Project in the name of her mother, Sheikh Rehana.
The Fourth Special Judges’ Court also sentenced Rehana to seven years and Hasina to five years in jail in the same case.
Tulip resigned from her post as a junior minister in the UK government 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 following the fall of the Hasina government.
The 43-year-old politician’s 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 Siddiq Ruponti in 2015.
The ACC claimed the notary used in the transfer was “fake”.
Tulip, the Labour MP for Hampstead and Highgate in London, has consistently denied the allegations.
Her UK-based law firm, Stephenson Harwood, warned the ACC that their client reserves “her rights in full” to take action over what it described as “false and vexatious allegations” and the damage caused to her.
The lawyers described the national anti-graft agency’s actions as an “unlawful campaign” intended “to smear Tulip’s reputation and interfere with her public service”.
ACC Chairman Md Abdul Momen told the BBC that the commission’s investigation was based on documentary evidence.
The Hindustan Times, however, noted that after the court verdict, an ACC prosecutor told journalists that some individuals had implicated Tulip based on what they had heard, contradicting the claim of documentary proof.
The report said no documentary evidence was presented and it was not clarified whether the statements were verified for admissibility.
Tulip’s lawyers said an ACC media note sent to a British journalist on Feb 4, 2025 alleged that about $5 billion was embezzled from the Rooppur Nuclear Power Plant project through offshore accounts in Malaysia, implicating Hasina, her son Sajeeb Wazed Joy and Tulip.
The note also alleged that Tulip received a £700,000 luxury flat as part of corruption linked to infrastructure projects, including Rooppur.
Stephenson Harwood told the ACC that the media note relied on “accusations” and “reports” without identifying who made them or when and where they were made, the newspaper said.
The law firm stressed that Tulip had no involvement in the agreement between Bangladesh and Russia for Rosatom to build the Rooppur plant and that she had not received any flat linked to the project.
The lawyers said a flat in King’s Cross, London, was gifted to Tulip in 2004, nearly a decade before the Rooppur agreement, and at a time when Hasina was not prime minister.
They noted that Tulip declared the gift in the MPs’ Register of Financial Interests.
According to the newspaper, Tulip said the flat was gifted by Abdul Motalif, who bought the property in 2001 for £195,000 and performed the Muslim blessing at her wedding.
UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer accepted Tulip’s resignation with “sadness”, saying the UK’s independent advisor on ministerial standards had found no breach of the ministerial code or evidence of financial impropriety on her part.
On Apr 13 last year, a Dhaka court issued an arrest warrant against Tulip in the plot corruption case, ordering her to comply by Apr 27.
The ACC warned it would seek an Interpol Red Notice if she failed to do so.
Two days later, Stephenson Harwood wrote to Momen, saying the ACC’s actions were inconsistent with due process and international norms as no contact had been made with Tulip or her lawyers, as per the newspaper.
Before the verdict, five senior British lawyers raised concerns over the trial process, saying Tulip had not been given the minimum right to know the allegations or appoint legal counsel.
