Tulip Siddiq MP says Bangladesh jail sentence is ‘deeply unfair’

Labor MP and former minister Tulip Siddique has described her two-year prison sentence in Bangladesh as “extremely unfair” after the court convicted her in absentia on corruption charges.

She was convicted of influencing her aunt, the ousted Prime Minister of Bangladesh, Sheikh Hasina, to secure a plot of land for her family on the outskirts of the capital, Dhaka, which she strongly denied.

The friend, who is based in London and has rejected the charges, is unlikely to serve a prison sentence.

The Labor MP said the process was “flawed and farcical from start to finish”.

“I am very confused by the whole matter – I have not received any communication at all from the Bangladeshi authorities despite them spreading malicious allegations about me for a year and a half now,” she said.

“No summons was ever sent to me, no indictment, and I received no correspondence from them – I am not hard to find, I am a parliamentarian.”

She said she had hired lawyers in the United Kingdom and Bangladesh.

“I feel like I’m in some kind of Kafkaesque nightmare,” she added.

“The only reason I know I was convicted is because I read it in the newspapers. So this is a trial by the media, and it is a completely unfair trial.”

Since the overthrow of Hasina’s regime, Bangladeshi prosecutors have launched a number of wide-ranging legal cases against the former leader, her former associates and family members.

Friend’s Trial – Who He resigned as Treasury Secretary in January due to the controversy About her relations with her aunt – which has been taking place in Dhaka since August.

Friend still faces a number of charges pending.

The court documents included allegations that Siddiqa “coerced and influenced her aunt and former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina by using her own power to secure… [a plot of land] To her mother, Rehana Siddiq, her sister, Azmna Siddiq, and brother, Radwan Siddiq.”

The prosecutor of the Bangladesh Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) earlier said that Siddiq was tried as a Bangladeshi citizen because the authorities obtained her Bangladeshi passport, identity card and tax number.

Siddiq’s lawyers cast doubt on her being a Bangladeshi citizen, telling the Financial Times that she had “never possessed” an ID or voter ID card, and had “not held a passport since she was a child.”

Judge Rabiul Alam sentenced her to two years in prison and a fine of 100,000 Bangladeshi taka ($821; £620). If you fail to pay, six months will be added to the penalty.

When the trial began, the deputy said prosecutors had “peddled false and disturbing allegations that were shared with the media but never formally presented to me by investigators.”

A statement on her behalf continued: “I have been clear from the beginning that I have done nothing wrong and will respond to any credible evidence presented to me. Continuing to smear my name to score political points is baseless and harmful.”

A Labor Party spokesman said the party could not recognize the ruling.

“As reported, senior legal experts have confirmed that Tulip Siddique did not have access to a fair legal process in this case and was never informed of the details of the charges against her,” the spokesperson said.

“This is despite repeated requests made to the Bangladeshi authorities through their legal team.

“Anyone facing any charge should always be given the right to legal representation when charges are brought against them.”

It is understood that Siddiqa is not subject to investigation or party disciplinary proceedings and maintains her membership of the Labor Party and the Labor Party’s membership in the House of Commons.

Last week, a group of senior lawyers raised concerns with the Bangladeshi representative in the UK about how the trial was being conducted.

Signatories to this statement included former Justice Secretary Robert Buckland, former Attorney-General Dominic Grieve, and Dame Cherie Blair, a human rights lawyer and wife of former Prime Minister Sir Tony Blair.

In a message I reported for the first time The GuardianThey said Al-Siddiq was unable to secure adequate legal representation during the trial, adding: “Such a process is artificial and a contrived and unfair way to proceed with the trial.”

The verdict comes Two weeks after Hasina was sentenced to death in a separate trial Because of her role in the brutal crackdown on protests that eventually forced her to step down from office in July 2024.

She was found guilty of crimes against humanity for the killing of an estimated 1,400 people at the hands of police.

This trial took place in Hasina’s absence, as she had been in exile in India since her overthrow. She denied these accusations.

Siddiq, whose mother is the former prime minister’s sister, still faces a number of charges pending in Bangladesh, including two ongoing trials in relation to the allegations that were the focus of Monday’s ruling.

She is also being investigated over the transfer of ownership of an apartment located in a lucrative area of ​​Dhaka to her sister.

A friend and her family were also investigated in relation to allegations of embezzlement relating to a £3.9bn deal in 2013 linked to a Russian-financed nuclear power plant deal.

Siddiq has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing in relation to the allegations, which arose with allegations made by Bobby Hajjaj, a political opponent of Hasina.

Bangladeshi authorities said they estimated that around $234bn (£174bn) had been seized through corruption under Hasina.

Reacting to the latest ruling, the Awami League, the political party led by Hasina, described the ruling as “completely unexpected” and “strongly denied” the accusations against the former prime minister and her family members.

“The operation failed to pass any reasonable test of judicial fairness – a point strongly emphasized by local and international legal experts,” the party said.

Hasina also accused Bangladesh’s judiciary of being controlled by “an unelected government run by political opponents of the Awami League,” that is, the interim government headed by Dr. Muhammad Yunus.

Before Siddiq resigned from the British government, Sir Laurie Magnus, an independent ethics adviser to Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, said he had found “no evidence of wrongdoing” after the investigation.

But he said it was “regrettable” that Siddiqa had not been more attentive to the “potential reputational risks” of her ties with Hasina.

While Siddiq continued to insist that she was not guilty of wrongdoing, she resigned from her junior ministerial position so as not to be a “distraction” to the government.

The UK does not have an extradition treaty with Bangladesh. It is classified as a 2B state, meaning clear evidence must be presented to lawyers and judges to allow any extradition.

Siddiq was not forced to return to Dhaka for the trial despite the authorities there issuing an arrest warrant.