Prof Yunus challenges charge framing by labour court
Staff Reporter :
Nobel laureate Prof Dr Muhammad Yunus, also chairman of Grameen Telecom, and three others have filed a petition with the High Court challenging the legality of a labour court order that framed charge against them in a case filed on charge of violating the labour law.
Barrister Abdullah Al Mamun on behalf of Prof Yunus and three others filed the petition on June 19 this year.
The lawyer said they have challenged the legality of the labour court order framing the charge against his clients.
The matter came into the cause-list of the High Court bench of Justice Md Habibul Gani and Justice Ahmed Sohel for hearing on Wednesday. However, the bench said that it will hold hearing on it after the Eid vacation.
Earlier on June 6, Judge of the Third Labour Court in Dhaka, Sheikh Merina Sultana, framed charge against Prof Yunus and three others in the case filed by the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments (DIFE).
The other accused in the case are- Grameen Telecom Managing Director Ashraful Hassan, Directors Nurjahan Begum and Md Shahjahan.
Prof Yunus and other accused in the case appeared in the court during the charge framing hearing and pleaded them innocent and sought justice from the court.
Inspector of the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments, Arifuzzaman, filed the case with Dhaka 3rd Labour Court on 9 September in 2021 against four people including Prof Yunus.
According to the case documents, a team of DIFE went on an inspection to Grameen Telecom and found the violations of labour laws like not regularizing 101 staff, not establishing a welfare fund for the labourers, among others.
Besides, 5 percent of the company’s dividends was supposed to be paid to the workers participation fund but it was not paid, also read the case statement.
After hearing the case, the Labour Court had also summoned the four to appear before it on October 12 in 2021. Later the Labour Court granted bail to Prof Yunus in the case on that day.
Barrister Abdullah Al Mamun said, “The employees’ jobs were not regularized as they were appointed on a contractual basis. Their contract was renewed after every three years. The employees also enjoyed earned leave 20 days in a calendar year, although the case statement brought an allegation that the employees didn’t get any earned leave during their job.”
The lawyer also said that 5 percent dividend was not paid as the company is a non-profitable organization.
Inspector of the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments Arifuzzaman, who is also the plaintiff of the case, appeared in the charge framing hearing representing his organization.
