TDS Desk:

Despite constitutional immunity for a sitting president, a corruption case was filed against Mohammed Shahabuddin while he was in office, raising questions over how the court accepted the case.

Under Bangladesh’s Constitution, no criminal proceedings can be initiated or continued against a sitting president. Yet a criminal case alleging financial corruption and fraud was filed against former president Mohammed Shahabuddin while he was in office, and a Dhaka court even ordered the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) to investigate the allegations.

The matter has drawn public attention only after Shahabuddin stepped down, nearly 10 months after the case was filed, triggering fresh legal debate.

Constitution expert Dr Shahdeen Malik told this afternoon (26 July) that such a case could not legally be filed against a sitting president.

“This is a clear violation of the Constitution and the law,” he said. “The bigger question is how the court accepted the case and ordered an investigation.”

Referring to Article 51 of the Constitution, Malik pointed out that Clause (2) explicitly states, “During his term of office, no criminal proceedings whatsoever shall be instituted or continued against the President in any court, and no warrant for his arrest or imprisonment shall be issued by any court.”

Expressing surprise, Shahdeen Malik said, “I simply cannot understand who files such a case, which lawyer pursues it, and which judge takes cognisance of it and orders an investigation.”

Contacted by phone, Law Minister Md Asaduzzaman declined to comment on the matter.

Case over Tk251cr share acquisition

On 4 September 2025, Md Abdus Samad, a senior officer of Islami Bank, applied before the court of Dhaka Metropolitan Senior Special Judge Md Sabbir Faiz to file the case accusing 20 people, including the then president Shahabuddin, of conspiring to acquire Tk251 crore worth of shares in Brilliant Business Company Limited through corruption, fraud, coercion, and embezzlement of funds from Islami Bank Bangladesh PLC.

The court recorded the complainant’s statement, accepted the case, and ordered the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) to investigate, setting 5 November 2025 as the deadline for submitting its report.

According to officials at the Dhaka Metropolitan Sessions Judge’s Court, the latest date for submitting the investigation report was 23 June. However, the ACC failed to submit its findings on that date. Acting Senior Special Judge Md Alamgir subsequently set 11 August as the new deadline for the investigation report.

The other accused in the case include Abdul Wahed, managing director of Brilliant Business Company Limited; Mirfat Ara Begum, chairperson of the same company; Mohammad Saiful Alam (S Alam), chairman of S Alam Group and S Alam Centre; and former directors of Islami Bank Bangladesh PLC Md Joynal Abedin, Arastoo Khan, and Professor Md Nazmul Hasan.

The complaint identified the then president as “Md Shahabuddin, Director of Islami Bank Bangladesh PLC,” a description that court officials confirmed appears in the case documents.

Identity allegedly concealed

Following public discussion over the legality of filing a criminal case against a sitting president, a senior official at the record room of the Dhaka Metropolitan Sessions Judge’s Court, speaking on condition of anonymity, told that the identity of the outgoing president may have been concealed in the complaint.

“The name Shahabuddin appears as Accused No. 12. Although the father’s name is similar, no official designation or position is mentioned. We do not know whether this is the then president, and neither does the judge,” the official said.

“If it is indeed him, then the plaintiff and the lawyer concealed that information. Criminal cases cannot be filed against a sitting president. The date, time and address mentioned in the complaint also did not correspond with the president’s official details, so the matter may have escaped our notice,” the official added.

Asked about the matter, Abdul Quddus, the lawyer representing the complainant, told that he did not know whether the Shahabuddin named as Accused No 12 was the president.

“I filed the case in my capacity as a panel lawyer for the bank. Beyond that, I know nothing. The bank authorities provided the list of accused, and I filed the case accordingly,” he said. Courtesy: TBS