UK Lawmaker Tulip Siddiq Sentenced in Absentia in Bangladesh Land Allocation Case

Washington – A court in Bangladesh has sentenced British lawmaker Tulip Siddiq to two years in jail in absentia after ruling on a corruption case involving allegations of unlawful land allocation in Dhaka.

The verdict also included sentences for her relatives, former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and her sister Rehana, intensifying international attention on the ongoing judicial proceedings.

Siddiq, a member of the UK parliament and former minister responsible for financial services, was accused of benefiting from political influence that allegedly secured a plot of land through irregular means.

She was not present during the trial and has strongly rejected the process, calling the proceedings deeply flawed and questioning the fairness of the legal steps taken.

The court ruled that the land, located in the capital and measuring more than 13,000 square feet, was allocated through political pressure applied during Hasina’s tenure as prime minister.

Officials overseeing the case argued that the property, originally designated for the development of a new township project, was diverted improperly through collusion and abuse of authority.

Hasina, who left Bangladesh for India during the political unrest of 2024, received a five-year sentence in the same case.

Her sister Rehana was handed a seven-year sentence, with all three individuals fined and warned of additional jail time for failure to pay the imposed penalty.

Siddiq, speaking to media after the ruling, described the verdict as unjust and politically driven, stating that she had not been provided the opportunity to respond to the charges or participate in the legal proceedings.

She criticised the process as lacking transparency and argued that the decision demonstrated a broader pattern of politically influenced judicial actions.

A spokesperson for her political party in the UK expressed concern about the handling of the case, noting that Siddiq did not receive access to essential legal information or adequate channels for representation.

The spokesperson added that any individual facing allegations should have the chance to defend themselves through established legal protections, reaffirming that due process had not been met.

Bangladesh’s current interim authorities maintain that the case was conducted within the country’s legal framework.

However, critics argue that the political environment, following Hasina’s departure from office and her subsequent legal troubles, has heightened tensions and raised questions about the motivations behind high-profile prosecutions.

Hasina has already faced multiple convictions since stepping down, including a death sentence issued last month linked to violence during large-scale demonstrations in 2024.

These outcomes have deepened divisions within Bangladesh’s political landscape, where supporters of the former leader view the cases as retribution, while others describe them as necessary accountability.

The latest judgment also included sentences for fourteen other individuals accused of participating in the land allocation scheme.

Authorities say these defendants were involved in administrative irregularities and misuse of public authority, receiving five-year sentences after the court concluded its review of the evidence.

The land at the centre of the case had been designated for a major urban expansion project aimed at responding to Dhaka’s rapid population growth.

Officials who testified during the trial said the illegal reassignment of the plot undermined broader development plans and contributed to delays in public infrastructure efforts.

Britain, which does not maintain an extradition treaty with Bangladesh, has not commented on any future legal implications for Siddiq.

Diplomatic observers note that the lack of an extradition agreement means enforcement of the ruling would be unlikely outside Bangladesh’s jurisdiction.

The case has drawn significant public attention both domestically and internationally, reflecting broader concerns about legal transparency, political influence, and governance in Bangladesh.

As proceedings continue in related cases, debates over accountability, political rivalry, and judicial independence are expected to remain at the forefront of national discussion