The Panama Papers, Paradise Papers, and Offshore Leaks revealed dozens of Bangladeshi individuals and entities linked to foreign money laundering.
These include prominent business figures, politicians, and government officials.
Many own luxury properties and offshore companies registered in jurisdictions such as the British Virgin Islands, and Dubai.
For example, the Paradise Papers (2020) listed figures such as Farida Y, Shahid Ullah, Chowdhury Faisal, Ahmad Samir, Musa Bin Shamsher, Fazle Elahi, and KH Asadul Islam, many of whom are reported to hold assets in the United States, Russia, and Ireland.
Domestic investigations have also flagged alleged money flows to Canada.
Named individuals include Ismail Chowdhury Samrat (former Jubo League leader), Khaled Mahmud Bhuiyan (organizing secretary of Jubo League), Atiqul Islam (former mayor of Dhaka North City Corporation), and Nazrul Islam Majumder, chairman of Nassa Group.
Laundering by all
According to an investigation by the ACC, a few AB Bank officials allegedly siphoned off Tk236 crore to the UAE and Singapore under the guise of offshore banking.
Reported in November 2020, the amount was embezzled in the name of loans for three non-existent institutions.
The entire operation was endorsed by senior officials of the bank, and the plan was specifically designed for the purpose of embezzling money, it added.
According to the ACC, between 2014 and 2016, bank officials and other relevant individuals embezzled Tk236.08 crore from the bank under the guise of offshore banking.
The money was then siphoned off to Dubai and Singapore in dollars.
In 2022, the Bangladesh Financial Intelligence Unit (BFIU) listed 69 and named 10 of them in its report submitted to the High Court about those mentioned in the Panama Papers and Paradise Papers leaks on money laundering.
Take another example of one Rabiul Islam, also known as Arav Khan, a gold trader who is accused in the murder of Mamun Imran Khan (a Special Branch police inspector) in Dhaka back in 2018.
Following the filing of charges, Arav Khan reportedly fled Bangladesh, first to India and then to Dubai, using an alias and reportedly an Indian passport.
He opened a jewelry business, “Arav Jewellers,” in Dubai in 2023. According to reports, his Dubai jewelry shop inauguration included an extravagant display (e.g., a large gold “bird of prey” emblem) and attracted Bangladeshi celebrities.
In April 2025, a Dhaka Metropolitan Sessions Judge’s Court sentenced eight people—including Arav Khan and his wife—to life imprisonment for the murder of Inspector Khan.
While there are allegations of Bangladeshis of various professions siphoning money overseas, most have been under the radar, since most of the politicians and businesspeople receive most of the flak.
Former central bank governors Fazle Kabir and Rouf Talukder have publicly denied allegations, claiming they hold no assets in Canada.
The Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) in January earlier this year sounded the alarm over a troubling trend of public servants secretly acquiring dual citizenship and foreign passports, allegedly to evade anti-corruption investigations and legal scrutiny.
The ACC highlighted cases where officials violated the Government Service Act, 2018, by obtaining foreign passports while retaining their positions in Bangladesh.
This breach of Section 40 of the law, the ACC claims, facilitates the concealment of ill-gotten wealth abroad and allows corrupt individuals to avoid accountability.
The commission’s investigations have revealed that some officials exploit dual citizenship not only to launder illegally amassed assets but also to undermine the country’s economy and the integrity of public service.
A social disease
Economists say the biggest misconception about money laundering is that it’s driven solely by those in power. In reality, corruption has become democratized.
“Laundering networks are now embedded in every layer of society,” said one economist familiar with the government’s anti-money-laundering efforts.
“Doctors under-declare income, lawyers handle dubious property transactions, contractors over-invoice projects, and mid-level bureaucrats send money abroad under the cover of education or investment. This is no longer a crime of the elite—it’s a social phenomenon.”
Bangladesh’s rising trend of trade-based money laundering—using fake import-export invoices or inflated project costs—has allowed many professionals and private businesses to transfer funds abroad without raising alarms. Meanwhile, hundi operators have made it easy for well-off families to pay for property purchases overseas without using formal banking channels.
Little recovery, lots of reports
In the past decade, Bangladesh has formed multiple committees, sent inquiries to foreign governments, and signed agreements to trace and repatriate stolen wealth. Yet the results remain dismal.
Agencies such as the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC), Bangladesh Financial Intelligence Unit (BFIU), and Criminal Investigation Department (CID) have identified thousands of suspected accounts and properties abroad—worth thousands of crores in total. However, no meaningful recovery has taken place.
Officials privately admit that international cooperation is hard to secure without airtight evidence or convictions. In many cases, domestic agencies lack the legal tools to pursue assets held under foreign entities or family names.
The Laundered Assets Recovery Committee is working to recover assets converted into laundered money from the country.
So far, assets worth about Tk5,000 crore have been seized in joint operations by various organizations.
In addition, Mutual Legal Assistance Requests (MLARs) have been sent to 20 countries to collect information on laundered money and investments abroad.
It is learned that the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) has sent Mutual Legal Assistance Requests (MLARs) to the United States, Singapore, Hong Kong, and Cyprus to trace the assets of former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and her family in the investigation of illegal assets and money laundering.
Through these MLARs sent through the Ministry of Home Affairs, information regarding the source of money, type of transactions, and location of assets has been sought from those countries.
Tk40,000 crore assets found abroad
The Central Intelligence Cell (CIC) under the NBR has brought to light new information about the huge amount of assets laundered from Bangladesh.
The agency said that influential individuals and various institutions in the country have built assets worth at least Tk40,000 crore abroad.
A total of 52 Bangladeshis who have built this asset have already been identified. Their passports have already been seized.
From January to April, a special team of the Central Intelligence Cell (CIC) conducted on-site investigations and found significant assets in Singapore, Malaysia, Dubai, London, New York, Virginia, Florida, and Kuala Lumpur. Among them, Singapore, Malaysia, Dubai, and London have the highest wealth.
A total of 346 properties have been identified in the names of individuals and companies. CIC Director General (DG) Ahsan Habib told Bangla Tribune, “Fifty-two influential Bangladeshis have built up assets worth about Tk40,000 crore outside the country. Their passports have already been seized.”
The politics of silence
Ironically, the political obsession with blaming rivals has obscured the bigger picture. Every major money-laundering scandal becomes a political football—but few touch the structural causes that make illicit transfers possible.
“When the issue is painted as only a political one, the bureaucracy and the professional classes slip under the radar,” said a former central bank official. “That’s why despite knowing who the culprits are, we’ve seen no punishment, no reform, and no repatriation.”
Economist Dr. Mustafa K. Mujeri warned that delays only strengthen the legal protection of illicit assets.
“As time goes by, traffickers’ illegal holdings become safer. The recovery process is growing more difficult by the day,” he said.
Widening the net
Analysts say Bangladesh must urgently redefine its anti-laundering strategy to treat illicit wealth as a national problem—not a partisan one.
India has aggressively enforced its Prevention of Money Laundering Act since 2018, recovering Rs23,000 crore in FY25 alone.
An additional Rs15,000 crore was returned to victims through court-approved settlements.
Sri Lanka passed the Proceeds of Crime Act in April 2025, allowing asset seizure without court orders.
Pakistan recovered £190 million from the UK in 2019.
Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB) Executive Director Dr. Iftekharuzzaman criticized the politicization of anti-money laundering efforts.
“The law has been used selectively. Investigative agencies are plagued by party influence. Without reforms, effective results will remain elusive,” he said.
A collective failure
Money laundering in Bangladesh is no longer a story about a few powerful men. It’s about the erosion of ethics across institutions—from the courtroom to the clinic to the construction site.
Bangladesh Bank Governor Dr. Ahsan H. Mansur told Bangla Tribune that they are directly investigating those who embezzled bank money.
“However, the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) and CID can work on the money that has gone abroad through bureaucrats, doctors, engineers, and other professionals. That is not our job.”
Bangladesh Bank’s focus is mainly on money laundered through the banking sector. The relevant law enforcement agencies have been urged to work in a coordinated manner to investigate money laundered through other sectors, he added.
TIB executive director Dr. Iftekharuzzaman said that money laundering has not stopped in the country, but those who get the opportunity are still laundering money.
He said, “Money laundering used to happen before; it is still happening. There is no reason to think that money laundering has stopped from the country after August 5 last year.”
Responding to Bangla Tribune, he said that bringing back laundered money is a very difficult and expensive process. Therefore, more attention should be paid not only to trying to bring back the money but also to the system to prevent money laundering.
“We are still not seeing that effective initiative,” said the TIB Executive Director.
Iftekharuzzaman said that very little laundered money is repatriated. Therefore, strict monitoring is needed on the routes and processes through which money is laundered.
He commented that money laundering can be prevented to a large extent if corruption in the NBR and customs officials can be stopped.
He further said: “Not limited to just a few business groups discussed, equal action should be taken against all those involved in money laundering. No matter who it is—bureaucrats, doctors, engineers, or senior police officers—no one can be favored. Otherwise, some people or businessmen will be pressured, and big swindlers will get away with it.”
“To bring back the laundered money, relevant agencies, including NBR, BFIU, ACC, and CID, will have to work more efficiently and in a coordinated manner. If necessary, trained people can be brought from abroad and appointed for this work.”
The utmost importance should be given to taking effective steps to prevent money laundering. Prevention should be the main goal, he added.
Not every laundering is the same
Dr Omar Farooq, assistant professor in the Department of Economics at Stanford University and financial crime analyst, said that laundered money is not a single type.
A large part of it originates from criminal activities, while another part, although it is legitimate income, goes abroad due to policy uncertainty and financial insecurity.
He said that criminal money often comes from bank fraud, commission trading, or bribery. He described such money as “proceeds of crime.”
On the other hand, when people have tax-paid or legitimate income, when they send that money abroad due to policy uncertainty or investment insecurity, it creates a different kind of problem.
Farooq said: “In the case of criminal money, justice is needed at two levels. First, the criminal liability is enforced, and then the money laundering is tried. Both these processes are long and complicated, because collecting evidence and legal cooperation at home and abroad is time-consuming.”
The area of repatriation of legitimate income requires a different strategy. He said, “If the government relies only on ‘punitive’ or ‘money laundering’ methods, it will not be effective. Because there is no trust in these processes, the policy is uncertain, and there is no security of investment.”
Farooq suggested that incentive policies should be adopted to repatriate legitimate income abroad. Such as tax breaks, safe investment channels, and ensuring financial confidentiality.
If there are no such incentives, legitimate income will not return to the banking channel.
He further said that the job of policymakers should be to adopt two separate policies according to the nature of the laundered money. First, in the case of criminal income, strict legal measures and ensuring asset recovery. Second, in the case of legitimate income, increasing trust and incentives and creating an investment-friendly framework.
He also warned on the issue of safe tax administration: “Giving opportunities to launder black money at various times may provide immediate benefits but will discourage taxpayers in the long run. This should be stopped on an urgent basis; otherwise, the tendency of people to not pay taxes will increase.”
While it is important to bring back laundered money, it is equally important to stop opportunities to launder black money, he added.
