In Bangladesh, Jamaat-e-Islami has long used religion as political capital, proclaiming the establishment of a “rule of the righteous”. Yet the record of corruption among its senior leaders is deeply troubling. A report published on 31 January 2008 in the Daily Amader Shomoy revealed that, during the ongoing anti-corruption drive in Bangladesh at the time, Jamaat-e-Islami ranked highest among political parties in terms of corruption cases involving Members of Parliament. According to the report, of the party’s 17 MPs then serving, 10 faced cases filed by the Anti-Corruption Commission—a rate of 58.82 per cent. By comparison, 29.82 per cent of BNP MPs and 14.29 per cent of Awami League MPs were accused of corruption. In other words, more than half of Jamaat’s parliamentary representatives were directly implicated in corrupt practices.
During that period, leaders such as Dr Syed Abdullah Mohammad Taher, Gazi Nazrul Islam, Mizanur Rahman and Shahjahan Chowdhury were imprisoned on corruption charges. Others, including Maulana Farid Uddin Chowdhury, Maulana Abdus Subhan and Miah Golam Parwar, were reported to be absconding. The specific allegations were striking: Dr Taher was accused of embezzling funds from various development projects, while Gazi Nazrul Islam faced charges of misappropriating nearly 20 million taka from Test Relief (TR) allocations, in addition to illegally acquiring 25 bighas of land. Relief tin sheets allocated for public distribution were reportedly recovered from the private clinic ‘Al-Amanah’, associated with Mizanur Rahman Chowdhury and Maulana Abdus Subhan. Meanwhile, in Khulna and Kanaighat, cases were filed against Miah Golam Parwar and Maulana Farid Uddin for allegedly embezzling approximately 25 million and 2.5 million taka respectively, alongside accusations of extortion. Allegations of misappropriating relief materials were also proven against Maulana Abdul Aziz.
The conduct of the party’s two principal leaders and former ministers, Motiur Rahman Nizami and Ali Ahsan Mohammad Mujahid, was even more far-reaching. While serving as Minister for Agriculture, Nizami was accused in 2003 of serious irregularities in the recruitment of 4,000 block supervisors. Reports suggested that party-based lists had effectively predetermined appointments even before viva examinations were conducted, prompting the government of the time to transfer him from the Ministry of Agriculture to the Ministry of Industries. Furthermore, allegations later emerged that materials imported by the Industries Ministry under his leadership, including rock sulphate, found their way into the hands of the banned militant organisation Jama’atul Mujahideen Bangladesh (JMB).
At the same time, while serving as Minister for Social Welfare, Ali Ahsan Mohammad Mujahid faced accusations of extortion and financial misappropriation. In 2003, of the 55.7 billion taka in aid reportedly provided by OIC member states for the construction of religious institutions, it was alleged that half was diverted towards building 3,000 Jamaat party offices across the country. When this irregularity came to light, party leaders were said to have sought to placate the Prime Minister of the time in order to avoid political repercussions.
Despite presenting itself as a moral guardian guided by religious principles, the party has repeatedly been accused of prioritising partisan interests and misappropriating state resources whenever it has had access to power. Having once declared women’s political leadership religiously impermissible, its leaders nonetheless served as ministers for five years under a female Prime Minister, even as allegations of embezzlement of relief goods and public funds persisted. Such contradictions, critics argue, reveal the true character of its governance.
Whenever Jamaat-e-Islami has been a partner in state power, it has been accused of using religion as a shield while engaging in corruption and administrative malpractice. Yet in the realm of self-promotion, it remains unrivalled. It persistently projects itself as virtuous, oppressed and devout—so insistently and unabashedly that conventional political parties often struggle to compete with the scale and intensity of its moral advertising.