Staff Reporter:
Home Minister Salahuddin Ahmed said on Thursday that no member of the current Jatiya Sangsad can be described as a loan defaulter, as Bangladesh’s election laws clearly bar loan defaulters from contesting elections and obtaining nominations.
“Those MPs who are here are not loan defaulters ….no one can deny that under the election law, including the RPO and other applicable regulations, loan defaulters are disqualified from participating in elections. Such individuals cannot be given party nominations,” he said.
Taking floor in the House, the home minister said due respect should be shown to the great Jatiya Sangsad and all its members.
He said the Representation of the People Order (RPO) and other relevant election laws unequivocally disqualify loan defaulters from contesting elections.
The minister said that if a person has been duly nominated and subsequently elected, it automatically mean that he or she was not a loan defaulter.
He emphasized that being indebted or having outstanding loans is fundamentally different from being a loan defaulter. “A person may have loans or financial liabilities arising from business activities, but that is not the same as being a loan defaulter,” he said.
Referring to allegations that a certain number of loan defaulters had received nominations, the minister said such claims would not constitute a correct interpretation of the law.
He noted that some candidates may have faced bank-related litigation or other private legal disputes at the time of their nomination. However, many of those cases were subsequently resolved through the judicial process.
“Once a matter is settled by the High Court or the Appellate Division and an individual is declared a valid candidate, that person can no longer be regarded as a loan defaulter,” he clarified.
Questioning the continued use of the term for elected representatives, the minister said, “These individuals have already been elected by the people. Why should they continue to be described as loan defaulters?”
He stressed that there is a clear legal and practical distinction between a borrower and a loan defaulter.
“The distinction is important. These are fundamentally different concepts, and the matter should be clarified accurately in the public interest,” he added.
