Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) Chairman Mohammad Abdul Momen has questioned whether British politics is truly so “fragile” that a corruption case against UK Labour MP and former City minister Tulip Siddiq could cause its collapse.

Speaking at the ACC headquarters in Dhaka on Tuesday, he said the national anti-graft agency was not interfering in British politics, and the case against Tulip was not politically motivated.

He insisted the case was filed based on concrete evidence, and must be dealt with through the judicial system -- not through correspondence.

“Criminals must face charges in the country where the offence occurred,” Momen said. “It now appears they want to settle the matter through correspondence. That cannot be the way.

“This is a court matter. Tulip Siddiq must appear and defend herself before the court.”

The remarks followed a legal notice sent by Tulip, alleging that the ACC and the interim government were interfering in UK politics.

“They are making their own country look small,” Momen said. “This shows how fragile Britain’s politics really is.”

“My simple question is: Is this case so serious that it will make Britain’s politics even more fragile? Can that even be possible?”

Momen urged Tulip’s legal team to be cautious with their language.

“Where is our interference? The ACC does not have the mandate to enter political affairs.”

The ACC chief denied the case was politically driven or targeted. “This is not a case meant to discredit anyone. Tulip Siddiq, like many others, is an accused.

“We have handled bigger cases than this.”

Momen stressed that Tulip is considered a Bangladeshi citizen under the law, holding a national ID and tax identification number.

“She is facing a case here in Bangladesh. I believe she will follow the legal process.”

According to Momen, Tulip knew the facts from the start, which led to her stepping down from her ministerial role.

He confirmed three separate cases against her, and trials will proceed even if she is absent.

On a related matter, Momen said the ACC is also investigating the controversial parliamentary elections of 2014, 2018, and 2024.

In Monday’s legal notice sent to both the interim government head and the ACC, Tulip claimed that the allegations raised against her were intended to harm her standing and disrupt her political work.

“The allegations were made to damage Ms Siddiq’s reputation and interfere with UK politics by seeking to disrupt Ms Siddiq’s service of her constituency, her party and her country. This was wholly unacceptable,” it read.

Issued through London-based law firm Stephenson Harwood LLP, the notice also criticised the interim government for failing to respond to previous correspondence.

Since the fall of the Awami League government on Aug 5 last year, the ACC has filed a series of cases against ousted prime minister Sheikh Hasina and members of her family, including her niece, Tulip.

A series of letters has been “exchanged” between Tulip’s legal representatives and the ACC from the beginning, but Tulip claims that neither Yunus nor the ACC has responded to any of them.

The latest legal notice points out that letters were sent to the ACC chairman and commissioners on Mar 18 and Apr 15.

A separate letter was then sent to Yunus on Jun 4.

Stephenson Harwood wrote: “As we made clear in our letters, Ms Siddiq has been the victim of an orchestrated campaign by the Chief Adviser and the ACC to publicise completely false allegations against her.

“In our correspondence, we demonstrated why each and every allegation made against Ms Siddiq was false.”

On Jun 9, Yunus visited the United Kingdom for a four-day trip.

Before his visit, Tulip extended an invitation to meet him to discuss the allegations in person.

In her letter, she invited Yunus to either a lunch or afternoon tea meeting at the House of Commons.

Although the Chief Advisor’s Office (CAO) confirmed receipt of the letter, Yunus declined to meet her.

Monday’s notice also criticised Yunus’s decision to avoid the meeting. “Having heard about the Chief Adviser’s visit to London, Ms Siddiq took the initiative to meet with him. She wished to discuss the allegations made by the ACC.

“Regrettably, the Chief Adviser failed to take up her offer.”

It also criticised Yunus for his reasoning, as said in a BBC interview, where the interim prime minister claimed he did not want to meet Tulip because the matter was a “legal procedure” and he did not wish to “interfere”.

Tulip believes there are two possible reasons behind Yunus’s refusal to meet her.

“Firstly, the allegations brought by the Chief Adviser against Tulip are entirely false,” the notice said.

As for the second, the notice cited multiple interviews where Yunus made several corruption claims against her.

It said: “We would have thought that the Chief Adviser would have checked his facts before making very serious allegations against a democratically elected representative of the House of Commons in the United Kingdom.

“Further, he should have appreciated that it was wholly inappropriate to make public comments critical of Ms Siddiq during an apparent investigation by the ACC and about the very matters the ACC was supposedly investigating, thereby seriously prejudicing her rights to a fair investigation.”

Tulip argues that Yunus had the opportunity to engage in an open discussion with her about the “false accusations” but chose instead to “hide behind the ACC”.

A copy of the notice sent to the ACC chairman was reportedly forwarded to Yunus.

“It is now time for the Chief Adviser and the ACC to abandon their wholly misconceived and unlawful campaign to smear Miss Siddiq’s reputation and interfere with her public service,” the notice read.

“Please now confirm that the ACC is closing its investigation,” it added. “We make clear that if no proper reply is received to this letter and to our previous letters by 30 June, Ms Siddiq will reasonably consider the matter close