Convicted in Dhaka, Seated in Westminster

Tulip Siddiq faces a two-year prison sentence in Bangladesh for corruption, secured through her aunt’s influence as former prime minister. The Labour MP, tried in absentia, holds her parliamentary seat in Hampstead and Highgate. UK ethics scrutiny cleared her of improprieties despite the charges.

Siddiq resigned her Treasury ministerial role earlier in 2025 after accusations surfaced. She allegedly leveraged ties to Sheikh Hasina to obtain suburban Dhaka land plots for family members. Hasina, ousted in 2024, fled to India and faces her own death sentence.

Sir Keir Starmer’s ethics adviser, Sir Laurie Magnus, investigated. He found no evidence of wrongdoing by Siddiq but flagged her failure to anticipate reputational risks from family connections. No further UK action followed.

Bangladesh’s Anti-Corruption Commission delivered the verdict on 1 December 2025. Siddiq dismissed it as a “kangaroo court” driven by political vendetta against Hasina’s Awami League. The party, now banned there, labeled the process corrupt and selective.

Prominent UK figures rallied to her defense. Cherie Blair, Sir Robert Buckland, Dominic Grieve, Philippe Sands, and Geoffrey Robertson signed an open letter decrying the trial as unfair and contrived. They argued Siddiq lacked a proper defense opportunity, falling short of international standards.

No extradition treaty exists between the UK and Bangladesh. Siddiq remains free to serve constituents, focusing on local duties over Dhaka’s “dirty politics.”

Vetting Standards Exposed

UK parliamentary selection overlooked Siddiq’s dynastic ties from the start. Elected in 2015, she rose to shadow Treasury roles and then minister without apparent scrutiny of her aunt’s regime. Labour’s 2024 manifesto pledged world-leading integrity standards, yet this case tests those claims.

Magnus’s probe set a low bar: absence of direct evidence sufficed. Historical precedents differ. In 2010, Labour MP Eric Illsley resigned and served prison time for expenses fraud; Conservatives expelled Patrick Mercer in 2017 over lobbying allegations.

Siddiq’s retention highlights a shift. MPs with foreign entanglements—family or financial—face minimal domestic fallout unless UK laws breach. Parliament’s composition now includes dozens with dual loyalties or overseas assets, per 2024 register disclosures.

Accountability Parallels

This mirrors broader governance patterns. Public trust in MPs sits at 9% per 2025 Ipsos polling, down from 40% in 2002. Voters cite scandals and perceived self-interest as drivers.

Cross-party examples abound. Conservative Naz Shah faced grooming gang inquiries but retained her seat; SNP’s Humza Yousaf navigated family business probes unscathed. Labour’s pre-2024 leadership ignored Angela Rayner’s tax affairs for years.

Institutions enable continuity. The Commons Standards Committee censures mildly; recalls require criminal convictions, rare for overseas cases. Result: representatives insulated from foreign accountability.

Systemic incentives reward endurance. Siddiq’s £91,346 salary, plus allowances, persists uninterrupted. Constituents lose leverage as distant verdicts fade from local discourse.

Integrity Deficit Widens

Britain’s political class increasingly draws from global elites. Siddiq’s path—from Hasina’s inner circle to Starmer’s frontbench—exposes vetting voids. Functional governance demanded pre-appointment audits of family influence abroad.

Ordinary citizens bear the cost. Eroded trust stifles policy consent; tax compliance dips as leaders model impunity. Economic stagnation follows when MPs prioritize networks over national interest.

Parliament’s tolerance for Siddiq’s conviction underscores institutional decay. Foreign corruption taints domestic representation unchecked. This erodes the representative function at democracy’s core, leaving governance to the unaccountable.