Al Amin :
Despite concerns expressed by government monitoring wing, graft watchdog and experts, Coal Power Generation Company Bangladesh Limited (CPGCBL) has allegedly been hell-bent in awarding work to an unqualified company for supplying coal for Matarbari Power Plant.
Recently, an international consortium participating in the tender submitted a complaint to the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) last Thursday questioning transparency of the procurement.
In a letter, addressed to the Principal Secretary at PMO, the consortium mentioned that all the financial proposals of the four consortiums participating in the tender were rejected without evaluating them.
Pointing out the irregularities and biased behavior in the selection process in the ongoing tender, the letter further stated that in order to reinstate a canceled financial proposal, some related officers and some board members colluded with the special company.
Authorities held a high-stakes negotiation meeting on June 5 to discuss prevailing laws and regulations, which some critics have labeled as unethical and illegal, according to a letter obtained by this publication.
The meeting was marked by sharp accusations and concerns about the integrity of the tender process for a major coal import job.
Officials from the Coal Power Generation Company Bangladesh Limited (CPGCBL) raised alarms over irregularities in the tender process.
Sources at the meeting alleged that an investment firm involved in a cycle project is conspiring to damage the government’s image in collaboration with the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA).
“The process by which the coal import job is being assigned will create a very embarrassing situation for the state’s image and the foreign investment environment,” an unnamed CPGCBL official stated. “Attempts are being made to award the job to a previously canceled company for personal profit.”
In April, the Implementation Monitoring and Evaluation Division (IMED) of the Planning Ministry sent a letter to the Senior Secretary of the Power Division.
The letter criticized the tender process for the Matarbari Power Plant project, highlighting that standards were not maintained.
Sources indicate that the process of irregularly awarding work to favored institutions for the personal benefit of project officials, despite the government agency’s objections, is nearing completion.
Dr. Iftekharuzzaman, Executive Director of Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB), emphasized the gravity of the situation. “If all the four companies that offered to supply coal were canceled, then there was a specific logical reason behind it,” he stated.
“Negotiating with a single company that has been canceled is a clear violation of procurement policy, added Iftekharuzzaman.”
Dr. Iftekharuzzaman further argued that such negotiations with canceled companies contravene international standards. “There is room for doubt if they try to give work to a single company after canceling the participants in the coal supply tender,” he added.
He suggested that these steps might be aimed at favoring “special quarters” through collusion and irregularities. “Such action should be avoided.
Re-inviting tenders following due process is necessary to ensure the integrity of the coal supply job,” Dr. Iftekharuzzaman concluded.
Energy expert Prof. M Shamsul Alam has criticized the recent decisions regarding the tender process for the Maheshkhali power plant project.
He stated, “There is no authority to legitimize an institution from among those canceled through executive order for any reason.
Now the process that they are being given the job is showing their power, over which they have no jurisdiction.”
Prof. Alam emphasized that the tender evaluation committee should consider only those companies that fulfill all criteria by re-inviting tenders.
According to project sources, the commercial production of the second unit of the 1,200 MW power plant at Maheshkhali is scheduled to commence in June. The first unit, built with Japanese financial assistance, began commercial production on December 26 last year, following the initiation of trial production for the second unit on December 24.
Sources involved in the tender process reported that four domestic and foreign organizations submitted proposals correctly. However, three were initially excluded due to lack of financial capacity.
On May 27, the technical committee rejected the financial proposals of all four consortia. Subsequently, on May 31, the CPGCBL board decided to approve the reconciliation of the canceled Unique Cement Consortium, citing national importance.
One of the three rejected consortia appealed to the senior secretary of the power department for re-evaluation on May 29 but has yet to receive a response.
The initial tender conditions required import experience of at least 12 million metric tonnes of coal.
However, this condition was later relaxed, allowing experience in importing iron, fertilizer, chemicals, cement, or food grains to qualify. This change has been criticized as creating uneven competition and providing an unfair advantage to a particular company.
