Dengue spending gone wrong: who is liable?
THE Anti-Corruption Commission’s latest findings at Dhaka North City Corporation (DNCC) expose a disturbing degree of institutional negligence in the city’s fight against dengue.
If the findings are substantiated, the problem is not merely that mosquito-control programmes have been ineffective; it is that a basic scientific requirement of those programmes may have been overlooked for years.
According to the ACC as reports published in this newspaper on Friday, DNCC repeatedly tested Malathion on Culex mosquitoes from 2022 onwards, while failing to produce documentation showing comparable testing on Aedes, the principal vector of dengue.
This is difficult to reconcile with a mosquito-control programme whose stated purpose is to prevent dengue. DNCC’s chief health officer has disputed the allegation, saying both species are tested and that Culex predominates in samples.
Such a defence should be tested through transparent laboratory records and independent verification, rather than settled by assertion.
The timing makes the matter even more serious. Bangladesh is experiencing a major dengue surge: the Directorate General of Health Services reported eight more deaths and 1,782 hospital admissions in the latest 24-hour period, taking this year’s totals to 209 deaths and 69,149 hospitalisations.
September alone has already become the deadliest month of the year.
The alleged procurement irregularities deepen the concern. The ACC reportedly found that a small group of firms repeatedly obtained insecticide-supply contracts, while also raising questions over the claimed origin of a BTI product.
The allegation that households were charged more than the prescribed waste-collection fees, without adequate DNCC oversight, points to a wider failure of regulatory supervision.
These are not minor administrative shortcomings when public money and public health are involved.
There is also a larger accountability question. Dhaka’s two city corporations have spent hundreds of crores on mosquito-control activities over the past decade, yet dengue continues to return with devastating intensity. Spending alone cannot be presented as evidence of effective action.
DNCC must therefore publish its insecticide-testing records, procurement documents, laboratory findings and contractor performance data.
Independent entomological testing should establish whether the chemicals being deployed actually work against the mosquitoes responsible for dengue transmission.
Most importantly, responsibility must not end with an internal explanation.
If the ACC findings are confirmed, those responsible for negligence, weak oversight or irregular procurement should face appropriate administrative and legal action.
