The Coal Power Generation Company (CPGCBL) has been accused of violating policy by assigning the responsibility of supplying coal to a company that had been disqualified during the tender process for the supply of coal to the Matarbari power plant in Cox's Bazar.
An international consortium participating in the tender recently submitted a complaint to the Prime Minister's Office, raising questions about the transparency of the tender process. In the letter sent to the Principal Secretary of the Prime Minister's Office last Thursday, the consortium detailed its concerns.
A Dhaka Tribune reporter obtained a copy of the complaint, which alleges that the financial proposals of the four consortiums participating in the tender were rejected without proper evaluation.
Claiming irregularities and bias in the ongoing tender selection process, the letter also said that some related officers and board members were affiliated with this specific company and illegally violated the prevailing laws and regulations of the country. The letter further alleged that a negotiation meeting was held on the afternoon of June 5, which was described as completely unethical and illegal.
According to sources, some officials involved in the project are conspiring to undermine the government's image with the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA).
Meanwhile, last April, the Implementation Monitoring and Evaluation Department (IMED) of the Ministry of Planning sent a letter to the Senior Secretary of the Power Department, stating that standards were not maintained in the tender process for the coal import for the Matarbari Power Plant project.
According to sources, the process of irregularly awarding work to a “preferred company” for the personal benefit of project officials ignored the government audit report at its final stage.
"We need to see who is responsible for these activities," said Consumers Association of Bangladesh (CAB) energy advisor and expert Prof Dr M Shamsul Alam to Dhaka Tribune.
"Matarbari is engaging in various forms of manipulation to grant responsibility to a particular contractor for the supply of coal to the power plant. We must identify who is behind this. After the cancellation of the bids of four companies, one of these disqualified companies is being given the responsibility of supplying coal with increased facilities and prices. This indicates a preference or vested interest in that specific company. Such activities have become customary:in granting contracts to whoever one wishes at whatever price. This has become a national character. While we can identify those directly benefiting from this process, we cannot see those behind them. It is unclear to whom the money is going through the project contractor."
He added: "For example, Tk4 million was released through corruption in the Niko case. While some sources of those who received this money are visible, not all sources have been identified. It is unknown how much money is changing hands. The same is happening in this project."
Regarding this issue, Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB) Executive Director Iftekharuzzaman said: "We have a procurement process and specific policies, which are being completely violated in this case. Since four institutions were not appointed as per the procurement process and were cancelled, the entire purchase process should be invalidated. However, selecting a particular firm through negotiation is a clear violation of the procurement process. It is logical to question whether a cycle of corruption is at play here. Are individuals related to the decision-makers at CPGCBL trying to collude in an illegal process benefiting a particular institution? That is the question now."
He further said: "It is not anyone's personal property or private purchase that can be cancelled at will and the responsibility given to whomever one wishes. Our constitution does not grant such rights to any state agency or government, nor have we provided such rights in any legal process. These are the people's funds, and the people have not given the right to misuse their money. Therefore, this tender process should be restarted."
According to a project source, the commercial production of the second unit of the 1,200 MW power plant at Maheshkhali is scheduled to start this month. After the first unit of the two-unit power plant, built with Japanese financial assistance, began commercial production, the second unit has also started trial production.
Experimental power generation of the second unit began on December 24 last year, with commercial production of the first unit starting on December 26 of the same month.
Sources in the organizations participating in the tender indicate that four domestic and foreign entities submitted their proposals by following proper procedures. However, three organizations were initially excluded due to a "lack of financial capacity."
Subsequently, the technical committee meeting on May 27 rejected the financial proposals of all four consortia. During the CPGCBL board meeting on May 31, considering the national importance in the current situation, approval was given to reinstate the cancelled Unique Cement Limited consortium.
One of the three consortia, cancelled due to the arbitrariness of the project officials, applied to the senior secretary of the power department for a re-evaluation of the tender on May 29. However, the company has not yet received any response.
Habibur Rahman, CPGCBL chairman and senior secretary of the Power Division, could not be reached for comment despite several attempts made to contact him.
CPGCBL Company Secretary Kazi Miraz Hossain said he is unaware of the matter as he joined his post recently and the tender took place before his joining.
An official, who declined to be named, said that the process of awarding the contract to the cancelled company is ongoing with the aim of making personal profit through negotiation.
It should be noted that the initial tender conditions required at least 12 million metric tons of coal import experience, a relevant condition for coal import-related tenders. However, to provide an unfair advantage to a particular firm, the condition was relaxed to include experience in importing 12 million metric tonnes of iron, fertilizer, chemicals, cement, or food grains, creating unequal competition, said the complaint.