Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB) has said that foreign investment in Chattogram port development could benefit the country, but stressed that the government must fully disclose all contract processes and conditions to ensure transparency and accountability.
In a statement on Wednesday, TIB said the recent agreements for developing Laldia and Pangaon terminals—signed with Denmark-owned APM Terminals and Switzerland-based Medlog SA—raise important questions that the government must publicly address.
The organisation also called for clarity on whether new terminal projects and management decisions are being taken under a long-term strategy or on an ad-hoc basis.
TIB Executive Director Dr Iftekharuzzaman said, “We appreciate any government initiative to attract foreign investment for overall economic progress.
However, along with ensuring procedural transparency, it must be made public how issues related to national interests have been safeguarded in such agreements.”
He noted that the company awarded the Laldia Terminal contract “did not come here to provide public service or charity,” adding that the government must carefully weigh long-term economic benefits and risks.
He said the authorities should disclose whether the firm’s international track record on transparency, accountability and corruption was examined, and whether any risk-mitigation or protective clauses were included in the contract.
“The government also has a responsibility to inform the public about the process through which APM Terminals was selected over other potential companies,” he added.
Dr Zaman questioned whether an assessment had been conducted on employment impacts and how the deal affects related industries and stakeholders.
He also asked whether the agreement supports the development of local skills and whether there was a clear economic strategy guiding the decision.
“Since the agreement has already been signed, answers to these questions must be promptly disclosed in the interest of transparency,” he said.
TIB further highlighted concerns over what it described as the unusually rapid pace of approvals for the Laldia agreement.
Although an International Finance Corporation (IFC) report projected 62 days to complete the process after submission, ten key steps—from evaluation to ministry approvals and the final signing—were completed within two weeks.
“This creates a reasonable basis for questioning the entire process,” Dr Zaman said, urging the government to explain the speed of the approvals and clarify why the Laldia deal followed an “exceptional process” while the Pangaon agreement reportedly followed competitive procedures.
He also questioned whether local stakeholders’ opinions were adequately considered and whether economic risks common in developing countries had been evaluated.
The government, he said, must clarify what the state stands to gain from the foreign operator’s profits and whether any cost-benefit analysis has been made public.
“In this context, the government must clarify its position to ensure transparency,” TIB said.