Published: 12:22 AM, 17 May 2026
Concrete Over Conservation: A Critical Analysis of Environmental Law Enforcement in Bangladesh's Real Estate Sector
Rozina Akter Nishu
Bangladesh suffers greatly from climate change and environmental damage. But even though the country has many environmental laws, they are often ignored for big real estate projects. In cities like Dhaka, wetlands are filled, floodplains become housing areas, and rivers disappear because of uncontrolled urban growth. The real problem is not the lack of laws, but weak enforcement of those laws in the real estate sector.
The main law for environmental protection in Bangladesh is the Bangladesh Environment Conservation Act 1995 (BECA). The Act was enacted to fulfil three major objectives: conservation of the environment, improvement of environmental standards, and control and mitigation of environmental pollution. Other laws also support BECA including the Natural Water Reservoir Conservation Act of 2000, the Bangladesh Water Act of 2013, the Town Improvement Act of 1953, and the Real Estate Development and Management Act of 2010, specially to land and property. Under BECA, any commercial or industrial project needs an Environmental Clearance Certificate (ECC) from the Department of Environment before starting. Some areas that are important for the environment can be officially marked with rules about pollution limits. Despite this framework, BECA has faced criticism for taking a "prescriptive approach", offering strong environmental protections but not setting up enough systems to make them work properly. The 2010 amendment made enforcement weaker by lowering the penalties for environmental violations, which made it cheaper and more attractive to break the rules than to follow them.
Even though an ECC is legally required for big real estate projects, in reality, the process is usually just a formality instead of a real environmental check. Urban planner Ishrat Islam said that turning each acre of wetland into city development costs Dhaka about $1.2 million every year in lost flood protection and other natural benefits way more than the fines the Environment Department gives out.
The Playground, Open Space, Park and Natural Reservoir Conservation Act of 2000 clearly stops people from using water bodies for other purposes. But in 2011, the High Court declared 77 housing projects around Dhaka illegal for filling wetlands. Even so, RAJUK later gave temporary permission to six of those same projects. This shows a big problem with enforcement: although the judiciary declared the projects unlawful, the planning authority effectively legitimized them, while the wetlands remained permanently damaged. The ongoing damage of Dhaka's wetlands shows Bangladesh's severe failures in environmental law enforcement. The Modhumoti Model Town Case is a notable example. The Bangladesh Environment Conservation Act of 1995, the Town Improvement Act of 1953, and the Playground, Open Space, Park, and Natural Reservoir Conservation Act of 2000 all were breached by the project, according to the High Court's 2005 decision. It also noted that RAJUK hadn't granted the developer permission. It took 20 years before RAJUK finally acted, in late 2024 when it told more than 3,000 property owners to remove structures and restore 550 acres of wetland. RAJUK's own 2023 Urban Development and Environmental Compliance Report showed that only eight of 346 protected ponds in Dhaka have been restored since 2020. Environmental consequences have become severe: Researchers from BCAS have found that Dhaka is already about two degrees hotter than nearby areas, while wetland loss has reduced groundwater levels and increased urban flooding, causing even light rain now flood many parts of the city.
The Arial Beel case in Munshiganj shows how regulation isn’t working. Real estate companies illegally occupied wetlands, violating several environmental laws. The Department of Environment didn’t do much to stop them. One company, Pushpodhara Properties Ltd, has been operating without a valid NHA license since 2020 and without proper environmental approval. A big problem lies in the dual role of RAJUK. Although it is responsible for enforcing planning and environmental compliance, it also acts as a developer and has itself filled wetlands, canals, and forest land for development projects. At the same time, RAJUK publicly maintains that it does not approve projects lacking environmental clearance. This creates a clear conflict of interest, where the regulatory authority itself contributes to environmental degradation. Also, BECA has faced criticism for giving the Director General of the Department of Environment "unlimited and unchecked power," further weakening accountability within the enforcement system.
The BECA gives a lot of power to a single authority, which people say goes against the rule of law. The Act does not specify inspection frequency, notice requirements, or limits on repeated fines for continuing violations. Also, environmental inspectors need permission from the head of the Environment Department before they can inspect a company, which slows things down and makes surprise checks less effective.
Due to weak governmental enforcement, Bangladesh Environmental Lawyers Association (BELA) has played a major role in challenging illegal real estate development through Public Interest Litigation (PIL). In the landmark case Dr Mohiuddin Farooque v Bangladesh, the Supreme Court broadened the rules of locus standi, allowing public interest groups to bring environmental claims on behalf of affected communities. Since then, PILs have dealt with issues like filling wetlands, taking over rivers, illegal brick kilns, and unauthorized building projects across Bangladesh. But these lawsuits usually come after the damage is already done. Examples like the Modhumoti Model Town Case show that even good court decisions can take a long time to carry out. This means that just having court rulings isn’t enough, there needs to be a strong system in place to make sure things get done.
Constitutional protection for the environment also remains limited. The Fifteenth Amendment of 2011 inserted Article 18A into the Constitution of Bangladesh, requiring the State to protect and improve the environment and preserve natural resources and biodiversity. But Article 18A is in Part II concerning Fundamental Principles of State Policy, it is about general state goals, not specific rights, it can’t be directly enforced in court. As a result, environmental protection claims are generally pursued through judicial interpretation of the right to life under Article 32 rather than through an explicit enforceable constitutional right to a healthy environment.
Bangladesh has strong environmental laws on paper, but weak enforcement continues to allow illegal and environmentally destructive real estate development. Without real accountability, the rapid growth of cities like Dhaka will continue to come at the cost of wetlands, rivers, and environmental sustainability.
Rozina Akter Nishu studies
Law in Bangladesh University
of Professionals (BUP), Mirpur
Cantonment, Dhaka.
