Published: 11:03 PM, 09 September 2026
Ctg Port handover without tender could put state at risk: Anu Muhammad
Economist Professor Anu Muhammad on Tuesday said the recurring argument that Bangladesh lacks the capacity to operate its own ports has been used to mislead the country's youth for decades, warning that handing over the New Mooring Container Terminal (NCT) without a competitive tender could expose the state to significant risks.
He also questioned the re-emergence of DP World in discussions over investment at Chattogram Port, saying the same company had surfaced during the previous Awami League government.
“It is a matter of shame for the present government that the name of DP World has resurfaced in connection with Chattogram Port,” he said, referring to the government's “Bangladesh First” policy.
“In reality, the old vulture has returned and taken control of the port,” he added. Professor Anu Muhammad made the remarks at a roundtable titled “Chittagong Port and National Interest”, organised by the Media and Civil Rights Society (MCRS) at the National Press Club in Dhaka. He said the claim that the country “lacks capacity” has been used to deceive Bangladesh's younger generation for the past 54 years.
“DP World is a state-owned enterprise. Handing over a strategic national asset to such an entity without any tender would be an act of recklessness and could put the state at risk,” he said.
He also cited the Rooppur and Matarbari projects, saying there was no effective mechanism to hold anyone accountable for questions surrounding such ambitious projects.
Presenting the keynote paper, Sohag Kumar Biswas, Chattogram bureau chief of the daily Amar Desh, said the debate should not be reduced to a question of “local versus foreign”. The more important issues, he said, are the financial terms of the proposed concession, its duration, transparency, strategic control and the ultimate beneficiaries.
The paper noted that the NCT was built entirely with government funds, involving an investment of around Tk 2,712 crore. In recent years, the government also invested roughly Tk 2,500 crore in 14 quay gantry cranes and 33 rubber-tyred gantry cranes (RTGs).
The terminal operating system (TOS) remains fully functional, it said.
According to the paper, NCT handled 1.385 million TEUs in FY2025-26, around 26 percent higher than the 1.1 million-TEU capacity estimated by German consultants. The terminal also recorded a monthly throughput of 126,496 TEUs in May 2026, its highest-ever monthly figure.
The paper identified three major structural changes in the proposed arrangement. First, the role would reportedly shift from an “operator” to a “concessionaire”, meaning toll revenue would no longer be credited directly to the port's own accounts.
Second, a fixed per-TEU revenue model would be replaced by a tiered royalty system, under which the port's earnings would depend on the reported “average revenue”.
Third, the proposed concession period has reportedly increased to 30 years, although the original financial model was based on a 15-year period. The concept paper highlighted several financial implications:
- Net port earnings per container could decline from $65.25 to $17.18, a reduction of about 74 percent, based on the same $120 revenue figure.
- The $48.07 difference per container could translate into around Tk 800 crore annually, or roughly Tk 12,000 crore over 15 years and Tk 24,000 crore over 30 years.
- The proposed foreign investment is around $205 million, equivalent to approximately Tk 2,500 crore, although the paper said the investment sector has not been clearly specified.
- A domestic company reportedly offered $5 more at every revenue tier, along with a $25 million advance fee. Its offer of $98.50 per TEU was higher than the foreign proposal's upper limit of $97.50.
- During negotiations, the minimum concession fee was reduced from $99.54 to $94.96, which, according to the paper, represents about $6.3 million in annual concessions.
- Although the court has ruled on the legality of the process, it has not examined the substantive terms of the proposed contract because those terms remain undisclosed.
The paper also raised concerns over control of port data, arguing that the most valuable asset of a modern container terminal is not necessarily its cranes but the data generated through its operations.
Such data includes cargo manifests, shipper and consignee information, export flows and vessel-berthing schedules.
“Whoever controls this data effectively holds a comprehensive picture of Bangladesh's foreign trade,” the paper argued.
It referred to a cyberattack on the Australian operations of the global port operator in November 2023, which disrupted operations at four ports and left more than 30,000 containers stranded.
The paper further warned that if the same operator were allowed to run both NCT and Chattogram Container Terminal (CCT), users could be left without meaningful alternatives regarding tolls and berthing priorities.
The concept paper proposed seven measures, stressing that the recommendations should apply equally to domestic and foreign operators rather than target any particular company.
First, competitive tender: Long-term transfer of strategic national infrastructure should take place only through an open, international and competitive tender process. Direct negotiations based on unsolicited proposals should be avoided.
Second, mandatory joint venture: In strategic infrastructure projects involving foreign investment, domestic companies should hold at least 51 percent ownership, while foreign partners should be capped at 49 percent. Technology transfer should also be mandatory.
Third, limits on term and scope: The concession period should not exceed 15 years and should be linked to the actual investment and repayment period. A single operator should not be allowed to operate more than one container terminal at the same port.
Fourth, ownership and control: The 51/49 ownership structure must be effective rather than merely nominal. Domestic majority control should be maintained in shares, dividend rights and board voting rights, with beneficial ownership fully disclosed.
Fifth, data and strategic security: Ownership of the TOS and all operational data should remain with the state. Data should be stored inside Bangladesh, while independent cybersecurity audits and clear restrictions on access to sensitive areas and surveillance infrastructure should be mandatory.
Sixth, transparency and accountability: Draft contract terms should be made public before signing and placed before the relevant parliamentary standing committee. Local agents, partners and beneficial owners should also be disclosed.
Seventh, labour and domestic industry: Existing workers' jobs and service conditions should be protected. Domestic berth operators and service providers should be included as partners rather than reduced to subcontractors. The paper also called for guaranteed non-discrimination in berthing facilities for Bangladeshi-flagged and feeder vessels.
Sheikh Nurullah Bahar, a top leader of the Chittagong Port Protection Committee, warned that handing over Chattogram Port to DP World could trigger a major workers' movement.
He said port workers believe that leasing the port to DP World would undermine their rights and security.
The roundtable was moderated by Baten Biplob, executive director of the Media and Civil Rights Society.
Dr Harun Or Rashid, general secretary of the Maulana Bhashani Parishad; Abdullah Kafi Ratan, general secretary of the Communist Party of Bangladesh; Satyajit Biswas, general secretary of the Garments Workers Union Parishad; Sayedul Haque Nishan, president of the Chhatra Council; Dilip Roy, president of Biplobi Chhatra Moitree; Professor Moshahida Sultana Ritu of Dhaka University; and Sakib Anwar, organising secretary of Nagorik Oikya, also spoke at the event.
Leaders of several other political and social organisations were present at the discussion.
Speakers said the central issue is not whether the operator is domestic or foreign, but on what terms the terminal will be handed over, for how long, under what level of transparency and who will ultimately benefit.
They cautioned against rushing into a long-term concession agreement without first making its terms public and subjecting them to proper scrutiny.
“A flawed tender can be cancelled, and a flawed investment can be restructured,” speakers said, arguing that withdrawing from a 30-year international concession agreement could instead lead to years of legal battles before arbitration tribunals.
