BIWTA official faces corruption allegations, remains in key post

Questions raised over salvage vessel fuel bills, contractor links and alleged unexplained assets

A senior official of Bangladesh Inland Water Transport Authority (BIWTA) is facing a series of allegations involving suspected financial irregularities, questionable bills and vouchers, fuel expenditure and preferential treatment of contractors, while he continues to hold a key position at the state-run agency.

Md. Abdur Rahim, additional director of BIWTA’s Marine Conservation and Operations Department, has been accused by officials and complainants of facilitating irregularities and allegedly maintaining a network of contractors and officials that has influenced procurement and operational activities within the department.

The allegations have reportedly been brought to the attention of the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) and BIWTA authorities. People familiar with the complaints said an ACC inquiry into fuel expenditure involving a salvage vessel also found discrepancies in some official records.

Fuel bills under scrutiny

At the centre of the allegations are fuel expenses claimed for the operation of BIWTA salvage vessel Pratyay, which is based in Narayanganj.

Sources familiar with the matter said the vessel, with an estimated lifting capacity of about 250 tonnes, is used for salvage and emergency operations and is normally anchored near Ghat No. 5 on the Shitalakkhya River.

Complainants allege that fuel bills submitted for the vessel did not always correspond with its actual operations and that discrepancies were found between expenditure claims and operational records.

Documents that could help establish the facts include the vessel’s logbooks, fuel receipt and consumption registers, movement records, bills, vouchers and payment documents.

An examination of those records would be necessary to determine whether any public money was improperly claimed or withdrawn.

Contractors repeatedly receive work

The complaints also raise questions about procurement involving buoys, beacon lights, vessel repairs and other equipment.

According to officials familiar with the allegations, some equipment was imported from overseas under project arrangements, while payments between fiscal years 2019-20 and 2024-25 were allegedly processed against bills issued in the names of local contractors.

Several companies are alleged to have repeatedly secured contracts from the department.

Officials and complainants have also alleged that a contractor known as “Bahar” has close links with Rahim and that several companies associated with the same business circle have obtained contracts through different entities.

Such claims would require verification through tender documents, work orders, company ownership records, beneficial ownership information, bank transactions and procurement files.

Questionable bills cited in complaints

The complaints reportedly identify several companies and payment amounts that are alleged to involve fictitious or irregular bills.

They include:

• Akhi Enterprise: Tk 772,000 under TP-135;

• Tania Enterprise: Tk 681,000 under MP-12;

• Tanzil Dockyard & Engineering Works: Tk 713,352 under TP-80;

• Tanzil Dockyard & Engineering Works: Tk 936,000 under TP-173;

• Tania Enterprise: Tk 884,100 for repairs to Speedboat-1;

• Alif Enterprise: Tk 498,151 under TP-45.

Determining whether the bills were genuine would require comparing them with tender documents, work orders, measurement books, completion certificates, inspection reports and payment records.

Assets raise further questions

Rahim has also been accused of accumulating assets allegedly disproportionate to his known income.

Complainants claim he owns two flats in a building known as Alif Garden in North Mugda, allegedly worth about Tk 3 crore in total, and two additional flats on Jhilpar Road, reportedly worth around Tk 2 crore.

Other allegations include ownership or joint ownership of property in Ashulia, Savar, Mohammadpur, Rampura and Hatirpool.

One of the more significant claims concerns a dockyard allegedly constructed near the Fatullah launch terminal in the Keraniganj area. The facility is claimed to have been jointly owned by Rahim and contractor Bahar and to have cost close to Tk 100 crore.

The complaints further allege that Rahim and an individual named Lima Tabassum own about 10 kathas of land in Pathalia, Ashulia, where a five-storey building was allegedly constructed at a cost of about Tk 20 crore.

The ownership and value of these properties, as well as the sources of funds used to acquire or develop them, could not be independently verified.

Serious property allegation

The complaints also contain a separate allegation concerning property in or around Pabna.

According to a claim attributed to a relative of Rahim, a house belonging to a Hindu family was allegedly acquired by using influence and financial power. The property is claimed to have a current market value of around Tk 100 crore.

Because of the seriousness of the allegation, verification would require examination of the original deed, registration documents, mutation records, khatian, ownership history and the source of funds involved in the transaction.

Why no action?

Officials familiar with the matter said complaints against Rahim and other officials have been submitted to the ACC and the BIWTA chairman’s office over alleged corruption and irregularities.

The apparent lack of decisive action has prompted questions among officials and complainants about the handling of the allegations.

Experts said that any credible investigation should examine not only the role of the accused official but also that of contractors, procurement officials, bill-approving authorities, accounts personnel and others involved in project implementation.

A forensic review of procurement records, vessel movement and fuel logs, company ownership structures, bank transactions and asset declarations could help determine whether the allegations represent isolated irregularities or a broader pattern of financial misconduct.

Rahim could not be reached

Multiple attempts were made to contact Md. Abdur Rahim for comment on the allegations, but he could not be reached.

The allegations against Rahim and the contractors named in the complaints remain unproven unless established through an independent investigation and supporting documentary evidence.