What reviving the 'unsolicited deal playbook' means for Bangladesh
Instead of inviting multiple proposals to ensure the best value, the government directly signs contracts with selected companies or foreign partners under special provisions or government-to-government (G2G) arrangements
The term "unsolicited deal playbook" refers to a long-standing practice in Bangladesh where major government projects - especially in sectors like power and infrastructure - are awarded without open tenders or competitive bidding.
Instead of inviting multiple proposals to ensure the best value, the government directly signs contracts with selected companies or foreign partners under special provisions or government-to-government (G2G) arrangements.
The interim government's recent decisions to lease out three key port terminals and approve several energy projects through the Direct Procurement Method (DPM) have sparked renewed debate that this controversial practice - once used extensively in the power sector - is being revived.
Keep updated, follow The Business Standard's Google news channel
What are 'unsolicited deals'?
In public procurement, an unsolicited deal means a project proposal or contract that has not gone through a competitive bidding process. These deals are often justified as necessary for "urgent national needs," "foreign investment facilitation," or "strategic partnerships."
Under Bangladesh's Public Procurement Rules (PPR), such deals can legally be approved through direct procurement or G2G agreements, but only in special circumstances - such as national emergencies, unique technical expertise, or when another government directly offers assistance.
However, over time, the system has been used more broadly to bypass competition altogether.
Why is this practice controversial?
Critics argue that non-competitive deals reduce transparency and accountability, as contract terms and costs are rarely disclosed or compared; create opportunities for corruption and inflated pricing, since no rival bidders can challenge or lower costs; and distort market fairness, discouraging local or smaller firms from participating in public projects.
Economists and policy experts have often warned that such practices undermine the public procurement system and result in poor value for taxpayers.
A look back: How unsolicited deals shaped the power sector
The trend began in 2010 when the Awami League government passed the Quick Enhancement of Electricity and Energy Supply (Special Provisions) Act. This law allowed the government to sign power generation contracts without tenders to rapidly address electricity shortages.
While it initially helped expand power generation capacity, the system became entrenched. By the time the act was repealed in late 2024, billions of dollars' worth of projects had been approved through unsolicited contracts - many criticised for overpricing, inefficiency, or lack of oversight.
The interim government's repeal of the act was hailed as a step toward restoring competition. However, new port and energy projects are now being processed through similar direct methods, raising questions about consistency.
The current controversy: Ports and energy projects
By the end of this year, three strategic terminals of the Chittagong Port - Laldia, New Mooring, and Pangaon - are expected to be leased to foreign companies for 25-30 years without open tender.
Similar arrangements are reportedly being made for the third LNG terminal (FSRU) in Moheshkhali, coal imports for the Matarbari power plant, and new vessels for the Bangladesh Shipping Corporation.
Officials claim these direct contracts will attract investment and improve efficiency. Critics, however, say the government is repeating the same pattern that once led to systemic dependence on unsolicited deals in the power sector.
What experts are saying
Former CPTU Director General Md Faruque Hossain told The Business Standard that direct contracting is legal but must follow strict negotiation and cost benchmarking procedures.
"Negotiation is mandatory in direct contracting, and the contract value must be benchmarked against a properly prepared cost estimate," he said.
"Transparency is always lower, and the risk of corruption higher, in direct contracting. That is why competitive methods are recommended wherever possible."
Why this matters
For an interim administration tasked with restoring fiscal discipline and public confidence, reverting to non-competitive procurement could undermine credibility.
While G2G or direct deals can strengthen diplomatic and financial ties, experts caution that without transparency and oversight, they risk repeating past mistakes - locking Bangladesh into costly, long-term obligations.
In essence, to "revive the unsolicited deal playbook" means returning to a system of backdoor agreements - a model that once fuelled quick development, but also deepened dependency, inflated costs, and weakened accountability.
