Faiz Ahmed, however, persisted. On 13 April, he met the ACC Chairman and handed over a letter, requesting favourable opinion to proceed with procurement. But on 18 June, 2025, the ACC stated that the initial probe had found violations of the procurement law, and advancing the procurement would be legally unsound.
Just four days later, on 22 June, Faiz wrote to the ACC Chairman again, justifying why the project must go ahead and appealing for his personal attention and cooperation.
To obtain his comments, Prothom Alo emailed Faiz and the Telecommunication Division’s PRO on 16 July, followed by phone calls and texts. When visiting the ICT Division, the reception desk said Faiz was not in the office. PRO Muhammad Jasim Uddin said a written response would be sent, but as of Saturday, it hadn’t been received.
Jasim Uddin told Prothom Alo on Monday that Faiz held a press conference on 7 July and presented his argument. Faiz told that press conference that BTCL’s capacity must be expanded or it would fail in the market. He reiterated that he only sought ACC cooperation, denying giving any instructions.
Faiz spoke on many other issues at that press conference. However, Prothom Alo has some other specific questions to him which remained unanswered.
Amid back-and-forth letters between ACC and the Telecommunications Division, BTCL on 16 April again wrote to the division seeking approval to send five, instead of four, personnel for factory inspection. The new list included two from BTCL and three from the division.
Investigation sources say the officials of Telecommunications Division were included to the list to ingratiate them. However, they didn’t go because the Chief Adviser’s Office blocked the government order (GO).
Meanwhile, Faiz visited China on 6–9 May with his private secretary, under the sponsorship of an little-known group called “Chinese Enterprises Association Members in Bangladesh.” The GO mentioned it was a learning visit on ICT infrastructure.
On 18 May, Huawei informed BTCL in writing that it learnt that the top government authorities hadn’t approved the factory visit, so it would self-certify the equipment. On 19 May, Huawei informed that the fund kept for factory inspection would be adjusted and requested shipment clearance.
Records show the letter dated 15 May—cited by Huawei—was exchanged internally between BTCL and the Telecommunication Division. Prothom Alo contacted Huawei’s Dhaka office to how it obtained the internal letter. The company, in written response, claimed to receive a formal letter from the project office on 15 May. Huawei claimed it learned about objection on factory inspection from that letter.
BTCL was asked on 21 July as to how its internal letter reached Huawei but has not responded as of now.
BTCL sought the Telecommunication Division’s opinion on Huawei’s shipment clearance request. On 25 May, the division sent a letter citing Faiz’s instructions—suggesting the equipment’s 5G compatibility and 12-year service life be reviewed by experts. It also referred to GCC Clause 38.4 (related to shipment without factory inspection).
As per rules, factory inspection can only be skipped if it's impossible. BTCL did not approve shipment directly but instead forwarded the letter—bearing Faiz’s instructions—to Huawei on 26 May.
Huawei seized the opportunity and shipped the equipment. On 16 June, they informed BTCL that the equipment was en route to Chattogram Port, expected to arrive on 22 June. Whether the shipment has arrived is still unconfirmed.
Banking sources say no import documents have been submitted yet, so there’s no question of payment. ACC had earlier collected relevant documents from the bank. The bank remains unsure whether to release payment if documents are eventually submitted.
