SS Power 1 Ltd (SSPIL), one of the largest private sector joint ventures in Bangladesh, has raised allegations of a conspiracy to discredit the company.
A China-Bangladesh joint venture with a power generation capacity of 1,224 MW, SSPIL has been supplying approximately 1,100 MW to the national grid since 26 October 2023.
However, the management of SSPIL claims that a calculated campaign is underway to tarnish the company's reputation through false and baseless information disseminated via various media outlets, including a national English daily, its online platforms, and other digital media.
A report published in a national daily alleged that S Alam Group, the local partner in the project, had embezzled $815.78 million through 184 fraudulent invoices, instead of importing capital machinery for the power project.
In response, SSPIL management refuted these claims, stating that the report was based on unverified and one-sided information.
The company warned that such baseless accusations could lead to dissatisfaction among foreign investors, which may ultimately harm the country's economic interests.
In a statement on Saturday (28 September), SSPIL Managing Director Tan Zhailing clarified that the total investment in the power project amounted to $2.506 billion, with six Chinese banks jointly investing $1.782 billion, while the state-owned Rupali Bank invested $30 million.
Additionally, the Chinese government provided $230 million as equity or seed capital, and S Alam Group contributed $507 million in equity.
The project, financed through a consortium formed under a loan agreement signed on 28 December 2018, saw 80% of the total funding come from Chinese banks and the government.
The engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) contractor responsible for the project’s construction is a Chinese firm, and all import expenses were covered by the consortium’s joint fund, without requiring any letters of credit (LC) from Bangladesh.
Capital machinery for the project was imported under an "import permit", and the payments were made from the Chinese investors' funds, ensuring that no foreign currency was spent from Bangladesh.
EPC contractor was paid through the Singapore branch of the Bank of China, which acted as the facility agent.
The entire financial process was supervised by international engineering consultants hired by the project’s sponsors, as well as by Black & Veatch, Mott MacDonald, Rupali Bank, and Bangladesh Bank.
Payments against all bills and invoices were made only after receiving clearance, following proper scrutiny and adhering to relevant regulations.
SSPIL categorically rejected any claims of money laundering, emphasising that all transactions were transparent and compliant with the oversight of regulatory authorities.
The company further highlighted that all equipment imported for the project was duly approved by the Power Development Board (PDB), Bangladesh Investment Development Authority (BIDA), the relevant ministry, Bangladesh Bank, and the Office of the Chief Controller of Imports and Exports.
Rupali Bank, the syndicated loan’s onshore security agent, regularly reported to all the concerned agencies without fail.
In the same statement, SSPIL’s Managing Director Tan Zhailing vehemently denied the allegations of money laundering, asserting that no unauthorised financial transactions had been conducted by the company.
The power plant has already paid a total of Tk1,605.30 crore to the national exchequer as revenue, including income tax, VAT, import duties, and supplementary duties, as of 26 September this year.
Addressing claims made in the published report, SSPIL refuted allegations that $12.196 million from LC No. 0000026319150005 (dated 29 January 2019) and $79.24 million from LC No. 0000026321150038 (dated 30 May 2021) were siphoned abroad. The company clarified that the journalist lacked understanding of EPC contracts, which allow the contractor, rather than the sponsor, to handle imports.
In such arrangements, the lender directly pays the supplier. The LC numbers mentioned in the report were merely references used by Rupali Bank for reporting to Bangladesh Bank as the onshore security agent, rather than actual LCs for imports.
Additionally, SSPIL dismissed the report's claim that 184 invoices were uploaded to the Bangladesh Bank server but not to the National Board of Revenue (NBR) server.
SSPIL confirmed that these invoices are available on both the NBR and Chittagong Customs House servers.
The company also rejected the alleged statement by Rupali Bank’s Motijheel Branch General Manager Abu Naser Mohammad Masud, who was quoted as confirming that no local or foreign loans were used to settle the import payments and that $815 million was paid from Bangladesh using 184 fake invoices.
SSPIL asserted that this quote was entirely fabricated, as the reporter had not consulted the concerned GM.
The invoice numbers mentioned in the report were in fact machinery import codes used for reporting, not LC numbers.
SSPIL further noted that the Chief Financial Officer's (CFO) comments were misrepresented in the report, and that the information presented was biased, inaccurate, and aimed at harming the company.
The company believes that vested interests are behind this misleading portrayal, intended to damage the project’s reputation.
As a joint venture between China and Bangladesh, SSPIL is not only meeting the country’s energy demands but also strengthening diplomatic and economic ties between the two nations.
The company warned that the publication of such false information could negatively impact the shared interests of both countries.
SSPIL has indicated that they may seek legal recourse and compensation for damages if necessary but will refrain from issuing any further formal statements on the matter.
