Dhaka North City Corporation (DNCC) has accused Nurul Haque Nur, President of Gono Odhikar Parishad and former Vice President (VP) of DUCSU, of inciting unrest outside DNCC headquarters after his preferred contractor was not awarded a public works contract.
The allegations were outlined in a press release issued on Wednesday by DNCC Public Relations Officer Farzana Bobby.
According to the statement, on May 18, Nurul Haque met with Additional Chief Engineer Mohammad Arifur Rahman, allegedly pressuring him to award a contract to a specific bidder. The engineer reportedly explained that public contracts are governed by the Public Procurement Act and related regulations, and must follow legal procedures.
Despite this, DNCC claims that Nurul Haque continued to exert pressure and even threatened to lock DNCC office if his demands were not met.
When the contract was not awarded, DNCC alleges that on May 20 at 3 PM, Nur and his associates staged a disruptive protest in front of Nagar Bhaban in Gulshan-2, chanting slogans and obstructing official activities.
In response, Gono Odhikar Parishad dismissed DNCC's statement as "false, fabricated and politically motivated."
In a public statement and a subsequent Facebook post, Nurul Haque Nur accused DNCC Administrator Mohammad Ejaz of turning City Corporation into a "personal business entity," claiming that contracts are awarded based on favoritism and kickbacks.
Nur further stated that protest was not merely about a contractor dispute, but was driven by broader concerns over alleged corruption and the administrator's alleged links to the banned extremist organization Hizb-ut-Tahrir.
He cited past incidents, including claims that Mohammad Ejaz had been arrested in 2015 on charges related to militancy-a claim also referenced by investigative journalist Zulkarnain Sayer in a recent social media post.
During a press conference held at the party's central office at Purana Paltan in Dhaka, on Thursday afternoon (May 22), Md. Rashed Khan, General Secretary of Gono Odhikar Parishad, stated that political parties were not consulted at the time of forming the advisory council. As a result, many individuals have raised objections to certain Advisers of the Council.
