Thianis Apparels, a garment manufacturer with a flawless 19-year operational record within the Chittagong Export Processing Zone (CEPZ), finds itself at the center of a legal firestorm. The company alleges that the Bangladesh Export Processing Zones Authority (BEPZA) has engaged in a series of “authoritative actions beyond any law,” including defying High Court orders and illegally auctioning off buyer-owned goods.
The dispute began over a financial disagreement regarding rent. Thianis, contesting the dues, sought arbitration to settle the matter fairly. When BEPZA was unresponsive, the company filed an application with the High Court in February 2025 to appoint an arbitrator. While this legal process was underway, BEPZA took a drastic step in June 2025: it unilaterally terminated Thianis’s lease and physically sealed the factory premises.
This action was taken despite the factory being fully operational with active production lines and pending export orders. The shutdown caused immediate and severe disruption, halting export permits and blocking shipments. Approximately $200,000 worth of ready-to-ship, inspected goods were frozen inside the sealed warehouse, with a further $400,000 in production-line goods also locked down.
In a critical legal development, the High Court had already stayed BEPZA’s termination order, pending the outcome of the arbitration. Despite this judicial intervention, BEPZA proceeded to publish an auction notice in September, scheduling the sale of the factory’s contents.
The situation escalated when three international buyers, who had sent their own fabrics and raw materials to Thianis and had made significant advance payments (30-70%), filed separate writ petitions. The High Court granted stay orders on the auction specifically for their goods. Official notices of these court orders were served to and acknowledged by BEPZA.
Contempt of Court Allegations
In a brazen act, BEPZA allegedly disregarded these direct court orders. The authority proceeded with the pre-auction inspection on September 8th and 9th and held the auction itself on September 16th.
“This is a willful contempt of court,” said Mr. Anisur Rahman, Managing Director of Thianis Apparels. “BEPZA has motivatedly ignored a genuine effort to resolve our issues through arbitration. They have acted as if they are a law unto themselves, rendering the Investor Protection Act of 1980 completely meaningless.”
Mr. Rahman confirmed that contempt proceedings are now being filed against BEPZA.
A Story of Two Narratives
The closure of Thianis is particularly striking given its history. The company never missed a single payroll in 19 years, even during the pandemic, and had just paid employee bonuses days before the shutdown. Mr. Rahman alleges that while BEPZA was publicly mediating with workers, it was secretly acting in bad faith.
“BEPZA used our workers as a tool, assuring them they would be paid so long as they did not open the factory,” he stated. “This closure was not due to our financial failure, but to a covert action by an authority that seems intent on destroying a going concern rather than resolving a dispute through the proper legal channels.”
The case of Thianis Apparels raises profound questions about the security of investment and the rule of law within Bangladesh’s special economic zones, with a government authority’s actions now under direct legal challenge.
