Nahid Islam Dismisses ‘Deliberate Disinformation’ Over Affidavit

National Citizen Party (NCP) Convener Nahid Islam, who will contest the 13th National Parliamentary Election from the Dhaka-11 constituency, has alleged that confusion and deliberate misinformation are being spread regarding his income and asset disclosures submitted to the Election Commission.

In a lengthy post published on his verified Facebook page on Wednesday night (7 January), Nahid said the campaign was not aimed at uncovering the truth but rather constituted a political attempt to place a transparent politician in the dock of suspicion.

Below is a translated summary of the key points from his statement:

Annual Income:
Nahid clarified that the controversy surrounding his declared annual income is based on a complete misunderstanding. The Tk 1.6 million cited in his affidavit does not represent a sudden earning after leaving any particular job; rather, it reflects his total income for the 2024–25 fiscal year (from 1 July to 30 June of the following year).

For a significant portion of this fiscal year—approximately seven months—Nahid served as an adviser to the interim government and received state-fixed salaries and allowances for that role. Around Tk 1.1 million of the declared income came from this source, paid through formal banking channels, fully documented and subject to income tax.

The remaining portion was earned after his resignation as adviser, through lawful professional consultancy work with a private institution, for which clear tax records also exist.

Total Assets:
Nahid stated that his total assets amount to Tk 3.2 million. He stressed that total assets do not represent income from a single year but rather the accumulation of savings over an individual’s lifetime. In his case, this reflects savings accumulated over approximately 27 years.

These assets include savings from his adviser salary, previous savings, gifts received at family and social events, the value of gold ornaments, furniture, and electronic goods. Income earned and taxed after stepping down from the adviser post has also been included. He asserted that the asset declaration is accurate and truthful.

Bank Accounts:
Addressing claims regarding his bank balances, Nahid said these too are the result of misinformation. At the time of resigning as adviser, his bank account held approximately Tk 10,000, which was simply the remaining cash balance from his total income—not a reflection of his overall assets.

Subsequently, government-allocated funds for purchasing official furniture were deposited into the same account, increasing the balance. This fact, he noted, is clearly mentioned in the affidavit.

At present, he maintains only two bank accounts: one with Sonali Bank and another with City Bank, opened on 28 December exclusively for managing election expenses. He reiterated that he neither owned nor owns any land, apartment, or vehicle—either during or after his tenure as adviser—and that this is clearly stated in the affidavit.

Profession:
Nahid also rejected claims of confusion regarding his profession. Nowhere in the affidavit is teaching mentioned as his occupation. His previous profession is listed as government adviser, and his current profession as consultancy—a recognised and lawful occupation.

He provides strategic and policy advice to a tech firm, the name of which is included in documents submitted to the Election Commission. He clarified that the firm is not involved in any government projects and has not received any state benefits due to his association. His role is based on political and administrative experience, with nothing unusual or concealed about it.

Nahid emphasised that every detail of his income and assets is legally verifiable through income tax returns and electoral affidavits. He said that his earnings during his advisory role, post-resignation professional income, and lifetime assets have all been transparently and separately declared.

According to him, the deliberate attempt to blur these clearly defined categories is meant to construct a dishonest political narrative. In reality, his limited assets and transparent income declarations demonstrate that he remained outside the politics of power abuse and illicit wealth accumulation—precisely what has made him uncomfortable for certain quarters.

He concluded by lamenting that in the country’s current political climate, truthfulness often becomes a liability. The more transparency one shows, the more one is put on trial, while politicians who live lavish lifestyles at home and abroad—despite questionable affidavits—often face little accountability due to their alignment with power.

DBTech/FBO/EK/OR