Sakibul Hasan

 

For years, laws have been legislated, projects launched and removal campaigns carried out to protect the rivers surrounding Dhaka. Yet contamination keeps increasing and illegal occupation continues. The question, therefore, is not simply whether plans exist rivers but whether those plans are actually being implemented. Observing from the banks of Dhaka's rivers, the first thing that catches the eye is often not the river itself but the indication of pollution.

 

In some places, the water has turned dark-coloured. in others, industrial waste has altered original colour. Discard plastic and domestic waste gather along riverbanks, while polluted water flows directly into the rivers through narrow drains.  The Buriganga, Balu, Turag and Shitalakhya once played a crucial role in Dhaka's economy and everyday life. Today, significant stretches of these rivers have been reduced to little more than waterways for transporting waste.

 

In August 2026, the government said a total of 224 waste-discharge points had been identified along the Buriganga and Turag river. These, 166 are situated along the Buriganga and 58 the Turag.

 

 The sources are not limited to private industrial facilities. Government agencies, including Dhaka WASA, city corporation and other local government bodies, have also been connected to some of the discharge points. The government has said it plant to identify the Institutions accountable and prevent illegal dumping.

 

A government survey found dissolved oxygen levels in the Buriganga ranging from 1.70 to 2.68 milligrams per litre. The survey noted that a healthy river environment generally needs a DO level of around 5 milligrams per litre. In some sections, therefore, oxygen levels are less than half of what is considered necessary for a healthy aquatic environment.

 

A peer-reviewed study published in June 2026 points in even more alarming view of the Turag river. Researcher collected water sample from 20 sampling sites during the dry season. The study found dissolved oxygen levels falling to reaching a minimum of 0.9 milligrams per litre.

 

Waste goes into the river-but where does responsibility go? This maybe the most difficult question in Dhaka's river pollution crisis. In a factory releases untreated waste into a river, who is accountable for stopping it?

 

In Bangladesh, this responsibilitie do not rest with a single institution. The department of environment, Dhaka WASA, Bangladesh Inland Water Transport Authority, National River Conservation Commission and city Corporations, among others, are involved in river protection control. but when responsibilities are divided among multiple agencies, accountability can become unclear.

 

One agency may be responsible for pollution control, another for waste water management, while another is tasked with protecting waterways. In some areas, boundary demarcation is in progress, in others, removal campaigns are carried out. But if polluted water continues to enter the rivers and encroachment comes back after eviction drives, question remain about the sustainability of those interventions.

 

Court orders exist but how much has been implemented?

In 2009, the high court issued important directives to protect Dhaka's four major rivers- the Buriganga, Balu, Turag and Shitalakhya including measures to mark their boundaries and stop contamination and encouragement. Nearly to decades have passed.

 

Various initiatives have been undertaken, including the installation of boundary pillars, construction of waterways along riverbanks and eviction of illegal structures. Yet a 2026 report found that many of the prescribed measures for protecting the four rivers remain incomplete, event 17 years after the courts' directives.

 

This reveals one of the fundamental problems of river conservation in Bangladesh. Absence of legislation and directives may be a problem but the bigger obstacle appears to the lack of consistent implementation. A river cannot be saved through a single eviction drive. Protecting it requires simultaneously stopping contamination at its source, permanently securing river boundaries and ensuring continuous monitoring. 

 

Can dredging alone save the rivers?

Excavating may be necessary to remove accumulated silt and contaminated material from riverbeds. But removing sediment itself is not a permanent solution. If industrial waste, sewage and solid garbage continue to enter the rivers, the same riverbeds will need to be cleaned time and again. It is like cleaning a house while leaving the door open for new waste to water every day.

 

In 2026, the government announced plans to increase the navigability of the Buriganga through excavating, alongside initiatives for online monitoring of Effluent Treatment Plants (ETPs) at industrial facilities. Such measures are essential because cleaning the river is only one part of the solution. Preventing new contamination from entering it is equally, if not more, important.

 

The damage extends beyond the rivers

Rivers are often treated simply as buddies of water. but an urban river is deeply connected to the economy, environment and everyday lives of the people around it. River-dependent the source of income include transportation, agriculture, fishing and small businesses. Rivers and wetlands are also closely connected to the city's drainage system and its eligibility to manage rainwater.

When rivers are narrowed by encouragement, natural water flow is blocked. When canals and waterways are filled, extra rainwater has fewer routes through which it can drain. Simultaneously, people living near contaminated rivers face growing environmental risks. Protecting rivers, therefore, is not a luxury for environmentalists. It is an important part of public health, flood and waterlogging management, source of income and long-term urban planning.

 

Why has the situation not changed after all these years?

This maybe is the main part of the problems lies. The issue is not necessarily a lack of initiatives to protect Dhaka's rivers. Rather, it is whether those initiatives are adequately organized, consistent and responsible. On one hand contamination control drives are being conducted. On the other, new source of pollution to appear. River land is being recovered but encroach come back in some areas. Projects are being undertaken to restore rivers. On the other hand, untreated sewage continues to flow into them. 

 

in August 2026, the government announced plans develop a coordinated strategy to control contamination in the Buriganga and Turag. The government has also emphasised the need for stronger and more organized action against river pollution.

 

Is a solution possible? 

The answer would be yes but the solution cannot be limited to conducting eviction drives along riverbanks.

First, every source of direct garbage discharge into the rivers must be identified and permanently shut down immediately.

Second, monitoring industrial ETPs cannot stop at verifying whether a treatment plan has been installed. Authorities must make sure that the plants are actually operating on a regular basis and that their performance is being monitored.

Third, Dhaka's waste water management system need fundamental reform. If untreated sewage continues to flow into the rivers, no river cleaning campaign can succeed in the long run.

Fourth, river border and eviction of illegal structures should not be treated as one time campaigns. They need to be placed under a permanent system.

Fifth, the accountabilities of different government agencies must be clearly identified. The public should know which agency is responsible for a particular pollution source and how long it has to take action.

The crisis facing Dhaka's river has developed over decades. It is not possible to solve overnight. But the longer the problem continues, the more expensive and difficult the solution becomes.

 

Ab illegal structure on a riverbank may visible to be a small problem. A single drain discharging garbage into a river may seem like an isolated failure of urban management. But thousands of such failures, accumulating over time can, can push me an entire river towards environmental collapse. Therefore, saving Dhaka's rivers need more than another project announcement.

 

It requires identifying who is contaminating the rivers, clearly identifying who is accountable, ensuring responsibility when agencies fail to act and regularly measuring whether the health of the river is actually improving. Because a river is more than a flow of water. It's a part of a city's environmental memory, economy and future.  If Dhaka fails to save its rivers now, there may come a day when there are still river restoration projects, boundary maps and court orders- but no river left worth saving.