The paperwork between the desks.
Registering a business in Bangladesh meant carrying the same records from one government office to the next. Our team designed DigiDesk, a blockchain system that would let those offices share one record and check each other’s approvals. I led its technical architecture.
DigiDeskE-governance competition design2020–2021
- Role
- I designed the system’s technical architecture. Two partners led the business case and the whitepaper.
- Recognition
- E-Governance category champion at the Bangladesh Blockchain Olympiad 2020 and the International Blockchain Olympiad 2021, won as a team.
The applicant carried the paperwork
The process we mapped moved between company registration, tax administration, local licensing and banking. Information travelled with the applicant, while decisions lived in separate organisations. A later request for credit could mean another round of checking the same business records.
The process we examined
- RegistrationSubmit company details
- TaxSupply supporting records
- LicensingTrack a separate approval
A lender may then need to check the same records.
The experience DigiDesk proposed
Authorities share information and retain their decision-making powers.
Simplified concept; requirements vary by service.
Sharing approvals across institutions
I defined how information would move between participants and who could access it. The proposal used a permissioned Hyperledger Fabric network to preserve a history of authorised updates. A shared workflow would coordinate the process, while each institution remained responsible for its own approvals.
OriginWho issued it?+
Reviewers need an issuer they can check. Recording an approval does not prove the original evidence was true.
StatusIs it still current?+
A certificate may be corrected, expire or be revoked. The latest valid status matters alongside its history.
AccessWho may see it?+
Permission to check an approval need not include access to its supporting documents.
Conceptual illustration of record verification.
Would I still use a ledger?
A ledger can preserve an incorrect decision just as effectively as a correct one. Institutions still need to check what they record and have a way to correct mistakes.
Looking at the design today, I would first test whether the participating organisations need to maintain that history independently. Where a shared operator is acceptable, a conventional database with signed records and an audit trail is a simpler option to evaluate.