Dear Editor,
PREVIOUSLY, I wrote on the concerted effort to downplay the reality of OFAC Magnitsky Sanctions. A curious press release from the WIN campaign on Sunday further demonstrates this.
The release, titled: “WIN Condemns Unjust Closure of Candidates’ Bank Accounts; OFAC Clarification Confirms Action Was Unjustified” entails an exchange between the OFAC Compliance Hotline and an entity purportedly representing WIN leader, Magnitsky sanctioned- Azruddin Mohamed.

This correspondence with the OFAC compliance hotline was shared by one of the WIN spokespersons, hoping to lend credence to the narrative that our commercial banks are engaging in political persecution.

It would be remiss of me to overlook the fact that said spokesperson, Ms. Hana Mohamed, is neither on the general nor regional candidates list for the WIN party. One can only wonder why. Why has she, the most visible Mohamed sibling on the WIN campaign trail, opted not to give up her dual citizenship and appear alongside her brother on a National Candidates list?
Let’s first point out the deliberate wording in the original message. The intentionally vague wording seeks to portray ordinary friends and associates of Mohamed as being sanctioned and/or having bank accounts closed. Not “association” as defined under the OFAC guidelines.

And most certainly not politically exposed persons operating as national candidates for an OFAC sanctioned candidate seeking to occupy the executive branch of government. This is intentionally vague wording hoping to elicit an ambiguous response.

Second, the very heading in the compliance hotline’s response reads: “Query Number OFAC-2025-007352 and OFAC-2025-007367” dated August 12, 2025.
Of note, is that the lone query published from this correspondence was “Query number: OFAC-2025-007352,” dated July 29, 2025 at 08:43 AM. If revelation was the intent, why publish only a fragment of this exchange? What was hidden in the other query?

Indeed, OFAC is saying that the U.S. financial institutions would not violate sanctions for not maintaining accounts with associates of a sanctioned individual.
However, the release firmly stated that American financial institutions would be “prohibited from engaging in such transactions if the sanctioned individual has an interest in the account or transactions”.

Additionally, the hotline’s response clearly states that “non-U.S. persons could also face sanctions risk for certain activities involving sanctioned persons, such as providing material support to them.”

WIN’s assertion that candidates’ accounts closure is impacting the campaign, is the WIN team literally confessing on themselves: that the candidates’ bank accounts were being utilised for the elections campaign of the Magnitsky- sanctioned Mohamed. Either this disclosure was deliberate self-incrimination or reflective of a fundamentally non-existent grasp of political calculus altogether.

Finally, Kaieteur News reported Azruddin Mohamed on July 26 telling the media that his lawyers in the US are “presently working with OFAC” to have him “delisted”. The OFAC compliance hotline exists for the general public to seek guidance on compliance with sanctions.
If Mohamed’s lawyers are indeed working with OFAC, as he claims, then why contact an OFAC compliance hotline? Couldn’t this information have been presented directly to their OFAC-licensed lawyer?

Has OFAC halted working with Mohamed directly on lifting the sanctions? If so, why? This leads me to finally question whether the intent behind this press release was clarity or empty political theatre?

Once more, this banal campaign of prevarication continues to collapse upon the very weight of OFAC’s language. Nevertheless, it is crucial for WIN to address these glaring gaps on the public record.

The public, and particularly, the electorate deserves truth over theatre. Hopefully, these answers come very soon, very shortly.
Yours faithfully,
Nikhil Sankar