Dear Editor,
AS day turns into night, the WIN campaign has emerged once more in this latest round of contortions and evasion.
In my letter carried Tuesday, I highlighted several glaring admissions in their press release involving correspondence with OFAC’s no-reply email compliance hotline. Whether the intent was self-incrimination or just another flimsy attempt at political spectacle, the release carried several revelations:
1. That Mohamed is no longer, or likely never was, “working directly” with OFAC to be “delisted”. If this was the case, then there was no need to write the OFAC compliance hotline. Further, is the lawyer in the correspondence with the hotline the same unnamed American lawyer working to have him “delisted”? I am making the assumption that the American lawyer in question is an OFAC- licensed lawyer.
2. That WIN candidates’ bank accounts were being used to finance Mohamed’s campaign. This was revealed in their message to OFAC’s hotline stating that “the banking restrictions resulting from these actions are impacting WIN’s ability to take part in the September 1, 2025, general elections of Guyana.” I still question whether WIN intended to shoot themselves in the foot through this disclosure, or whether this was just another misstep in a fundamentally unserious campaign.
3. OFAC, through their compliance hotline stressed to WIN that material or non-material exchange of goods or services constitutes a sanctionable offence. Now, while this was easily understood from the original OFAC sanction release from 2024, now OFAC has stressed it directly to WIN. No room for contortion. No space for obfuscation. OFAC has made it clear once more, this time to WIN’s face.
Unsurprisingly, WIN’s response has been to piggyback upon the Carter Centre’s pre-election report and once more, staying six feet apart from addressing these noticeable lacunas. This is woefully predictable. Now, WIN has written the UN and the European Union citing “discrimination” by the bank account closure.
This latest contortion was likely reliant upon the Carter Centre’s concern over whether there was “over compliance” from the local banks – as stated in their preelection report. The centre expressed concerns over whether the banks closed the accounts without proof of transaction with the Magnitsky sanctioned Mohamed.
This is a fair comment. Whatever concerns the Carter Centre had about “over compliance” – they would’ve been answered by WIN’s own press release disclosing that the candidates’ accounts were being used for the campaign.
Yet, with each subsequent outburst, this unfortunate pattern of evading questions continues to mirror the apparent raison dêtre for this entire campaign: averting extradition.
Aluta continua!
Yours faithfully,
Nikhil Sankar