E-Financial
ICIJ Fingers Western Union, MoneyGram as Conduits to Launder Criminal Cash

International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) has uncovered how companies like Western Union and MoneyGram play a hidden role in laundering cash from around the globe.

In May, the International Criminal Court ruled that Jean-Pierre Bemba Gombo, former vice president of the Democratic Republic of Congo, will not be compensated for spending more than a decade in detention on war crimes and other charges mostly overturned on appeal.
He will not be reunited with his planes, villas and river cruiser, nor will he receive the $77 million he asked for in compensation.
After 12 years and more than 100 witnesses, history now records just one judgment of guilt: that Bemba bribed witnesses using Western Union and MoneyGram International, the world’s largest money transmitters.
Bemba and his allies, the court found, offered soldiers and civilians $100 or more — and in some cases relocation to Europe — to lie in Bemba’s trial.
In 2002 and 2003, Bemba commanded 1,500 Congolese soldiers who intervened in a conflict in the neighboring Central African Republic.
His forces killed civilians and raped women and girls as young as 10, victims and other witnesses later claimed.
The ICC found Bemba guilty of war crimes, crimes against humanity and witness tampering in 2016. The first two charges were overturned on appeal in 2018.
The bribery conviction held up.
A leak of U.S. government banking records reveals new details about the alleged payoffs — and the role Western Union played in them.
Bemba and four aides, also convicted of bribing witnesses, sent more than $429,000 through Western Union from 2005 to 2015, according to a suspicious activity report submitted by Western Union to the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, a division of the U.S. Treasury Department. It is unclear how much of this money was used for bribes.
The suspicious activity report cites hundreds of recipients in 23 countries and names three people who have not been identified before, including one of Bemba’s key allies, Narcisse Arido, who received nearly $30,000 through Western Union, according to the report.
The Western Union report is also notable for its timing.
Financial institutions are required to regularly examine transactions and accounts for signs of money laundering and other types of financial crime.
Western Union didn’t file the suspicious activity report, or SAR, describing the payments until 2015 or later — at least seven years after Bemba’s arrest.
The undated Western Union document is one of more than 2,600 records obtained by BuzzFeed News and shared with the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists as part of the FinCEN Files investigation.
The reporting team found that banks, money transmitters like Western Union and other financial institutions have moved vast amounts of money for people accused of corruption and other crimes, often long after allegations were first made public
Bemba’s money flows are among suspicious transfers worth at least $150 million that went through Western Union and MoneyGram between 2005 and 2017, according to an ICIJ analysis of transactions from the FinCEN Files.
The two companies filed or were cited by other financial institutions in 236 suspicious activity reports, according to ICIJ’s analysis. Suspicious activity reports reflect the views of banking professionals and are not themselves evidence of criminality.
Payments through money transmitters, while often small, are central to modern crime. The FBI counts such payments as the third most common method to launder money, after bank transactions and payments in hard cash.
Recent cases in which money transmitters allegedly played a central role include several involving opioid trafficking rings and the crime rampage of a violent Eurasian mobster.
“Certain money transfer companies have repeatedly demonstrated a readiness to provide essential support to criminals and terrorists,” said David Pressman, an attorney suing Western Union, MoneyGram and two Russian banks on behalf of families of victims killed by Ukrainian separatists who shot down Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 in 2014.
“The business model is predicated on moving cash fast, at a global scale, even when it means moving cash to those intent on carrying out murderous acts.”
Big guys and little guys
The amount of money that Western Union, MoneyGram and other money transmitters send worldwide in a year exceeds the gross domestic product of Switzerland or Saudi Arabia. More than $689 billion was sent in 2018, the last year for which figures are available.
While remittances — especially transfers to relatives — are a crucial source of income for many people, especially in poorer countries, crime agencies say drug and human traffickers, fraudsters and arms smugglers push money around the world through the same companies.
The Financial Action Task Force, an international network of government anti-money-laundering agencies, found that many criminals avoid banks because they see money transmitters “as offering less risk of detection.”
Money transmitters are hard to monitor; there are 23,968 companies in the United States alone that fall under the technical term “money service business.” They are based at post offices, banks, liquor stores, Walmarts and gas stations. They range from behemoths like Western Union to a three-person outfit in Pago Pago, American Samoa.
Like banks, American money transmitters must report suspicious activities to FinCEN, the U.S. agency that oversees the fight against financial crime. Yet officials acknowledge that they catch little of the illicit money that passes through money transmitters.
Criminal exploitation of money transmitters is one of the “most significant vulnerabilities” in the United States, according to the Treasury Department’s 2020 report on the national strategy to counter illicit finance. There are simply not enough auditors to monitor the industry, the strategy paper said.
In the vast money transmission sector, the FBI calls MoneyGram and Western Union the “Big Guys.”
The big guys have a big rap sheet.
In 2012, the U.S. Justice Department agreed not to prosecute Dallas-based MoneyGram, the world’s second-largest money transmitter, after its agents conspired with fraudsters to trick victims into sending money with false promises of lottery winnings and bargains.
“MoneyGram Agents knowingly entered false addresses, telephone numbers, and personal identification” and took fees for processing the frauds, the company admitted in a statement of facts filed in federal court.
To escape prosecution, MoneyGram agreed to create a system to spot and stop potential frauds, tie executive bonuses to compliance with the law and require every MoneyGram office worldwide to follow U.S. anti-money-laundering rules, among other conditions.
MoneyGram broke the agreement when its new anti-fraud system failed to prevent a substantial number of criminal transactions, according to the Justice Department. MoneyGram paid a $125 million penalty.
Citing MoneyGram’s “environment of fraud,” the Justice Department in 2014 took the unusual step of suing a senior executive. It accused the company’s chief compliance officer, Thomas Haider, of allowing criminals to use MoneyGram “to defraud innocent consumers and then launder the proceeds.” Haider settled and paid $250,000.
Western Union, headquartered in Colorado, operates in more than half a million locations worldwide, compared with MoneyGram’s more than 350,000 outlets.
In 2010, the company agreed to upgrade its anti-money-laundering systems and paid $94 million to settle charges that drug, human and weapons smugglers misused the company to move vast sums of money across the U.S.-Mexico border.
Seven years later, Western Union agreed to pay $586 million after a U.S. investigation found that the company enabled scammers to defraud hundreds of thousands of Americans who paid to claim prizes or job offers that didn’t exist. “Various Western Union agents were complicit in these fraud schemes, often processing the fraud payments in return for a cut of the fraud proceeds,” the Justice Department said in a news release.
A year later, New York state fined the company $60 million for, among other things, waving through cash for criminals in China. And in 2019, French officials fined the company for failing to alert regulators to suspicious customers in Afghanistan, Iran and Turkey.
Western Union told ICIJ that it would respond to questions. It never did; the company’s communications chief, Claire Treacy, did not return subsequent emails or phone calls.
MoneyGram proposed a phone conversation with ICIJ to “potentially help” with research. MoneyGram canceled the call and sent a written response in which the company declared that it had found “several statements to be completely baseless.” The company did not explain what it considered “baseless.”
“MoneyGram takes financial crime very seriously and does not tolerate unethical or illegal conduct,” the company said in a statement. MoneyGram “has invested tens of millions of dollars in our state-of-the-art compliance program” and “has among the lowest fraud rates in the industry,” it said.
‘Exploitation’
Jean-Pierre Bemba’s detention in 2008 made global headlines after police in Brussels arrested him and the ICC asked African and European capitals to seize villas, cars, bank accounts and a Boeing 727-100.
The ICC, which was created to bring the world’s worst war criminals to justice, whisked Bemba to The Hague, where his trial opened in November 2010. He was charged with witness tampering three years later.
“Whiskey” was Bemba’s code name for Western Union and “Mike” for MoneyGram, according to wiretaps obtained by ICC prosecutors. “Never, never, never” should payments pass through a bank account, Bemba told one aide.
Bemba conspired with aides – all of whom were also convicted, including his defense lawyer and a member of the DRC parliament – to coach witnesses to pretend that they were soldiers and testify in Bemba’s favor.
During his trial, prosecutors alleged that Narcisse Arido, an expert witness for Bemba’s defense, lured Central African witnesses with the hope of asylum in Europe and “exploited the precarious personal situations of these witnesses, selling them the illusion that by testifying falsely for Bemba they would have a better future.”
Sometime after Oct. 12, 2015, Western Union filed a suspicious activity report to FinCEN saying an employee had “identified” news about Bemba on the ICC’s website. Western Union reported almost 2,000 transfers from 2005 to Oct. 12, 2015, that involved Bemba and accomplices.
Arido, for example, received $28,732 from 30 Western Union branches in seven countries, according to the suspicious activity report. The ICC had issued a warrant for Arido’s arrest at least a year and 10 months before Western Union submitted its report to FinCEN.
The Western Union report indicates that Arido sent payments to three people in Cameroon and France: Arlette Josiane Tongui Bengue, Louis Kotys and Sylvie Ngo Manding. The average transaction was worth less than $300. It is unclear whether the payments were part of the bribery scheme.
Kotys and Ngo Manding could not be reached. Tongui Bengue, who now lives in Quebec, refused to answer questions when contacted.
You don’t need Western Union or banks to “go around and threaten a witness with a monkey wrench,” said Robert Cryer, a law professor at the University of Birmingham in England. “But money is central to other forms of witness intimidation.”
In a WhatsApp call with ICIJ, Bemba denied bribing witnesses. “No, that is absolutely false,” Bemba said. “I was not in a position to do it.” He has appealed the rejection of his compensation request.
From drug dealers to the godfather
From bustling metropolises like Tokyo to the world’s smallest capital city, Ngerulmud in Palau, Western Union’s black and yellow logo or MoneyGram’s white arrow can be found almost everywhere. For a fee, the companies offer an easy way to wire money to a loved one in a panic or to seal a business deal on a deadline. They play an essential role in the lives of tens of millions of people who use their services, from vice presidents to journalists.
While a bank-to-bank transfer can take days, both companies claim to make cash available “within minutes.”
There’s no stopping all illicit money transfers, especially those involving small dollar amounts and people not known to law enforcement.
But financial institutions are supposed to be on the watch for people like Anthony Gomes and his cronies.
Gomes and others helped introduce the potent opioid fentanyl to the U.S., routing the drug from Chinese laboratories to American dealers and users through the postal system. More than 36,000 Americans died last year from overdoses of fentanyl and similar synthetic drugs.
His trafficking ring hid transactions through offshore accounts and wired money through Western Union, according to court documents.
The records show that he and others sent $17,600 to China in one month alone via the money remitter.
“I have the guy on the way to wu [Western Union] now give me a few,” Gomes emailed another dealer, according to court records. “Ok good stuff,” the fentanyl dealer replied. “New batch is even stronger than [the] last.”
At least four Americans, including 19-year-old Daniel Latjerman in North Dakota, were killed by fentanyl imported by Gomes’ ring, prosecutors said. Gomes pleaded guilty in 2018 to conspiracy charges related to drug trafficking and money laundering.
Gomes and eight others appear in a spreadsheet included with a suspicious activity report in connection with more than $403,000 in payments made via MoneyGram from 2012 to 2017. Also named in MoneyGram’s undated report was Darius Ghahary, a northern New Jersey man charged in 2014 with manslaughter after Latjerman died. Ghahary died in custody. It is unclear why MoneyGram filed the report when it did.
MoneyGram helped move money for Ghahary despite his well-publicized conviction for internet fraud more than a decade earlier.
Money transmitters are one of “two key payment systems which support illicit procurement of opioids,” the assistant director of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement told Congress in 2018. Just a few months earlier, an undercover agent of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration told a federal court that he received fentanyl in a box marked “peanuts” after wiring $80 to China via MoneyGram.
Last year, the Treasury Department alerted financial institutions to the potential abuse of money transmitters in fentanyl and synthetic opioid trafficking.
The FinCEN Files show that one of America’s most dangerous Eurasian mafia dons built his empire with help from money transmitters.
In 2018, Razhden Shulaya, a Brooklyn tow-truck-leasing company manager, was convicted in New York of masterminding “a vast and violent criminal enterprise” involving gambling, credit card fraud, contraband cigarettes and stolen chocolates. Authorities said he also had plans to defraud casinos with rigged slot machines.
Shulaya was a “thief-in-law” the Russian equivalent of a godfather, U.S. prosecutors said. “He used his power to steal, defraud, extort and disfigure.” They cited occasions when Shulaya pistol-whipped his nephew and battered the face of a lieutenant after a perceived insult. Members of his gang beat enemies with pool cues. Others, to curry favor, gave Shulaya a Mercedes and a crossbow as gifts.
Shulaya is serving a 45-year prison sentence in West Virginia. He has appealed his conviction.
Two years before Shulaya’s conviction, FinCEN reported that an “associate” named George Meskhishvili sent $12,600 from Western Union locations in New York City to eight people, including Shulaya.
The agency’s report called Meskhishvili one of the possible “central facilitators” in the financial networks of Eurasian crime gangs. Meskhishvili has not been criminally charged.
FinCEN said the transactions were suspicious because many amounts were below the $10,000 threshold that banks must report in currency transactions, or were sent on the same or consecutive days.
In May 2014, Meskhishvili wired $1,200 from Brooklyn to Shulaya at the Bellagio hotel and casino in Las Vegas weeks before the U.S. launched its investigation. By the time Western Union approved Meskhishvili’s payment to Shulaya, the thief-in-law had previously been arrested in Europe during a high-profile anti-mafia crackdown. Shulaya was also wanted in Russia on unspecified charges, according to U.S. prosecutors.
ICIJ was unable to reach Meskhishvili for comment through social media or his last listed address in Brooklyn.
Asked five times why it approved payments to Shulaya, Western Union never replied.
E-Financial
Adedeji, NRS Boss says Technology is Crucial to Tax Reform’s Success

Zacch Adedeji, the Executive Chairman of the Nigerian Revenue Service (NRS), has described technology as a crucial factor in the implementation of the new tax laws.

Adedeji stated this while delivering the maiden convocation lecture of the Federal Polytechnic, Ayede, Oyo state.
In a statement by his Technical Assistant on Print Media, Sikiru Akinola, Adedeji listed some of the most fundamental challenges confronting taxation to include infrastructure, skills, trust and resistance.
In the lecture titled, ‘The Role of Technology in Implementing Nigeria’s New Tax Laws: Challenges, Prospects, and Implications for National Development,’ the NRS chairman said each of the challenges would be addressed with the imminent upgrading of the country’s tax system for a digital environment.
He said: “Nigeria has recently enacted a new set of tax laws, representing the most significant restructuring of our nation’s fiscal legislation in 50 years. While public conversation often frames these changes as legal reforms, and that is true, it is also an incomplete picture.
“These laws are not merely changing rates, definitions, or administrative powers. They are quietly redefining how authority operates within the tax system. This is a complete structural overhaul, signalling the end of tax collection as a manual task and the beginning of tax intelligence.
“If you read the new laws carefully, you will notice a subtle but profound assumption woven throughout their fabric. They presuppose the existence of reliable taxpayer identification, integrated data across institutions, traceable transactions, automated processes, and scalable enforcement.
“In other words, these laws are built for a digital environment. They cannot function properly in a manual, fragmented, paper-based system. The implication is clear: without technology, the laws remain aspirational. With technology, they become operational.
“This transition is central to the mandate of the Nigeria Revenue Service as we implement this new legal framework. Historically, tax administration relied heavily on human discretion over who is registered, who is assessed, who is audited and who is penalised.”
The Speaker of the House of Representatives, Tajudeen Abass, encouraged the graduating students to be good ambassadors of the institution.
Represented by AbdulFatai Buhari, the senator representing Oyo North, Abass charged the youths not to relent in their bid to acquire more knowledge.
He also commended the tax boss for leading the change in tax administration in the country.
E-Financial
Billions in Nigeria’s Reserves, But Where is the Growth?

By Blaise Udunze
The moment the Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Olayemi Cardoso, recently announced that Nigeria’s foreign reserves had inched to $49 billion as of February 5, 2026, the news was received with understandable enthusiasm.

He described the development as “a very important statistic” when speaking at the 2nd National Economic Council (NEC) Conference in Abuja, while noting a 4.93 per cent increase and emphasising that Nigeria had moved from being a net seller to a net buyer of foreign exchange. He cited improved remittance inflows, a narrowing gap between official and parallel market exchange rates, and greater confidence in the naira as evidence that reforms were working.
On the surface, the numbers are reassuring. The premium between official and parallel market rates has reportedly fallen to under 2 percent. Remittances have improved following deliberate engagement with the diaspora. Nigerians can increasingly rely on naira cards for international transactions. It can be said that investors are earning positive real returns, banks are recapitalising, equity markets are recovering, and macroeconomic indicators such as GDP growth of 3.98 per cent, a current account surplus of $3.42 billion in the third quarter of 2025, and a reported moderation in inflation to 15.15 percent are presented as signs of stabilisation.
So far, beyond the celebratory headlines lies a deeper and more consequential question, in the form of, what does the fixation on foreign reserves really tell us about the underlying strength of the Nigerian economy?
History and economic logic suggest that when a central bank repeatedly elevates foreign reserves as a central achievement, it often signals that the true engines of growth are either weak or underdeveloped. Strong reserves are not built through declarations, press conferences, or defensive monetary manoeuvres. They are built through systems that generate value, exports, productivity, and trust. Countries with durable reserve positions did not chase reserves; they built economies that produced them naturally.
This distinction matters greatly for Nigeria.
Foreign reserves are important, but they are not a development strategy. They are a buffer, not a foundation. They are an outcome of economic vitality, not a substitute for it. When reserves become the centrepiece of economic storytelling, there is a risk that policymakers mistake statistical comfort for structural strength.
Even Nigeria’s celebrated $49 billion reserve figure requires closer scrutiny, which appears to be more of sexing up the figures. Gross reserves make headlines, but net usable reserves are what protect a currency in moments of stress. A significant portion of reported reserves is often tied up in swaps, forward commitments, and external obligations. When these are stripped out, the net buffer available to defend the naira is far smaller than the headline figure suggests. The gap between gross and net reserves is too large to justify unqualified confidence about currency stability, especially in an economy that remains import-dependent and structurally fragile.
The danger of over-fixating on reserves is not unique to Nigeria, but it is particularly acute here because of the economy’s narrow production base, which subliminally calls for sexing up the figures. Despite decision-makers prematurely applauding the reserves’ growth, the apex bank must rethink its approach. The reserves are not generated through production-based or stronger export means but rather largely from borrowing (sales of Eurobonds) or through government loans, which come in as dollars to the CBN that temporarily boost dollar inflows. This points to the fact that Nigeria still exports little beyond crude oil, imports most manufactured goods, and relies heavily on volatile capital inflows. In such a context, reserves require constant defence rather than organic replenishment. Tight monetary policy, FX restrictions, and moral persuasion may buy time, but they do not solve the underlying problem of insufficient foreign exchange generation.
By contrast, countries with strong reserve positions followed a very different path. Unlike Nigeria, countries like Saudi Arabia, with foreign reserves of about $410 billion, paired subsidy reforms with visible reinvestment in infrastructure, social welfare, and alternative energy systems. Indonesia, with reserves of roughly $153 billion, combined fiscal reforms with expanded social assistance and a shift toward targeted household support, ensuring that reform pain was offset by tangible benefits. Reserves are mainly meant to grow from productive economic activities like Singapore, whose reserves stood at approximately $397 billion at the end of 2025, as it built its position through decades of disciplined industrial policy, export competitiveness, domestic savings, and institutional credibility. In all these cases, reserves were not the objective; they were the by-product of deliberate economic architecture.
In most successful developmental states, public expenditure plays a catalytic role in growth. Unlike Nigeria’s, most countries’ expenditures It crowds in private investment, expand infrastructure, lower transaction costs, and build productive capacity. Over time, this deepens domestic capital formation, drives industrial productivity, supports export diversification, and strengthens external balances. Nigeria’s recent experience, however, appears to diverge from this model.
Rather than deploying fiscal policy aggressively to stimulate productive capacity, government financing has increasingly leaned on the domestic capital market. While this approach has attracted foreign capital inflows, much of this capital has been short-term portfolio investment into treasury bills, government bonds, and money market instruments. A fact that is well established is that these inflows can temporarily stabilise liquidity and support the exchange rate, but their multiplier effects on the real economy are minimal. In the absence of strong productive investment for a country like Nigeria, the giant of Africa, this pattern resembles constructing a skyscraper on weak foundations, which is impressive in appearance, but structurally fragile.
This fragility is evident in the broader economy. Especially this kind of growth is associated with Nigeria in 2025, which portrays a country that is increasingly survival-led rather than productivity-driven. The underlying challenge today is that households, small businesses and even industrial firms are left with no option but to adapt to rising costs and shrinking real incomes by expanding low-productivity activities. Industrial depth remains shallow. Domestic capital accumulation is weak. Export capability outside oil is limited. Labour productivity continues to lag. These are not the conditions under which reserves become self-sustaining.
This is why the central bank’s strategic focus must extend far beyond reserve accumulation. If the CBN genuinely seeks to grow the economy and build reserves sustainably, it must prioritise the mechanisms that generate foreign exchange organically. The most important of these is productive credit expansion. Central banks around the world are expected to shape economies not only through interest rates but through the direction of credit. Prolonged monetary tightness may suppress inflation at the margins, but it also suppresses investment, output, and employment, as is the case in Nigeria. Contrary to Nigeria’s lived experience, countries that successfully built reserves deliberately channeled affordable, long-term credit to manufacturing, agro-processing, and export-oriented sectors, but the same cannot be said of Nigeria. Nigeria cannot tighten its way into prosperity.
Closely linked to this is the need for a serious export-led industrial strategy. Nigeria’s trade challenge is often framed as an import problem, but it is fundamentally an export deficiency. Banning imports or rationing foreign exchange does not create competitiveness. Export growth does. Sustainable reserves come from selling more to the world than one buys, particularly in manufactured goods and tradable services. Oil exports may still matter, but they are volatile and finite. Value-added exports are repeatable, scalable, and employment-intensive.
Exchange rate stability, too, must be approached through supply rather than fear. Currency pressure reflects insufficient FX supply more than excessive demand. Strengthening real economic fundamentals, which calls for expanding non-oil exports, formalising remittance channels, and attracting long-term productive capital, will do more to stabilise the naira than administrative controls mixed with sexing up figures. Predictability matters, and for this reason, investors may tolerate risk, but they may be forced to withdraw when policies are inconsistent.
Infrastructure financing is another critical missing link. No economy exports competitively without reliable power, efficient transport, and functional logistics. While infrastructure is often treated as a purely fiscal responsibility, central banks in many emerging economies have played catalytic roles in financing industrial infrastructure. Supporting industrial parks, logistics hubs, processing zones, and energy projects would address one of the root causes of Nigeria’s weak export performance and fragile reserves.
Equally important is the mobilisation of domestic savings. Strong reserves are easier to build when a country funds its development internally. One of its domestic savings that has been lying fallow is that Nigeria’s pension and insurance funds remain under-deployed in productive sectors. For a country that is truly angling for growth and with the right regulatory frameworks, these long-term pools of capital can support infrastructure, manufacturing, and export industries, reducing dependence on volatile foreign inflows.
Inflation control must also be re-examined. This is one grey area with Nigeria’s system as its inflation is largely cost-driven, fueled by energy costs, logistics bottlenecks, FX shortages and insecurity. It must be understood that addressing it solely through interest rate hikes risks shrinking output in terms of economic production and growth while prices remain elevated, as is the case today. The policy-makers in Nigeria must understand that supply-side interventions that reduce production costs and stabilise input availability are more likely to deliver durable price stability and stronger reserves than monetary tightening, especially in the case of raising interest rates alone.
The CBN has projected that GDP growth could reach 4.49 percent, inflation could moderate to 12.9 percent, and reserves could exceed $50 billion. These projections are presented as evidence of consolidation. Yet many economists caution that macroeconomic stability, while necessary, is not synonymous with sustainable growth. Even if the provided official statistics may suggest that the economy is improving, the reality is that the majority of the populace are not experiencing the benefits, as is the case in Nigeria, where the unemployment rate is high, wages aren’t keeping up with costs and many households are barely making ends meet.
To further drive the point, Gbenga Olawepo-Hashim has argued that the true measure of economic performance is not headline figures but the living conditions of citizens. This is to say that economic growth is meaningless if it doesn’t create jobs, purchasing power, and opportunity, cannot sustain political or social stability, nor can foreign reserves grow sustainably.
Going forward, it is advisable that the foreign reserves, therefore, should be read for what they are, as a reflection of deeper economic health. When production expands, exports diversify, infrastructure improves, capital deepens, and trust is restored, reserves grow quietly and sustainably. When these foundations are weak, reserves require constant defense and loud celebration.
Today, Nigeria is at a critical point where it must make a major decision, either the choice is between managing reserves endlessly or building an economy that earns them effortlessly. The former offers headlines and is unsustainable. The latter offers prosperity, and it is sustainable in the long term.
Blaise, a journalist and PR professional, writes from Lagos and can be reached via: [email protected]
E-Financial
UBA Revamps Agency, Unveils Enhanced Value on RedPay Terminals

United Bank for Africa (UBA) Plc has launched a new Aggregator Sales Structure for its RedPay POS and Agency Banking Network, as part of efforts targeted towards the advancement of its mission to deepen relationship with its network and most importantly, expand financial inclusion across Nigeria.

Oliver Alawuba. Group Managing Director/CEO, UBA
The newly launched multi benefit structure which offers partners a comprehensive value proposition, was unveiled at the inaugural UBA Aggregator Engagement Session, held at the Bank’s Head Office in Lagos on Tuesday.
The session themed, “POS-itive Impact: Connecting Agents, Merchants, and Customers,” served as a collaborative platform to align strategies for scaling the UBAMONI Agency Banking ecosystem and bringing together key industry aggregators, Point-of-Sale (POS) partners, and network managers,
Emmanuel Lamptey, executive director Designate, Digital Banking, who spoke at the event, emphasised the critical role partnerships play in achieving national financial inclusion objectives.
“Today’s session marks a pivotal step in our collective journey to democratise financial access in Nigeria. By bringing together our valued aggregators and partners, we are strengthening the ecosystem that connects UBA directly to communities and ensuring that reliable financial services is within everyone’s reach,” he stated.
Emphasising the need for partnerships, Shamsideen Fashola, head, Digital Banking, UBA, who presented the keynote address, outlined the strategic imperative behind the new structure.
“Our aggregators are fundamental to realising our ambition of building Africa’s most impactful digital collections network. This structured framework is designed to be scalable, transparent, and mutually rewarding, empowering our partners with the technology and support needed to drive agent productivity as well as serve under-served communities effectively,” Fashola noted.
The platform delivers comprehensive value to agents and aggregators alike, featuring instant settlement, reliable transaction processing, real-time dashboard reporting, and a full suite of services including dispute and terminal management, analytics, card withdrawals, bill payments, and pay-with-transfer.
For aggregators specifically, the model provides a structured opportunity to on board and manage agents within UBA’s network…
access attractive incentives and commissions, as well as leverage a dedicated Aggregator Admin Portal for real-time visibility into agent performance and transactions
Adetunji Iyiola, head, Agency Banking, UBA, who noted the customer-centric focus of the initiative, emphasized that the structure fundamentally strengthens the collaboration between UBA, merchants, and agent
“This rollout is about creating superior value for every stakeholder, and enabling better service delivery to customers while ensuring our partners have the tools and incentives to thrive. It reinforces our promise to deliver essential banking services exactly where they are needed most”. he said.
With the introduction of the aggregator framework, UBA further cements its leadership in pioneering innovative digital financial solutions that bridge the inclusion gap and drive economic empowerment across the African continent.
United Bank for Africa is one of the largest employers in the financial sector on the African continent, with 25,000 employees group-wide and serving over 45 million customers globally.
Operating in twenty African countries, the United Kingdom, the United States of America, France and the United Arab Emirates, UBA provides retail, commercial and institutional banking services, leading financial inclusion and implementing cutting-edge technology.
Telecom2 days agoInside Nigeria’s Telecom Exploitation Crisis Draining Household Budgets
News2 days agoNITDA Supports CAC AI Driven Transformation
Telecom2 days agoSophos Expands AI Capabilities with Arco Cyber Acquisition
News2 days agoCAC Pushes Single National Register to Curb Corruption Loopholes
News2 days agoU.S. Slams Nigerians: Overstays Jeopardize All Visas
News2 days agoNAFDAC Seizes N3Bn Fake Malaria Drugs, Cosmetics in Lagos Raid
E-Business2 days agoKaspersky Gives Advice on How to Make AI for Children Safer @ Safer Internet Day
General News3 days agoPalmPay Celebrates Valentine with #LoveWithPalmPay Campaign

















