Burundi’s anti-corruption watchdog OLUCOME has raised questions over an alleged transfer of between $100,000 and $500,000 from the National Post Office to the United States, saying the transaction reportedly proceeded after the central bank cancelled an earlier payment order.
Gabriel Rufyiri, president of the Observatory for the Fight Against Corruption and Economic Embezzlement (OLUCOME), raised the issue at a news conference on Oct. 8, during a press conference in Bujumbura.
Rufyiri said the Bank of the Republic of Burundi (BRB) had cancelled an initial transfer order, but a second order was subsequently issued, reportedly with a change in the destination of the funds.
The circumstances surrounding the alleged transaction raise questions about how the second payment was authorised, who approved it and what controls were in place to prevent a transfer after the initial order had been cancelled.
OLUCOME called for the arrest and prosecution of those found responsible. Rufyiri also questioned why only one person had reportedly been detained in connection with the case, according to the report.
The amount transferred, the identity of the recipient, the purpose of the payment and whether the funds have been recovered remain unclear from the information publicly reported.
Separate from earlier BRB funds loss
The allegations come amid continued scrutiny of a separate case involving the BRB, which has reported the loss of more than €800,000 in a transaction linked to fraudulent payment instructions.
In that case, the central bank said a partner bank in Poland had been infiltrated in June 2024. The incident involved an impersonation scheme linked to a payment for equipment purportedly intended for REGIDESO, Burundi’s state-owned water and electricity utility. The BRB said part of the money had been blocked or recovered and that investigations were under way.
OLUCOME has questioned aspects of the explanation surrounding that transaction and called for accountability.
The latest allegations involving the National Post Office concern a separate transaction. No evidence presented in the available reporting establishes a direct connection between the two cases.
Both cases, however, raise questions about payment authorisation, the handling of suspicious transactions and the accountability of public institutions when funds are transferred under disputed circumstances.
The National Post Office had not publicly responded to the latest allegations. The allegations have not been independently verified, and responsibility for any wrongdoing has not been established.
The exact amount involved, the destination of the funds and the circumstances surrounding the second payment order remain to be clarified.
