Critics say the regulator {Somaliland’s Central Bank] acted as a defender rather than a watchdog after dismissing allegations that Premier Bank processed Somalia’s federal e-visa fees
HARGEISA — Somaliland’s Central Bank faces backlash for defending Premier Bank amid e-visa payment allegations, sparking calls for an independent investigation and renewed oversight.
E-Visa Dispute Stokes Tensions
Somalia launched its mandatory electronic visa and travel-authorization (e-visa) system on September 1, 2025, requiring all foreign visitors to apply online before entry. The move was meant to “modernize immigration” and tighten security, but it immediately provoked backlash from Somaliland and Puntland, which insisted only regionally-issued documents are valid in their airspace.
Amid this sovereignty feud, WorldRemit executive Ismail Ahmed publicly alleged that Premier Bank – a Somalilander-owned bank with branches in Mogadishu – was secretly processing the e-visa payments to collect fees. Ahmed claimed the federal e-visa gateway’s transactions reference Premier Bank’s systems (for example, merchant ID “PBS0008” and MSO ID “PREMIERBANK”), implying the bank’s network was being used to funnel visa revenues to a company linked to President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud.
Premier Bank and Somaliland officials quickly denied any link, insisting the e-visa contract was struck only in Mogadishu and that Premier Bank Somaliland “played no role” in the system.
Central Bank’s Unusual Intervention
On Nov. 13, 2025 the Central Bank of Somaliland issued a statement mirroring this denial: it said the e-visa deal “was entered into entirely in Somalia” and that Premier Bank’s Hargeisa branch has “no involvement” in Mogadishu’s payment gateway.
The bank urged citizens to “avoid confusion” between Somalia’s and Somaliland’s financial systems, reaffirming its commitment to local laws. But critics saw the regulator’s swift defense of Premier Bank as a potential conflict of interest.
Activists and analysts noted that regulators normally investigate, not exonerate commercial banks when serious allegations surface. On social media and in the local press, voices demanded accountability.
One prominent Somaliland lawmaker warned that routing e-visa fees through a bank with branches in both Somaliland and Somalia is effectively a “financial Trojan horse” — saying “Premier Bank is effectively recognizing Mogadishu’s authority,” an outcome he called “unacceptable”.
A former banking regulator in East Africa summed up the mood: “Premier Bank is no longer a neutral financial actor,” he said. “It has been captured by state interests — operating under political, not commercial, logic”.
Even global figures weighed in: co‑founder of WorldRemit Dr. Ismail Ahmed insisted the e-visa payment flows were “under the direct influence of Somalia’s presidency,” telling reporters that this is “a political — not financial” issue.
Civil society groups and investors have publicly called for an independent probe into Premier Bank’s links to the e-visa system, and some even urged the central bank governor to step down, arguing a regulator must remain impartial.
Central Bank’s Mandate and Best Practices
At stake is the regulator’s core mandate. By law and custom, a central bank must ensure the stability and integrity of the financial system – not shield particular institutions.
In Somaliland, the central bank (often called the Bank of Somaliland) was created in 1994 precisely to maintain financial stability and supervise banks and payment services. Its responsibilities explicitly include licensing and monitoring all financial institutions operating under Somaliland law, including commercial banks, money-transfer firms, and mobile-money platforms.
The bank also enforces anti–money laundering and counter-terrorism financing (AML/CFT) laws: Somaliland’s 2019 AML Act even established a Financial Intelligence Unit inside the central bank to detect and report illicit money flows.
In practice, central banks wield a range of tools and obligations:
- Bank supervision: Examining accounts, ensuring banks maintain adequate capital, and enforcing compliance with banking regulations. Somaliland’s central bank is charged with monitoring domestic banks’ solvency and conduct.
- AML/CFT enforcement: Regulating reporting by banks and transfers, and coordinating with prosecutors. As one analyst notes, Somalia’s federal central bank formally “has AML/CFT oversight of the new [e-visa] payment system”, a function intended to reassure international partners. Somaliland’s central bank likewise must oversee whether its banks adhere to KYC/AML rules.
- Payment systems oversight: Promoting safe, efficient clearing and settlement. Central banks typically audit payment gateways and SWIFT codes to prevent fraud or misuse. (For example, experts highlighted that Premier Bank’s Mogadishu and Hargeisa branches share the same SWIFT code, which normally signals a single corporate identity.)
- Financial stability: Managing currency reserves and liquidity. Somaliland’s bank issues its own shilling and protects monetary stability; undermining confidence by appearing to favor a potentially compromised bank can threaten that mandate.
A regulator found to be defending one bank against fraud charges risks breaching all these duties. AML/CFT norms in particular require investigators to follow the money. By issuing a public denial rather than launching an inquiry, critics say Somaliland’s central bank looks more like an ally of Premier Bank than its examiner.
Parallels from Puntland (2020)
The dilemma echoes earlier Somali cases. In 2020, allegations surfaced that hawala money-transfer companies in Puntland were handling funds for al-Shabaab militants. The Somali central bank’s reaction then drew criticism: its governor said he was “unaware” of any improper transfers but promised to investigate. Observers noted that initial statements seemed defensive, a misstep similar to todays.
“A regulator must supervise banks – not defend them,” one critic wrote at the time. If the watchdog bends to political pressures, analysts warn, terror-finance risks can slip through.
In both scenarios, regulatory independence is at issue. A central bank answerable to politics cannot credibly crack down on the very abuses it is meant to prevent.
Lessons and Outlook
In Somaliland’s fiercely contested political climate, this episode has become about more than finance. Sovereignty, transparency and trust are the watchwords. Many Somalilanders fear that allowing Mogadishu’s ambitions to ride on a local bank erodes their autonomy. Others worry about the message to international partners: if Somaliland’s regulator appears to parrot one side in a political spat, foreign banks may de-risk the entire market.
By contrast, technical safeguards demand investigation. The Premier Bank controversy underscores how even routine visa fees can turn into flashpoints if financial flows are not transparent. As one commentator summed up, “The integrity of Somaliland’s financial system cannot be compromised”.
Whether calls for resignations gain traction, the episode is already renewing debate over the bank’s neutrality. Many expect the central bank to clarify how it will handle any evidence from Premier Bank’s payment records, and to reaffirm its independence.
At the very least, banking and law-enforcement experts say, regulators must walk a fine line: upholding AML/CFT rules without appearing to pick political sides. If that balance is lost, both Premier Bank’s reputation and the broader financial system’s credibility could be at stake.
