In response to an article in a local newspaper, the Banking Commission of the West African Monetary Union (UMOA) made an update on the situation at the Banque de l'Habitat de Côte d'Ivoire (BHCI). Right of reply :

In its publication of Tuesday, September 3, 2019, the daily "L'ESSOR Ivoirien" reports a pseudo harassment of the WAMU Banking Commission against the Banque de l'Habitat de Côte d'Ivoire (BHCI).

The numerous inaccuracies, approximations and erroneous assertions contained in this article led the Banking Commission to react in order to reestablish the reality of the facts.

Moreover, compliance with the rules of professional ethics for journalists in Côte d'Ivoire, a guarantee of professionalism, should have led the author of the article to seek the point of view of this Banking Supervisory Authority, with a view to processing balance of information. Unfortunately, this approach has not been observed.

Consequently, the allegations emanating from the offending article are totally false, in particular those concerning the Banking Commission and the role of the former Director General, a BCEAO agent, seconded to the Government of Côte d'Ivoire, to at his request, to lead the BHCI which was experiencing very serious financial problems.

The Banking Commission, created in 1990, is a community supervisory body that oversees the good health of commercial banks and credit institutions established within the West African Monetary Union. The Commission is made up of 16 members, including eight representatives of each of the WAMU States and 8 members chosen and appointed ex officio by the WAMU Council of Ministers. During quarterly sessions, this Commission examines all the files relating to the situation of the banks and takes its decisions in complete independence.

Thus, although subject to a strict obligation of confidentiality, the Banking Commission deems it necessary to build public opinion on its role in preserving the stability of the regional banking system and protecting savers. The case of BHCI is a perfect illustration and deserves clarification.

First of all, the Banking Commission carries out the control of all the banks of the WAMU, without exception and this, in compliance with the banking regulations in force and its internal procedures. There is therefore no relentlessness against the BHCI

Then, while noting the erroneous date of the last BHCI inspection mentioned in the incriminated article, it is useful to specify that the frequency of bank inspections or their periodicity takes into account several factors, within the framework of a process of risk-based supervision. Among these factors is the assessment of the conditions for starting up or taking over a bank. As such, the Banking Commission has already carried out this type of verification in other banks in the Union, in the same circumstances. In addition, beyond the checks carried out within the establishments, the Commission has other control instruments or tools, in particular permanent monitoring based on the use of reports. It also maintains regular contact with banks through exchanges of correspondence, meetings and hearings.

It is essential to specify that, for this institution which was experiencing enormous difficulties, the privatization of BHCI was made possible, precisely, thanks to the recovery of governance and the financial situation led by the former Managing Director, Mr. Abou Toure. It should also be specified, to remove any ambiguity, that the verification of the BHCI is taking place on the basis of the accounts closed on June 30, 2019, therefore on a date when this former Managing Director was still in office.

Finally, the correspondence of the Banking Commission published, relating to the verification of the BHCI is a classic announcement letter. The format of this letter, as well as its content, is identical to that generally sent to all banks subject to inspection.

It recalls the regulatory provisions governing the powers and prerogatives of the Banking Commission. These provisions are therefore just cited as a reminder, since they are necessarily already known to bank managers. In this case, the correspondence states that no bank can obstruct the power of control of the Supervisory Authority. It cannot therefore be “a deliberate threatening letter”.

It emerges from the foregoing that the WAMU Banking Commission exercises its powers independently, impartially and rigorously. It cannot therefore participate in supposed attempts to destabilize or harass any bank whatsoever, knowing that all banks are, in any case, subject to its control.

Finally, the Banking Commission reserves the right to use all legal remedies in its possession against initiators of defamatory articles, aimed at tarnishing its professionalism and credibility.

>