Hello everyone,

In my previous research on the 1.3 billion people worldwide who live without a bank account, the focus was mainly on poverty, lack of infrastructure, and distrust of banks. But there is another, increasingly visible form of “unbanked-ness” – not caused by poverty, but by deliberate financial exclusion. Banks and authorities close accounts, freeze assets, or refuse new accounts, often without clear justification. This affects not only distant countries but also journalists, activists, and dissenting voices right here in the Western world.

Since 2024/2025, such cases have been accumulating. They show that financial participation can suddenly be withdrawn – not because of criminal offenses, but because of inconvenient opinions. Here are six current examples that clearly illustrate the pattern.

Scott Ritter, former UN weapons inspector and independent journalist who critically follows US foreign policy, had his bank (Citizens Bank) terminate the business relationship after 26 years in January 2026. Accounts were “zeroed out” and his debit card was blocked – without explanation. Ritter suspects federal authorities behind the move, triggered by his trips to Russia and his reporting. “If they can de-bank me, they can de-bank anyone,” he wrote.

Donald Trump experienced something similar after January 6, 2021. JPMorgan Chase closed accounts belonging to him, his family, and his companies. The bank openly admitted this in a 2026 court case (Trump is suing for 5 billion dollars). Trump later responded with an Executive Order against “politicized debanking.”

Michael Ballweg, founder of the Querdenken movement in Germany, has reported blocked accounts since 2022. His local bank terminated private, business, and movement-related accounts. Opening new accounts in Europe has become nearly impossible. His companies are in liquidation, and supporters are being directed toward crypto. Ballweg sees this as systematic isolation of critical voices.

Martin Sellner, Austrian activist of the Identitarian Movement, has lost over 59 accounts and payment services since 2017. In 2026 he reported 116 closed accounts and 340 banks that refused him a business account. Even Swiss Postfinance suspended his account under pressure from authorities.

Jacques Baud, Swiss former colonel, ex-NATO analyst and intelligence officer, was sanctioned by the EU in December 2025 – allegedly for “pro-Russian propaganda.” His bank accounts in the EU were frozen and travel within the Schengen area was banned. For a time he could not even buy groceries. A humanitarian exception for “essential living expenses” was later granted.

Hüseyin Dogru, Berlin-based journalist (red.media), was also sanctioned by the EU in May 2025. The reason given was his reporting on Gaza and alleged “Russian disinformation.” His account at Comdirect has been blocked since then. “I have zero access to money,” he wrote. He is not allowed to accept work or receive support – not even food or medicine from third parties. His family, including a newborn, was temporarily without health insurance.

These cases are no isolated incidents. They fit into the broader picture described in the WAN-IFRA and IAPA report “Courting Silence,” which shows how economic offenses and financial instruments are used to paralyze journalists and media outlets – without the need for direct censorship laws.

What does this mean for the unbanked debate?

In the “Global South,” being unbanked often results from poverty or missing infrastructure. In the Western world, it is deliberately created – under the label of “de-risking” or sanctions. The outcome is the same: people cannot pay bills, receive donations, or conduct business. Freedom of the press and freedom of expression are not formally banned, but made practically impossible. Without a bank account, journalistic work, donations, or support become extremely difficult.

What conclusions do I draw?

First: Financial systems are no longer neutral ground. Banks increasingly act as an extension of politics and authorities – often without judicial review. This represents a creeping erosion of fundamental rights that goes far beyond the individuals mentioned. If it can happen to Scott Ritter, Hüseyin Dogru, or Michael Ballweg, it can happen to anyone who reports outside the mainstream.

Second: The affected individuals are often journalists or critical voices. This underscores the trend highlighted in the WAN-IFRA report: de-banking as a weapon against press freedom. It is quieter than imprisonment or direct censorship – and therefore particularly effective.

Third: This reveals a real opportunity for decentralized solutions such as Bitcoin and stablecoins. Several of those affected (Ballweg openly, others implicitly) are turning to crypto. For people in the Global South suffering from inflation or expensive remittances, this has long been everyday reality. In the West, it is becoming an emergency solution against state and banking control. Bitcoin does not automatically make everyone bankable – but it creates resilience when the traditional system fails.

Fourth: We urgently need clear rules against arbitrary de-banking. Transparency obligations for banks, the right to a hearing, and independent oversight bodies are essential. Otherwise, financial inclusion will become a farce not only in developing countries but also here.

The unbanked problem is not only an issue of poverty. It is an issue of power. Whoever controls money controls voices. The cases mentioned remind us: freedom needs more than words – it also needs a functioning account. And sometimes a decentralized network that cannot be switched off.

What do you think? Have you experienced or observed similar stories? I look forward to your thoughts in the comments.

Stay vigilant and stay solvent – however that may be.