When access to financial services is denied by discrimination, not law
to the Association of Political Prisoners of Belarus. October 2025.
Who I Am
My name is Youras Ziankovich. I am a U.S.-licensed attorney and a former political prisoner of the Lukashenka regime in Belarus.
I spent four years (1,480 days) in detention, much of it in incommunicado conditions. The Government of the United States formally recognized me as a wrongfully detained U.S. person.
In May 2025, I returned to the United States after my release.
What Happened
In the summer of 2025, I opened an account with Wise. At first, the account was used to receive humanitarian assistance provided to me as a former political prisoner. Later, beginning in the fall of 2025, I used the same account to collect and transfer humanitarian support to other former political prisoners who were released after me.
I also joined the Association of Political Prisoners of Belarus (APB) — a legally registered, tax-exempt charitable organization based in Lithuania.
One of my transactions was a routine membership contribution to this organization. Wise unexpectedly flagged this payment as “suspicious” and demanded explanations.
Full Compliance — and Rejection
I immediately provided everything requested: official registration documents of the organization, its tax identification number, and contact details of its leadership.
Despite this, Wise refused to process the payment.
From my correspondence with Wise’s customer service, it became clear that the issue was not legality, compliance, or risk — but the word “Belarus” in the organization’s name, and Belarusian names among its leadership.
The fact that we are former political prisoners of a sanctioned authoritarian regime made no difference.
Account Closure and False Implications
After a second attempt to send funds to the same organization — and after receiving a transfer from a well-established Polish humanitarian organization, Belarusian House, with more than 12 years of documented work supporting victims of repression — Wise fully blocked my account.
Wise sent a vague notice implying that I might be involved in:
- sanctions evasion,
- weapons trafficking,
- or facilitating prostitution.
These implications are false, unsupported, and deeply damaging.
A Trap Disguised as “Resolution”
As a precondition to “reviewing” my complaint, Wise demanded that I provide another bank account number to which my funds would be transferred.
Doing so would have meant losing access to my account, transaction history, and evidence, effectively foreclosing any meaningful challenge.
I refused.
The Lawsuit
Instead, I filed a lawsuit in U.S. federal court against Wise US Inc. for:
- civil rights discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 1981,
- selective and pretextual enforcement of contractual terms,
- false and defamatory implications of criminal conduct,
- and for declaratory and injunctive relief.
This case is not about one account.
It is about whether financial institutions are allowed to use national origin as a proxy for criminality, while hiding behind automated “risk” language and sanctions rhetoric.
A Broader, Systemic Problem
Since late 2024, Belarusian political refugees and former political prisoners have increasingly faced blanket refusals from banks in both Europe and the United States.
In my own case, I was previously denied banking services solely because my U.S. passport lists Belarus as my place of birth.
This is not compliance.This is de-risking through discrimination.
Why This Case Matters
Sanctions imposed on an authoritarian regime are meant to protect victims of repression — not to punish them again in exile.
You cannot lawfully discriminate against victims of human rights abuses under the pretext of enforcing sanctions against their oppressors. Doing so replaces compliance with collective punishment, and risk assessment with ethnic and national profiling.
The Goal
The goal of this case is to establish a clear legal precedent:
- Banks may not deny access to financial services based on nationality or origin.
- Banks may not treat “Belarus” as a proxy for illegality.
- Banks may not smear lawful humanitarian activity with insinuations of criminal conduct.
I intend to pursue a judicial determination that Wise violated anti-discrimination law, so that no financial institution on either side of the Atlantic can continue this practice unchecked.
Transparency
This case is public by design.
There is no NDA, and there will be no quiet settlement that trades accountability for silence.
The facts, the filings, and the implications will remain accessible.