Centralized exchange in Guinea

Cryptocurrency Exchanges: Operating a platform for buying, selling, or exchanging cryptocurrencies is not permitted.

Custody Providers: Providing services for safeguarding cryptographic keys or virtual assets on behalf of customers is not permitted.

Payment Processors (for Virtual Assets): Facilitating payments or transfers using cryptocurrencies is not permitted.

The fact that they are not recognized as legitimate currencies or financial instruments under Guinean law.

Their lack of legal tender status and absence of intrinsic value.

AML/KYC: The general anti-money laundering and combating the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) laws and regulations of Guinea would still apply to any financial activity. These laws would make it extremely difficult (and likely illegal) to process transactions for unregulated assets like cryptocurrencies without proper identification and reporting mechanisms.

Local Presence: For any recognized financial institution, a physical local presence and registration would be mandatory.

Law N° L/2018/005/AN concerning the Fight Against Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing (LBC/FT): This is the fundamental legal text. It replaced older legislation and aims to align Guinea's framework with international standards, particularly the FATF recommendations.

Identification and Verification of Customer Identity:

For natural persons: Full name, address, date of birth, nationality, unique identification number (e.g., national ID, passport). Verification using reliable, independent source documents, data, or information.

For legal entities: Name, legal form, address, proof of existence, names of directors/partners, legal representatives, and identification of the beneficial owners.

Identification of Beneficial Owners: Take reasonable measures to understand the ownership and control structure of the customer and identify the natural persons who ultimately own or control the customer.

Ongoing Due Diligence: Conduct ongoing monitoring of the business relationship and transactions to ensure they are consistent with the VASP's knowledge of the customer, their business, and risk profile.

Risk-Based Approach (RBA): VASPs must implement an RBA, meaning they should apply enhanced due diligence (EDD) for higher-risk situations (e.g., transactions involving politically exposed persons (PEPs), customers from high-risk jurisdictions, complex or unusually large transactions, new or developing technologies and products). Conversely, simplified due diligence (SDD) may be applied in lower-risk scenarios.

Report Suspicious Transactions: Immediately report any transaction (or attempted transaction) that they suspect involves money laundering or terrorist financing to the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU). This includes transactions regardless of the amount.

Cellule Nationale de Traitement des Informations Financières (CENTIF-Guinée)

Transaction Records: All records of financial transactions, including the amounts, currencies, virtual assets involved, dates, and parties to the transaction.

Customer Identification Data: All documents and information obtained during the CDD process (e.g., copies of identification documents, beneficial ownership information).

Correspondence: All relevant correspondence relating to customer relationships and transactions.

No Tipping-Off: Not disclose to the customer or any third party that a report has been made or that a money laundering or terrorist financing investigation is being conducted.

No, the FATF Travel Rule has not been explicitly adopted as a specific piece of legislation in Guinea. Instead, the regulatory environment for virtual assets in Guinea, largely dictated by the BCEAO, is characterized by strong warnings and restrictions against their use by regulated financial institutions.

Not applicable. As the Travel Rule is not adopted for VASPs, there are no specific threshold amounts for information sharing related to virtual asset transactions.

Which VASPs are Covered:

No VASPs are formally covered or licensed to operate under a regulatory framework that would mandate Travel Rule compliance.

BCEAO Communiqués and Circulars: The primary source of guidance and directives concerning virtual assets for Guinea's financial sector comes from the BCEAO. While direct URLs to specific communiqués might change, their official website is the central repository:

The BCEAO's position has historically been to prohibit or strongly discourage financial institutions under its supervision from engaging in activities related to virtual assets. This stance prioritizes financial stability and consumer protection over establishing a framework for regulated virtual asset service providers (VASPs) to operate and comply with rules like the Travel Rule.

Regulator Name: Banque Centrale de la République de Guinée (BCRG) - (Central Bank of the Republic of Guinea)

Entity Targeted: The general public, financial institutions, and implicitly, any unregistered cryptocurrency operators or promoters within Guinea. Violation Type: Engaging with or promoting financial instruments (cryptocurrencies) that are not recognized as legal tender, are volatile, speculative, and outside the regulated financial system, posing risks of fraud, money laundering, and financial instability. This is a preventative warning rather than a direct violation levied against an entity. Penalty Amount: Not applicable (this is a public warning, not a fine against an entity).

Entity Targeted: Individuals or groups orchestrating investment schemes or scams that might utilize cryptocurrencies or promise crypto-related returns. Violation Type: Fraud, illegal financial operations, potentially money laundering. Penalty Amount: Varies by judicial decision; often involves arrests, prosecution, and potential imprisonment, but not typically a "regulatory fine" in the initial enforcement phase. Specific amounts are rarely publicized at the time of arrest.

Focus on fraud: Any direct "enforcement" actions are more likely to fall under general criminal law for fraud or illegal financial operations, rather than specific crypto regulations.

No dedicated crypto regulatory body: Guinea does not have a specific regulatory body solely focused on cryptocurrency, nor a comprehensive legal framework for crypto assets.

Lack of specific fines: There have been no widely reported instances of the BCRG or another financial authority levying specific fines against crypto exchanges or platforms for regulatory non-compliance, largely because such entities would be operating outside any recognized framework.