NCRI - While the crisis surrounding Caspian Credit Institute and its investors is entering its fifth month, Iranian regime’s Central Bank officials have promised to resolve the issues in the next two months and also determine the status of the institute’s merged cooperatives by April 20.
Chanting slogans such as “people’s assets must be freed”, the protesters in front of Central Bank building in Tehran’s Mirdamad street called on the Central Bank as the entity responsible for monetary and banking system to make a final decision in order to resolve the crisis and months-long mismanagement in the institute.
The depositors are complaining about setting different times by the Central Bank for resolving Caspian crisis, believing that it’s actually aimed at buying time for the government on the eve of the presidential elections.
One of the protestors say that “this is an obvious insult to people’s rights, announcing different dates every once in a while by government officials. It sounds like Central Bank officials are going to just set dates instead of trying to really resolve the problem!”
Another depositor who calls himself ‘being cheated by the Central Bank’, says in this regard “the Central Bank first gave an official, unconditional permit to the institute. The institute then advertised across the city and encouraged people on state TV to make investments there. Ten months later, however, they once again appeared on TV, announcing their losses and deficits, and the decision to block people’s assets.”
“After all this time, Central Bank officials have all of a sudden remembered that they should have first assessed the status of credit cooperatives consisting the Caspian institute before giving them permit”, he added.
This depositor, like the other ones, expresses his discontent over Rouhani’s government and Central Bank officials not apologizing for the crisis that has affected people, saying “unfortunately, none of the Central Bank’s directors has apologized people for the scandal. They even say that the depositors are to blame, since they should have known in advance that the institute’s permit was conditional!”