Tweet

By Times Caribbean News Desk

Dominica’s Citizenship by Investment programme is once again under intense regional scrutiny following a new report by financial crime commentator Kenneth Rijock, who claims that a high-stakes legal battle involving Dubai-based Montreal Management Consultants Est. — widely known as MMCE — could have major implications for the island’s CBI sector and, potentially, for some persons who acquired Dominican citizenship through development-linked investment channels.

In a May 23, 2026 post, Rijock reported that Anthony Haiden, the head of MMCE, has filed a petition in the High Court of Dominica naming several respondents, including the Government of Dominica, the Attorney General, the Permanent Secretary, Range Developments and ABL Holdings. According to Rijock, the central issue is Haiden’s alleged claim that MMCE should be treated as the sole or exclusive authorised agent/developer for citizenships tied to CBI-funded development projects in Dominica.

The report, if borne out in court documents and official responses, could mark one of the most consequential internal clashes yet in Dominica’s controversial but economically vital CBI architecture.

A Battle Over Who Controls Dominica’s CBI Development Pipeline

Dominica’s CBI programme has long been used to finance major national projects, including housing, hospitality, infrastructure and the island’s long-promised international airport. MMCE has been deeply associated with several major public-sector development projects, including the international airport, which was announced in 2021 as a roughly US$370 million CBI-funded project. At the time, MMCE and the Skerrit administration described it as one of the largest infrastructure contracts in Dominica and the wider Eastern Caribbean.

Range Developments, meanwhile, has been associated with the Kempinski-branded hotel project at Cabrits, while ABL Holdings is connected to the Cable Car project. Rijock’s report suggests that Haiden’s petition seeks to challenge whether these other developers should be permitted to market or process citizenship applications connected to their respective projects.

That claim, if accurately reported, raises a fundamental policy question: can any single private developer legitimately claim exclusive control over Dominica’s CBI development pipeline, or must the state preserve a wider, competitive and government-regulated framework for approved projects?

Why This Matters Beyond Dominica

The issue is not merely a private commercial dispute. Dominica’s CBI programme is a major revenue mechanism, a key development-financing tool and a sensitive international compliance subject. Caribbean CBI programmes have faced growing scrutiny from international partners over due diligence, transparency, money flows, pricing, developer arrangements and post-approval monitoring.

Previous investigations and legal filings have already placed Dominica’s CBI system under public debate. A 2022 Caribbean Investigative Journalism Network report noted that MMCE had been authorised to sell passports as a service provider and was also linked to the development and management of CBI-funded projects, a structure critics argued raised transparency and conflict-of-interest concerns.

In 2024, a constitutional claim filed in Dominica and cited in public reporting alleged serious concerns about the management of CBI revenue, MMCE’s role and whether certain CBI-funded arrangements were properly handled under Dominica’s legal and financial framework. Those allegations remain matters for legal and public scrutiny, not settled findings.

Could CBI Passport Holders Be at Risk?

The most explosive element of Rijock’s report is the suggestion that persons who obtained Dominican citizenship through MMCE-linked channels could face uncertainty if the dispute escalates. Rijock reported that some local voices are calling for MMCE’s licence to be cancelled and, more dramatically, for citizenships issued through MMCE to be reviewed or revoked.

That possibility should be treated carefully. There is no publicly confirmed evidence at this stage that Dominica’s government has moved to revoke citizenships simply because they were processed through MMCE. However, Dominica has already demonstrated that it is prepared to cancel citizenships where authorities determine that fraud, false representation or concealment of material facts occurred.

In 2024, Dominica issued a Citizenship Deprivation Order cancelling the citizenships of 68 individuals who obtained status through the CBI programme, citing fraud, false representation or concealment of material facts. A separate official 2024 deprivation order similarly states that scheduled persons were deprived of citizenship on those grounds.

This means the real legal risk for passport holders would likely depend on whether any individual application was found to involve false documents, concealed facts, improper processing or other material irregularities — not simply the identity of the developer or agent involved.

Serious Allegations Require Official Clarity

Rijock’s report also includes serious claims that Dominican police may have registered a case against Haiden over allegedly fake or forged documents connected to claims of exclusivity. Times Caribbean has not independently verified that police matter from an official Dominican law-enforcement statement. Until confirmed by police, the courts or the parties involved, those claims must be treated as allegations.

The report further refers to alleged prior legal trouble in Dubai involving a CBI applicant, Rasha Ahmed Mohammed Almukhtar, who reportedly accused Haiden and an associate of forgery and fraud connected to her Dominican citizenship application. Rijock states that the case resulted in a three-month prison sentence for Haiden. At the time of writing, that specific claim appears primarily sourced to Rijock’s report and requires further independent confirmation from court records or official documentation.

Given the seriousness of the allegations, the public interest now demands clear statements from the Government of Dominica, MMCE, Range Developments, ABL Holdings and the relevant authorities. Silence would only deepen uncertainty.

The Political and Economic Stakes

Dominica’s government has defended CBI-funded development as transformational, particularly after Tropical Storm Erika and Hurricane Maria caused major national damage. Supporters argue that CBI revenues have enabled housing, infrastructure and resilience projects that would otherwise have been difficult for a small island state to finance.

Critics, however, have repeatedly questioned transparency, public accounting, developer influence and whether Dominicans are receiving full value from passport-generated revenues. Those concerns have become more sensitive as international banks, the European Union, the United Kingdom and other partners continue to examine Caribbean CBI programmes through the lens of security, migration and financial compliance.

If Haiden’s reported petition is interpreted locally as an attempt to monopolise the CBI development space, it could trigger public and political backlash. If the government resists the claim, the matter could expose previously confidential arrangements. If the court entertains the claim, it could raise even larger questions about who has been legally empowered to market, process and benefit from CBI-linked development projects.

Balanced View: Not Yet a Passport Panic, But a Serious Warning Sign

For current Dominican CBI passport holders, the situation should not be overstated. There is no confirmed mass revocation order tied to MMCE, and citizenship cannot lawfully be removed simply because of public anger or political controversy. Revocation would require legal grounds, due process and evidence of disqualifying conduct or irregularity.

However, the case underscores a growing reality: Caribbean CBI citizenship is no longer a “set it and forget it” asset. Governments are under pressure to review files, tighten rules and demonstrate that citizenships were lawfully obtained. Dominica’s previous revocation actions show that passport holders can face consequences where the state determines that fraud or concealment occurred.

The broader concern is reputational. Every public dispute involving CBI developers, alleged exclusivity, opaque contracts or claims of forged documentation increases scrutiny on the entire programme — including legitimate applicants who followed the rules.

Times Caribbean Analysis

This developing controversy appears to be more than a commercial quarrel. It sits at the intersection of law, national sovereignty, investor confidence, public accountability and the future of Caribbean economic citizenship.

If Rijock’s reporting is accurate, Haiden may have opened a legal and political front that could force Dominica to confront long-standing questions about the structure of its CBI development model. The government may now face pressure to explain whether MMCE ever had exclusive rights, what those rights covered, how other developers were authorised, and whether passport applicants tied to any project are exposed to future review.

For Dominica, the priority must be transparency. For CBI investors, the priority must be legal certainty. For the region, the lesson is clear: CBI programmes can survive international scrutiny only if they are governed by strong laws, clear contracts, credible due diligence and public confidence.

Until official court filings, government statements or police confirmations are made public, the most responsible conclusion is this: Kenneth Rijock’s report raises serious and urgent questions, but the most explosive claims remain allegations requiring verification. What is beyond dispute is that Dominica’s CBI programme is entering another sensitive moment — one that could test the balance between private developer power, state authority and the rights of those who purchased citizenship in good faith.