Alleged investment scam leaves Tindouf camps residents seeking answers, funds

Residents of the Tindouf camps in southwestern Algeria are seeking answers and the return of their funds following the reported collapse of a company that had solicited investments from people in the camps.

The company, Infrafist for Contracting and Investment, reportedly operated in the camps since 2022 and was managed by Salamo Abaali. According to information gathered by Hespress AR from multiple sources, a large number of residents invested money with the company after being promised significant returns.

The company’s manager has reportedly disappeared, while alleged investors gathered outside its headquarters in Rabouni this week to demand the return of their money.

The exact number of investors and the total amount involved has not yet been independently established. Initial estimates circulating among residents, however, put the losses at potentially millions in Algerian dinars and Mauritanian ouguiyas.

The allegations have triggered widespread concern and discussion on social media among residents of the camps, with some questioning how the company was able to attract investments on such a scale.

Company’s ties to local figures questioned

The controversy has also prompted public statements from individuals who had previously interacted with the company.

Nanana Labat Rachid, a media adviser to Polisario leader Brahim Ghali, said on Facebook that her initial view of the company was similar to that of many others.

She said the organization initially presented itself as a group of young entrepreneurs operating from a known office and later developed a media arm to promote its activities, alongside cultural initiatives.

Labat Rachid acknowledged having worked with the organization to promote the Khadija Hamdi Short Story Prize. She said she had requested the company’s assistance in publicizing the competition and had visited its offices several times for that purpose, including to record a promotional video.

She said that cooperation had been limited to media-related activities and involved no financial relationship.

Labat Rachid also rejected any suggestion that her familiarity with the company or its members established a connection to the alleged investment operation, saying that knowing some or all of them did not necessarily relate to their investments or the alleged fraud.

She characterized the investments as individual decisions by people who chose to place their money with the company, rather than as an institutional investment operation.

Claims of high returns

Mustapha Bouda, an activist from the camps, described the case on Facebook as a major alleged fraud rather than an ordinary failed investment.

According to Bouda, the company initially built credibility through construction and contracting activities before expanding its public profile through charitable initiatives and sponsorships of community and cultural activities.

He said the company subsequently promoted direct investment opportunities using promises of returns ranging from 50% to 70%, which he described as a key factor in attracting investors.

Bouda alleged that the company’s activities extended beyond the camps and attracted investors and capital from neighboring countries.

He also claimed that the company used its media presence and relationships with journalists and prominent activists to promote its activities and reinforce confidence in its business model.

These claims have not been independently verified, and the final scale of the alleged losses remains unclear.

Conflicting figures over losses

Bouda cited a figure of 648.58 billion Algerian dinars, in addition to 532 million Mauritanian ouguiyas, allegedly collected through 3,420 investment contracts involving 2,841 investors.

He further claimed that the average investment per person was about 228.29 million Algerian dinars.

Those figures could not be independently verified and appear inconsistent with the broader descriptions of the alleged scheme. They should therefore be treated as claims rather than established financial data pending documentation or an official investigation.

Bouda argued that the case highlighted the risks of relying on media exposure, charitable activities or personal networks as substitutes for financial transparency and regulatory oversight.

He compared the alleged operation to a Ponzi scheme, invoking the historical case associated with Charles Ponzi. That characterization has not been established by a judicial authority.

The reported collapse has left residents seeking clarity over the company’s financial structure, the whereabouts of its management and the possibility of recovering their investments.

The case also raises broader questions about the regulation and oversight of commercial and investment activities inside the Tindouf camps, where the institutional and legal framework governing such businesses remains a politically sensitive issue.