Depends on who "we" is -- here, a bank is saying it is their prerogative to decide your access to banking based on arbitrary private charities that they like
As a matter of fact it is their prerogative. This indicates, i'd say, a failure of the state to provide access to what is now a basic need (banking).
Do people who are convicted of financial-related crimes (like money laundering) deserve access to banking too? Just curious how absolute this right to banking should be.
Yes, banking is a requirement for proper participation in society, and we definitely want convicted felons to be able to properly participate in society once they get out of prison (otherwise what's the point of letting them out?) so they should deserve access to banking, and in EU they do have that right.
It might reasonable to deny a known fraudster access to credit, but they should have access to a bank account, for example, to make electronic payments for their rent and utilities.
I suspect that the bank is actually trying its best to supply services to the indigent without running afoul of a strict regulatory regime. You make it sound like they’re being intentionally unreasonable out of some sense of cruelty.
As a matter of fact it is their prerogative. This indicates, i'd say, a failure of the state to provide access to what is now a basic need (banking).