Major private bank in South Africa fighting prosecution
South African private banking group Investec says it has given the Competition Commission the opportunity to withdraw charges against it in the ongoing rand manipulation saga.
If the Commission declines to do so, it will approach the Competition Tribunal with the same request, as it believes there is no viable case against it.
Investec has, until now, largely sat out the decade-long legal battle over allegations of rand/dollar fixing at major banks.
The change in the bank’s position follows a presentation by the Commission to the Portfolio Committee on Trade and Industry last week, where it said it would move to prosecute seven banks in its rand manipulation case—including Investec.
The move to prosecute comes after the Constitutional Court cleared the way for this to happen against a handful of banks in a June 2026 judgement.
The Competition Commission launched a cartel case for rand manipulation against 28 local and international banks in 2015, alleging that the banks fixed the buying and selling prices of the rand/dollar.
It said that traders took turns buying or selling currencies, giving each other the opportunity to do so without interference from competition.
Over ten years, there were back-and-forth challenges and appeals by the banks and the Commission at the Appeal Court, which resulted in the matter heading to the Constitutional Court in 2025.
Ultimately, the ConCourt ruled that most banks, including major local banks like Standard Bank, Nedbank and FNB, were cleared of prosecution.
Two banks settled with the Commission, and three banks—including Absa—traded cooperation for leniency.
This left the Commission with a clear path to prosecute seven remaining banks, including BNP Paribas, JPMorgan Chase, JPMorgan Bank, HSBC Bank plc, Standard Americas, Investec Bank, and Investec Limited.
Investec is the only remaining major South African bank facing prosecution in the case—a position which the bank says will be challenged.
The table below outlines the two groups in the Competition Commission’s case:
| Cleared | Proceeding |
|---|---|
| Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC | BNP Paribas |
| Bank of America Merrill Lynch International DAC | JP Morgan Chase |
| New Zealand Banking Group Limited | JP Morgan Bank |
| Nomura International Plc | HSBC Bank plc |
| Commerzbank AG | Standard Americas |
| Macquarie Bank Limited | Investec Bank |
| HSBC Bank USA NA | Investec Limited |
| Merrill Lynch Pierce Fenner and Smith Incorporated | Citibank NA (Settled) |
| Bank of America NA | Standard Chartered Bank (Settled) |
| Standard Bank of South Africa Limited | Barclays Plc (Leniency) |
| Nedbank Limited | Barclays Capital (Leniency) |
| FirstRand Bank Limited | ABSA Bank Limited (Leniency) |
Investec pushing back
According to Investec, it did not participate in the interlocutory applications, which ended up before the Constitutional Court.
“This approach was taken on the advice of senior counsel, who recommended proceeding directly to the merits of the referral, on the basis that the case against Investec was weak,” the banking group said.
Sitting out the decade-long battle at the Tribunal, Appeal Court, and ConCourt left Investec a formal respondent in the referral, along with various other international banks.
However, the group said that even though it was not a party to the many judgments and appeals that ran all the way to the ConCourt, it believes the rulings and findings from these processes would ultimately apply to it as well.
The Constitutional Court judgment handed down on 30 June 2026 largely upheld the Competition Appeal Court’s judgment in the matter, it noted.
In respect of the South African banks, the Constitutional Court dismissed the Competition Commission’s complaints.
“The Constitutional Court found, based on the Competition Commission’s own pleadings, that it had not established a prima facie case of those South African banks participating in a single overarching conspiracy to fix the rand/US dollar exchange rate,” Investec said.
“Based on the judgments of both the Competition Appeal Court and the Constitutional Court, Investec does not believe that the Competition Commission has a viable case against it.”
The banking group said that the facts relevant to Investec are similar or identical to those applied to the other South African banks that have now been released from the Referral.
As such, the group has now invited the Competition Commission to withdraw the referral against Investec.
“Should the Competition Commission decline to do so, Investec intends to approach the Competition Tribunal with the same request,” it said.
Should Investec follow its South African counterparts to be removed from the referral, this would leave the Competition Commission with five banks to prosecute.
Loading ...