Investec fights rand manipulation allegations

Investec has given the Competition Commission the opportunity to withdraw charges against the group amid South Africa’s ongoing rand manipulation saga.

The private banking giant plans to approach the Competition Tribunal with the same request for withdrawal should the Commission decline.

This comes after the Competition Appeals Court (CAC) dismissed charges against 23 banks and financial institutions in January 2024.

Following this, Investec was the only local bank to remain implicated in the Competition Commission’s probe into alleged currency manipulation, alongside four foreign banks.

The competition watchdog’s investigation into alleged rand manipulation was launched in 2015 and examined 11 local and international banks.

The Commission suspected traders at these institutions of price-fixing and market allocation while trading in the USD/ZAR currency pair.

Once the investigation was concluded, the Commission referred the complaint to the Competition Tribunal in 2017, seeking prosecution against 18 banks.

Since then, some of the accused have settled or entered into leniency agreements, while others decided to fight back.

In 2019 and 2020, some of the implicated banks challenged the Competition Commission’s jurisdiction over foreign entities and argued that its case against the institutions was legally vague.

The Commission then amended its complaint to include additional correspondents, bringing the number of implicated institutions to 28.

The Competition Commission was handed a victory in 2023 when the Tribunal ruled that it had jurisdiction to hear the case against foreign banks.

The Tribunal ordered the 28 banks involved to submit answering affidavits. This is when some of the implicated banks appealed to the CAC.

In 2024, the CAC dismissed charges against 23 of the 28 banks. The court ruled that the Commission presented vague evidence, lacked jurisdiction, and failed to prove that local banks were part of the conspiracy.

In 2025, the Commission appealed this ruling, and the case went to the Constitutional Court.

In July 2026, the Constitutional Court delivered a unanimous ruling that permanently cleared South Africa’s major domestic banks. This included Standard Bank, FirstRand, and Nedbank. 

However, Investec remained under scrutiny, as it had not joined the initial CAC application to prevent the case from proceeding.

Since the Constitutional Court’s judgment primarily dealt with the Competition Commission’s appeal to the CAC’s dismissal of the other banks, Investec remained on the hook.

Investec pushes back

Investec has repeatedly denied having engaged in collusive rand manipulation, and has largely sat out the decade-long legal battle.

“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 told BusinessTech.

However, the bank has now been pushed to become involved following a presentation by the Competition Commission to the Portfolio Committee on Trade and Industry.

In the presentation delivered on 19 August, the Commission said it would move to prosecute seven banks in its rand-manipulation case, including Investec.

This prompted Investec to invite the Competition Commission to withdraw its referral against Investec.

“The Constitutional Court found, based on the Competition Commission’s own pleadings, that it had not established a prima facie case,” 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 group said the facts of the case against Investec are identical or at least similar to those brought against the other local banks that the Constitutional Court cleared.

Therefore, Investec has now invited the Commission to withdraw its case against the banking giant.

“Should the Competition Commission decline to do so, Investec intends to approach the Competition Tribunal with the same request,” it said.