ATM calls for stronger oversight after Constitutional Court ruling in rand manipulation case

The African Transformation Movement (ATM) is urging Parliament not to treat the Constitutional Court’s recent ruling in the long-running rand manipulation case as the final chapter.

Instead, the party wants lawmakers to launch closer oversight of South Africa’s competition authorities, arguing that the judgment has exposed broader questions about the country’s ability to investigate and prosecute complex financial misconduct involving multinational banks.

Court clears several banks after years of legal battles

The renewed political attention follows the Constitutional Court’s decision on 30 June, which dismissed the Competition Commission’s appeal against several major banks.

The ruling effectively clears institutions including Standard Bank, Nedbank and FirstRand, ending allegations that they participated in an overarching conspiracy to manipulate the US dollar-rand exchange rate.

However, the case is far from over.

The court ruled that proceedings may continue before the Competition Tribunal against six financial institutions:

• BNP Paribas
• JP Morgan Chase & Co
• JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A.
• Investec Bank Limited
• HSBC Bank plc
• Standard Americas Incorporated

The Constitutional Court also allowed the Commission’s appeal to continue against JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A. and Standard Americas Incorporated while dismissing it against several other respondents.

ATM says Parliament still has work to do

ATM leader Vuyo Zungula has written to Parliament’s Portfolio Committee on Trade, Industry and Competition, arguing that the judgment should trigger greater parliamentary scrutiny rather than bring the matter to a close.

According to Zungula, Parliament has a constitutional responsibility to oversee institutions responsible for maintaining fair competition, protecting financial markets and safeguarding the public interest.

The party wants the committee to receive a comprehensive briefing on:

• The implications of the Constitutional Court ruling.
• The Competition Commission’s next legal steps.
• Whether existing legislation is sufficient to investigate sophisticated cross-border financial misconduct.
• Possible reforms to strengthen South Africa’s competition enforcement system.

ATM has also called for officials from the Competition Commission, the Department of Trade, Industry and Competition, the South African Reserve Bank and the Financial Sector Conduct Authority to appear before Parliament.

A case that has stretched nearly a decade

The investigation dates back to 2017, when the Competition Commission referred a complaint to the Competition Tribunal alleging that 18 local and international banks colluded to manipulate the dollar-rand exchange rate between 2007 and 2013.

The Commission alleged that traders communicated through electronic chatrooms, coordinated trading strategies, exchanged confidential information and timed transactions to influence the currency market.

Over the years, the case became bogged down by procedural disputes before any substantive evidence could be heard.

Some banks chose to cooperate with authorities.

Absa received leniency after assisting the investigation, while Citibank entered into a settlement agreement with the Commission.

Several other banks challenged the Commission’s referral, arguing that aspects of the case were legally defective and that some parties had been improperly included.

The Constitutional Court ultimately agreed with several of those procedural objections.

Why the rand manipulation allegations matter

Although the case centres on competition law, ATM argues its implications extend far beyond the courtroom.

The value of the rand directly influences the daily lives of South Africans through:

• Fuel prices.
• Food inflation.
• The cost of imported goods.
• Government debt servicing costs.
• Business investment decisions.
• Household purchasing power.

The party says that makes robust enforcement against any potential market manipulation a matter of public interest rather than simply a technical legal dispute.

Parliament to consider next steps

Portfolio Committee chairperson Mzwandile Masina has confirmed that Parliament has received ATM’s request.

He said the committee is studying the Constitutional Court judgment and will seek legal advice before determining its next steps.

Masina added that the committee intends inviting both the Competition Commission and the Department of Trade, Industry and Competition to brief MPs on the ruling and the remaining legal proceedings.

Meanwhile, Competition Commission spokesperson Siyabulela Makunga said the Commission remains committed to pursuing the outstanding cases before the Competition Tribunal.

He confirmed that prosecutors will continue receiving assistance from Absa and Barclays, which were granted leniency, as well as Citibank and Standard Chartered, both of which previously reached settlement agreements with the Commission.

A case that could shape future regulation

While the Constitutional Court ruling has narrowed the scope of the original case, it has also sparked fresh debate about whether South Africa’s competition authorities have sufficient resources, specialist expertise and legislative powers to investigate increasingly complex financial market misconduct.

For Parliament, the focus may now shift from the banks that have been cleared to whether the country’s regulatory framework is equipped to tackle similar cases in the future.

Follow Joburg ETC on Facebook, Twitter, TikTok and Instagram

For more News in Johannesburg, visit joburgetc.com

Source: iol.co.za