South Africa's Forex Manipulation Case Advances to Full Trial After Court Ruling

South Africa’s Constitutional Court cleared the path Tuesday for a full evidentiary trial against six banks accused of rigging the rand’s exchange rate, sending a case that began nearly a decade ago back to the Competition Tribunal of South Africa for its next phase.

Justice Owen Rogers delivered the ruling, which upholds the Competition Commission’s right to pursue the action while largely rejecting the regulator’s earlier arguments. The decision is a significant narrowing of a complaint that originally named 28 institutions. Six banks now face trial: Investec, BNP Paribas, JPMorgan Chase and Co, JPMorgan Chase Bank NA, Standard Americas Incorporated, and HSBC Bank.

The allegations center on collusion among traders at those institutions to manipulate the exchange rate between the US dollar and the South African rand across a seven-year window, from 2007 to 2013.

The road to this point has been long. The Commission filed its initial complaint in 2015. It was referred to the Competition Tribunal in 2017, then worked through two separate Tribunal proceedings and two rounds at the Competition Appeal Court before reaching the Constitutional Court. Each stage trimmed the defendant list. Among the major institutions excluded along the way are FirstRand and the Standard Bank of South Africa, both named in the original complaint. The reduction from 28 defendants to six reflects the cumulative effect of those earlier rulings, which eliminated various institutions on grounds that may have included jurisdictional issues, evidentiary gaps, or other legal considerations.

The Competition Commission said it was still reviewing the judgment and would provide a comprehensive response at a later date, suggesting the ruling requires careful analysis before the regulator determines its next steps at the Tribunal.

What changes now is that the substantive allegations will be tested through a full evidentiary process. The Tribunal will examine whether traders at the six remaining banks engaged in the collusive conduct the Commission has alleged. That means witnesses, documents, and a formal hearing on the merits, rather than the procedural and jurisdictional battles that have defined the case so far.

The South African proceedings sit within a broader pattern of global scrutiny over forex trading practices. Investigations into currency manipulation have touched major financial institutions across multiple jurisdictions, with traders accused of coordinating to move rates for profit. The rand, central to South Africa’s economy and financial markets, is the specific focus here.

Meanwhile, the Competition Commission has been active on separate enforcement fronts. Last month it referred a complaint against Adcock Ingram Critical Care to the Competition Tribunal, alleging excessive pricing in the renal dialysis market. That case reflects a different enforcement priority but sits within the same mandate to investigate anticompetitive conduct across the economy.

The forex case now enters its most consequential phase, with a defined set of defendants and a tribunal process that will finally test whether the allegations can be substantiated through evidence and testimony. The open question is how long that process takes, and whether the evidentiary record built over a decade of complaints holds up under the scrutiny of a full hearing.