Dailymaverick logo

Business Maverick

BUSINESS REFLECTION

After the Bell: Manipulating the rand — really?

The ongoing saga of alleged rand manipulation by a consortium of banks feels less like a high-stakes courtroom drama and more like a drawn-out golf match where everyone’s just waiting for the final putt—except what’s on the line is our collective sanity and a currency that seems to be on a permanent vacation.
After the Bell: Manipulating the rand — really? Illustrative image | Financial stock market graph. (Photo: iStock) | R1 coins. (Photo: Waldo Swiegers / Bloomberg via Getty Images)

I sometimes wonder if that feeling, that horrible desperation, the feeling that our currency is so weak, is behind the very strange story about claims that a group of 28 banks, both South African and foreign, manipulated the rand.

The backstory is long and complicated, but essentially, the Competition Commission says it has evidence that traders working for the banks were part of a single conspiracy. There is talk of “rand-pairs” and secret chats on Bloomberg terminals – even phone conversations and secret agreements.

Considering that the phrase “rand-pair” is second only to watching golf in making my eyes feel somewhat weighted, it’s easy to understand how this thing has such political power.

It’s because, like the chap on par-who-gives-a-monkey’s, almost all of us have no cooking clue what is going on. 

And the moment I hear phrases like “manipulation” or “hedge” or “rand-currency-pair”, I immediately get the feeling you get when someone is trying to sell you car insurance.

You just know you’re being screwed.

But in fact, as former Daily Maverick journalist Ray Mahlaka once clearly explained, the currency market is just too big for it to have any impact on you. Around $50-billion (about R882-billion) is traded every day.

And while some of the banks involved are big, none are big enough to have played that particular game.

Now obviously, some people did play games with the currency.

Absa was the first to announce that it had discovered two of its traders were doing this. It told the regulators and suspended them. 

Standard Chartered and CitiBank have also admitted that some of their people were guilty. They’ve paid a fine and moved on with their lives.

But some of the other banks are fighting on.

As Business Live reported this morning, the Constitutional Court is finally expected to put all of this to bed one way or another in a four-day hearing next week.

One hopes the coffee machine at Constitution Hill can do double-time. Four days of a hearing about currency pairs is more than we mere mortals could possibly stand.

Two things have really struck me about this case.

The first is that I remember speaking to the Competition Commission about it in 2017. The recording is sadly lost now, but I remember so clearly how adamant they were that first, all the named banks were involved, and second, how they would wrap up this case in a couple of months.

It’s 2025 now, and it’s still going.

The other is the language used by the banks in their defence.

Take Sim Tshabalala, the CEO of Standard Bank.

I think it was the first time I’d seen a CEO of one of our big banks writing an op-ed in our media, back in 2023. It was on this topic.

Remember how dangerous it is for a CEO, who was not on the Bloomberg terminal or the Reuters chat or the phone conversation, to say anything dogmatic about what happened.

But this is what he said in News 24 two years ago:

“We’re not playing for time or looking for a deal. When we say that we are innocent of currency manipulation, we mean it. We will not settle. Where we found that our people have engaged in wrongful conduct, we will act swiftly and will work with the relevant authorities. Where we find no evidence of wrongdoing, we will protect and defend our people – our most valuable assets.”

This is a person putting their entire reputation on the line. 

He must believe it. Firmly, utterly, unshakeably. 

I have a horrible feeling in my belly that the Competition Commission might feel a little silly after all of this – that the Constitutional Court, after selecting a good nine-iron, might include a few choice words about the commission’s conduct in its final ruling.

But that won’t be the end of it.

I think the damage is done. 

Parties such as the EFF and MK, and perhaps even the SACP, who have every incentive to attack the system, banks and institutions, will just go on attacking them. I wouldn’t be surprised if we hear that phrase “monopoly capital” again.

They might even turn, again, on our judges.

It’s quite strange in one way. 

Julius Malema has mouthed off time and time again about “currency manipulation”. It almost makes you wonder what he might know about making a profit off the manipulation of a bank.

In the meantime, bankers who are innocent will probably feel pretty frustrated, too. And not just with their putting.

I think they’ll feel they’ve been dragged into something that they have nothing to do with.

I’ll tell you this for free, though. Like any golf tournament I’ve ever watched, I can’t wait for the whole saga to end. DM

Comments (6)

D'Esprit Dan Aug 13, 2025, 08:10 AM

If it does turn out that the Competition Commission is wrong - they've already been told their evidence is weak - can we expect those driving this to resign? Or better, be fired? They deserve it, nothing more and nothing less. Dunno who their lawyers are in this, but they should be forced to forfeit their (doubtless massive) fees too!

megapode Aug 13, 2025, 09:35 AM

Hmmm... this would set the bar of prosecution too high I think. Is it better to let flimsy, but not frivolous, cases to be heard rather than set the bar too high at the risk that an important case will go unheard? With the proviso, of course, that there be a verdict and the verdict is made known and thus exoneration - if that happens - is also made known.

D'Esprit Dan Aug 13, 2025, 12:34 PM

Maybe, but from what I've read, this sounds like a frivolous case, with the CC simply trying anything and everything to change the decisions made previously. From what I remember, Standard Bank had one person, included in one note over the entire course of this, has been exonerated, and is still being pursued! Imagine applying that logic to the ANC - a junior councillor in a rural municipality steals, and the whole government is charged with theft (probably more reasonable, actually!)

megapode Aug 13, 2025, 09:31 AM

It would be no surprise that individual brokers have been trying to manipulate prices. The question is what the banks can be expected to know. Second to this is whether or not they employ the brokers or just give them facilities. It's like the organ trade case of a few years ago. Certainly a doctor was doing it, but how much could the healthcare company be expected to know, and so that what degree (if any) were they responsible?

Rod MacLeod Aug 13, 2025, 11:18 AM

Part 1. Governments don't understand that it isn't the market that is to blame, but their own pathetic attempts to shape that market. Look at what Soros did to the Pound in 1992. Thatcher's government thought they could bolster a fundamentally weak Pound by joining the European Exchange Rate Mechanism, essentially pegging the pound to a value range around the Mark, and hoping to get lower interest rates, lower inflation and a stronger Pound.

Rod MacLeod Aug 13, 2025, 11:18 AM

Part 2. How long can fixed exchange rates fight natural market forces? Soros’ Quantum Fund, along with many other speculators could easily see that the Bank of England would run out of steam trying to defend the indefensible - BoE just could not sustain the Pound at those levels. And so, when speculators shorted the Pound, guess who won the game? Politicians [and their regulatory lackeys] are idiots.

Rod MacLeod Aug 13, 2025, 11:23 AM

Part 3. What is the intrinsic value of the ZAR? It's not what SARB says it is, it's not what the SA Government says it should be, it's the price at which a willing buyer will buy it from a willing seller in a free market. Politicians just don't get the concept at all.

megapode Aug 13, 2025, 12:24 PM

To a point. But brokers (maybe banks) who can manipulate prices to suit their own agenda will (or at least will try). The price doesn't just float according to some popular demand.

Rod MacLeod Aug 13, 2025, 04:26 PM

When you say "manipulate prices" it sounds conspiratorial. And all conspiracies require great collaboration to pull them off. If a bank swats a profit off an unsuspecting client in forex, that's not price rigging - it's just dishonesty in the client bank relationship. But I doubt that all the banks in South Africa colluded to collapse the ZAR. In any event, the ZAR is a liquid emerging market currency and attracts lots of traders worldwide. A conspiracy makes no sense at all.

Thomas Cleghorn Aug 13, 2025, 11:42 AM

I'm pretty sure that Des Van Rooyen being appointed the Minister of Finance was used for currency manipulation. I wonder if anyone sold the Rand hard days before that event..?