MBABANE -Mbongiseni Nkambule,the outgoing Curator says his ‘life support’ statement did not qualify or support SCBS liquidation.
Last year during a stakeholders meeting held at SibaneSami Hotel where Nkambule made the statement that Status Capital Building Society was in Life Support.
Such a statement drew different opinion particularly after the SCBS was put into Provincial Liquidation.
After the latter,many came to the conclusion that the statement by the outgoing Curator ignited the move to liquidate the Society.
When reached for comment,Nkambule explained that when he referred to SCBS as being ‘on life support,’ he was not making a casual or emotive remark, but rather describing, in simplified terms, the financial condition of the institution at the time.
He furrther outlined that,specifically, the reference was to a situation of insolvency, where an institution was no longer able to meet its obligations as they fell due, or where its liabilities exceeded its assets. He pointed out that in regulatory language, this was a critical condition that signaled that the institution was no longer viable in its current form.
“The analogy of ‘life support’ was used to convey that the institution was being sustained through regulatory intervention, despite its underlying financial position being severely compromised.It is important to clarify that this statement did not in itself constitute a declaration of liquidation, but rather an indication that the institution had reached a stage where extraordinary supervisory measures were required, and where normal operations were no longer sustainable without intervention.”
Nkambule went on to cite that globally, regulatory practice had evolved.
He made an example that regulators no longer operated on the assumption that all financial institutions can or should be preserved indefinitely.
“Instead, the focus is on ensuring that when institutions fail, this is managed in an orderly and controlled manner, with minimal disruption to members, customers, and the broader financial system.”
Financial institutions typically move through a lifecycle that includes Licensing (entry) and normal supervision,heightened supervision or curatorship where distress emerges and finally resolution, including liquidation, where recovery was no longer feasible.
“Where an institution is insolvent—particularly in circumstances where this arises from serious governance or financial misconduct—it is neither prudent nor in the public interest to artificially sustain it indefinitely. The regulatory priority in such cases shifts to protecting stakeholders and preserving system stability, rather than prolonging the life of a non-viable entity.”
In summary and accordingly, he reinstated that the ‘life support’ reference should be understood in this context,“as an indication of severe financial distress requiring intervention, rather than a definitive statement on the specific resolution outcome at that point in time.”
The High Court of Eswatini placed Status Capital Building Society (SCBS) under provisional liquidation, effective December 24, 2025, following an application by the Financial Services Regulatory Authority (FSRA).
The investors and shareholders filled opposing papers through Mntshali and Gcamphalala Attorneys.
Through the opposing papers,among other things,it was discovered that all monies that were invested in the various allegedly related entities have been repaid.
The investors and shareholders legal team refuted the claims made by the FSRA that the revenue invested was still owed.
“Only one investment remains unpaid and I have been advised that the reason for its delay is the fact that it is long term.This is the investment made through the Swaziland Debt Factoring Firm (SDFF).However,worth mentioning is that same is being settled after it,SDFF made the necessary settlements with the curators.”
Moreover, the team argued that the SCBS could not meet its obligations because it has been denied the opportunity to do business.
“There is no sufficient reason at this point in time to liquidate the SCBS.Furthermore,there will be no equitable distribution of funds at this stage as the other investors have been paid as preferred creditors.”
“The allegation that money was siphoned out of the country cannot be sustained.The Status Capital Building Society appointed a Compliance Officer who was responsible for preparing the debenture agreements and related documentation.”
The intention was to execute compliant debenture agreements to ensure that the capital was always adequate as per the requirement of the FSRA.
“The reason the SCBS believed that everything was in order was because the Building Society Act authorized the Society to invest in debentures.”
Lastly,the FSRA was accused of avoiding accountability over the funds collected before the appointment of the first curator- Bimal Da Silva.
It also worth noting that the renewal of the 2025 licence was done after the appointment of the curator contrary to the reports that it was done before.
“The SCBS was authorized to commence business on December 01,2024 up to November 30,2025.”
Therefore,the defence argues that it is only the Swaziland Debt Factoring Firm that required further engagements not the other entities.
“The other investments had already been paid when the curator was appointed.It appears that the FSRA is avoiding accountability regarding the funds that were collected.The funds that were recovered were invested in Status Asset Management.The compliance office was responsible for recovering those funds.However the FSRA decides to avoid this subject.”
Discussion about this post