MBABANE – Financial services executive Sifiso Nxumalo has alleged that he suffered financial losses running into millions of Emalangeni after the Financial Services Regulatory Authority (FSRA) blocked his appointment as Managing Director of STANLIB Eswatini and subsequently declared him not fit and proper for the position.
Nxumalo makes the allegations in a High Court application in which he is seeking to stop the regulator from taking further action that could bar him from working in the non-bank financial services sector.
In his founding affidavit, Nxumalo argues that the FSRA unlawfully declared him unfit to hold the position of Managing Director at STANLIB without first affording him a hearing, thereby infringing on his constitutional rights.
“First, they unlawfully declared me as not fit and proper to be appointed as MD of STANLIB without affording me a hearing and infringing on my right to practise an occupation of my choice,” Nxumalo states in court papers.
He further claims that the regulator’s actions have had a devastating financial impact on him and his dependants.
“This act alone has had an adverse effect on my life and my extended dependants. In simple terms, I have suffered actual financial loss in millions of Emalangeni which I could have earned had FSRA not abused its power and declared me not fit and proper without even affording me a hearing,” he alleges.
The dispute stems from an offer of employment made to Nxumalo by STANLIB Eswatini in August 2025 after what he describes as a rigorous recruitment and interview process.
According to the court papers, STANLIB offered him the position of Managing Director on August 25, 2025, subject to regulatory approval by FSRA.
However, in October 2025, STANLIB informed him that the regulator had declined to approve his appointment. The decision was reportedly based on provisions of the Financial Services Regulatory Authority Act and the regulator’s Fit and Proper Guidelines.
Nxumalo contends that before the decision was taken, he was never given an opportunity to state his case.
He further argues that he was not informed of the considerations or criteria used by FSRA in reaching the conclusion that he was not fit and proper to lead the company.
The financial services executive says he subsequently lodged an appeal before the Financial Services Regulatory Authority Appeals Tribunal in November 2025, challenging the regulator’s decision.
According to his affidavit, the appeal remains unresolved.
Nxumalo further accuses FSRA of frustrating his efforts to pursue the appeal by failing to provide records necessary for the matter to proceed.
“Second, they have been obstructive in the process of pursuing my appeal before the Tribunal. They are, for no substantive reasons, ignoring and/or refusing to furnish me with the relevant record so as to ensure I do not prosecute the appeal,” he alleges.
He claims the regulator’s refusal to provide documents has delayed the appeal process.
“This obstructive conduct is intended to ensure I do not challenge their unlawful action to declare me not fit and proper to hold the position of MD at STANLIB,” he states.
According to the court papers, Nxumalo’s attorneys wrote to FSRA in December 2025 requesting correspondence between the regulator and STANLIB concerning his appointment. He alleges that the regulator has not responded to the request.
The matter escalated in March 2026 when FSRA issued what Nxumalo describes as a “show cause” letter.
In the notice, the regulator called upon him to explain why he should not be declared unfit and improper to serve as a controller, director, adviser, presenter or officer of a non-bank financial services provider.
Nxumalo argues that the move was contradictory because the regulator had already effectively declared him unfit when it blocked his appointment at STANLIB months earlier.
Through his attorneys, he challenged the process, arguing that FSRA had already made up its mind and could not now seek to give him a hearing after the decision had allegedly been taken.
His legal team further argued that a show-cause process should occur before a decision is made and not after an adverse determination has already been reached.
Despite these objections, Nxumalo says FSRA informed his attorneys in May 2026 that it intended to proceed with the process and would issue a decision on the matter.
This prompted him to approach the High Court on an urgent basis seeking an interim interdict.
In the application, he asks the court to restrain FSRA from issuing any decision, ruling or directive that would debar him from occupying positions as a shareholder, controller, director, adviser or employee within financial institutions in Eswatini pending the determination of the main application.
Nxumalo argues that such a decision would effectively end his career in the industry in which he has worked for more than two decades.
The executive describes himself in court papers as a financial services professional with more than 23 years’ experience in the sector. He holds a Master of Science degree in Financial Analysis and Fund Management from the University of Exeter in the United Kingdom and currently serves as Head of Strategy at Ebener Property Developers.
He contends that the regulator’s intended actions threaten his constitutional right to practise a profession and earn a living.
Nxumalo also argues that FSRA lacks the legal authority to debar individuals from working in the financial services sector.
According to his application, the regulator’s powers are limited to those specifically granted under the FSRA Act and do not include the authority to prohibit a person from practising a profession or holding employment in the sector.
He further argues that because he has already appealed the regulator’s earlier decision before the Appeals Tribunal, FSRA cannot revisit the same issue while the appeal remains pending.
The High Court is now being asked to determine whether FSRA should be temporarily restrained from taking any further action against Nxumalo while the broader legal challenge to the regulator’s powers and conduct is heard. The allegations contained in the court papers have not yet been tested before the court, and FSRA’s response to the application was not contained in the documents before the court.
Discussion about this post