{"id":9444,"date":"2026-07-27T12:11:42","date_gmt":"2026-07-27T10:11:42","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/datanamixdev.wpengine.com\/media\/?p=9444"},"modified":"2026-07-27T12:11:42","modified_gmt":"2026-07-27T10:11:42","slug":"how-south-africas-cofi-bill-could-reshape-ai-fintech-and-open-finance","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.datanamix.com\/media\/2026\/07\/27\/how-south-africas-cofi-bill-could-reshape-ai-fintech-and-open-finance\/","title":{"rendered":"How South Africa\u2019s COFI Bill Could Reshape AI, Fintech and Open Finance"},"content":{"rendered":"

South Africa\u2019s proposed Conduct of Financial Institutions (COFI) Bill is designed to modernise market-conduct regulation by replacing fragmented requirements with a more coherent, activity-based and outcomes-focused framework.<\/p>\n

Its importance extends beyond regulatory consolidation. By emphasising technology neutrality, customer outcomes and data-led supervision, COFI could influence how financial institutions deploy artificial intelligence, collaborate with fintech platforms and participate in open-finance ecosystems.<\/p>\n

What the proposed reform is intended to change<\/h2>\n

Under the Twin Peaks model, the Financial Sector Conduct Authority is responsible for market conduct, while the Prudential Authority focuses on financial soundness. COFI is intended to give the conduct side a consolidated legislative framework.<\/p>\n

National Treasury describes the proposed approach as activity-based, principles-led and focused on fair treatment, transparency and accountability. The Bill remains subject to the legislative process and should not yet be treated as enacted law.<\/p>\n

Why technology neutrality matters<\/h2>\n

Financial technology develops faster than prescriptive legislation. A technology-neutral framework avoids creating separate conduct expectations for every new platform, model or delivery channel.<\/p>\n

The practical implication is that an institution cannot transfer responsibility for customer outcomes to an algorithm or technology supplier. Whether a decision is made by an employee, an AI model or a platform workflow, the institution must be able to govern the process and assess its effects.<\/p>\n

AI turns conduct into a data-governance question<\/h2>\n

AI-supported financial services depend on data quality, model design and continuous monitoring. Inaccurate, incomplete or poorly governed data can lead to unsuitable recommendations, inconsistent decisions or unfair exclusion.<\/p>\n

A conduct-focused AI programme therefore needs more than technical accuracy. It needs evidence that the system:<\/p>\n