Telecommunications giant MTN Uganda has indicated it will consider appealing a High Court judgment that ordered the company to pay more than Shs 2.3 billion to its former senior manager, Richard Mwami, for malicious prosecution.
In a brief statement issued after friday’s ruling, the company said it had taken note of the judgment delivered on June 26, 2026, and was carefully reviewing it with its legal team before deciding on the next course of action.
“MTN Uganda notes the judgment of the High Court delivered on 26 June 2026 in the matter of Richard Mwami v Attorney General and MTN Uganda Limited,” the company said.
“We are studying the judgment carefully with our legal advisors and are considering all available options, including an appeal. MTN Uganda remains committed to the highest standards of corporate governance and to conducting its business in accordance with the law.”
The company added that because the matter could proceed on appeal, it was unable to make any further comment at this stage.
The ruling, delivered by Acting Justice Isaac Bonny Teko, found MTN Uganda liable for malicious prosecution and ordered it to pay Mwami Shs 1.809 billion in special damages, Shs400 million in general damages and Shs100 million in exemplary damages, bringing the total award to over Shs2.3 billion, excluding interest and costs.
The Attorney General was struck out of the suit after the court held that the claim against the Government had been filed outside the statutory limitation period.
Mwami, a former Senior Manager at MTN Uganda, had sued both the Attorney General and MTN after he was prosecuted over the 2012 MTN Mobile Money fraud case involving billions of shillings. He maintained that he was the whistleblower who uncovered suspicious transactions and reported them to senior management before later becoming one of the accused persons.
In its judgment, the High Court concluded that MTN was the “moving force” behind the criminal proceedings despite an earlier forensic audit reportedly not implicating Mwami. The court held that the company acted without reasonable and probable cause and that the prosecution was malicious.
However, legal experts who spoke to this publication said the decision raises important legal questions that could ultimately be settled by the Court of Appeal.
According to the lawyers, once MTN discovered and reported the suspected fraud to law enforcement agencies, the responsibility for investigating the matter, evaluating the available evidence, deciding whether to prosecute and conducting the criminal case rested with the Uganda Police Force and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions.
“The company’s obligation was to report what it believed was a crime. From that point onwards, the investigative agencies and prosecutors independently exercise their constitutional mandate before the courts determine guilt or innocence,” one legal expert observed.
The experts noted that the High Court nonetheless found that MTN’s actions went beyond merely reporting the suspected fraud and concluded that the company had actively instigated the prosecution. They said that specific finding is expected to be among the key issues that will likely be challenged should MTN file an appeal.
They further explained that appellate courts routinely examine whether a trial judge correctly applied the legal principles governing malicious prosecution, particularly where independent investigative bodies and prosecutors were involved before criminal charges were sanctioned.
MTN’s response signals that the company is not accepting the High Court decision as the final determination of the dispute and intends to exhaust the legal avenues available to it.
For now, the judgment remains enforceable unless stayed by the appellate courts, but legal observers expect the matter to proceed to the Court of Appeal, where broader questions surrounding the respective roles of complainants, investigators and prosecutors in criminal proceedings are likely to receive further judicial interpretation.
The dispute stems from one of Uganda’s most high-profile corporate fraud investigations, and any appeal is expected to attract significant public and legal interest given its potential implications for companies that report suspected criminal activity to law enforcement agencies.
