In a ruling that has stunned the business and legal communities alike, the High Court recently acquitted two directors of ThreeWays Shipping Company—central figures in a decade-long fraud case involving MTN Uganda and USD 3.8 million siphoned from corporate accounts. The decision, delivered by Hon. Justice Lawrence Gidudu, clears the accused despite overwhelming evidence of financial benefit, control, and circumstantial involvement.
The ruling doesn’t just let two suspects walk free—it sends a chilling message to the investment community: in Uganda, facts may no longer be enough to guarantee justice.
The Inconvenient Truth Behind the Judgment
The facts of the case were not in dispute:
- 125 fraudulent invoices were generated between 2009 and 2012.
- USD 3.8 million was transferred from MTN to ThreeWays Shipping’s bank account.
- The accused, A1 and A2, were sole signatories to that account and withdrew the money over several years.
- The now acquitted duo had entered an agreement with MTN not to prosecute them if they repaid the stolen money. They paid USD 300,000 and then reneged on the agreement.
- A former staff member of MTN John Paul Basobose repaid UGX 1.2BN and entered a plea bargain.
One MTN staffer, John Paul Basabose, confessed to the fraud and paid back UGX 1.2 billion in a plea bargain.
Yet, the court ruled there was no direct evidence proving that the directors knew about or participated in the fraud, and declined to lift the corporate veil, a standard approach in such fraud cases.
This decision is even more baffling given that the same judge, in the 2017 case of Uganda v. Jeff Lawrence Kiwanuka, lifted the corporate veil to convict a company director in a similar financial fraud case. What changed? Legal scholars and court watchers are left scratching their heads.
Investors Left in the Dark
The implications of this ruling go far beyond the courtroom. For multinational companies operating in Uganda, judicial uncertainty is now a material risk.
This case began in 2016. MTN, like any responsible corporate entity, pursued legal remedies with the expectation that evidence and due process would determine the outcome. Instead, they were met with systemic delay, unclear legal thresholds, and a judgment that contradicts both logic and precedent.
Multinational firms require a dependable legal system. One where dispute resolution is predictable, fair, and based on merit—not on personality, influence, or backroom politics. When judgments appear arbitrary or suspiciously inconsistent, investor confidence erodes quickly.
A Justice System Under Siege
In recent years, businesses have watched with concern as high-stakes commercial and corruption cases take on a pattern of judicial contradictions. Judgments begin with acknowledgment of wrongdoing, agreement with legal reasoning, and recognition of harm—only to end with acquittals that defy the very logic the courts previously affirmed.
This curious legal phenomenon, where rulings reverse themselves at the final moment, leaves legal experts and stakeholders baffled. It’s more than judicial caution—it is judicial capitulation, and it leaves too much room for speculation about external influence.
Reclaiming the Rule of Law
The DPP has an opportunity—and a responsibility—to appeal this decision. This is not simply about recovering lost corporate funds; it is about restoring public trust in Uganda’s judiciary. If the law cannot hold accountable those who control accounts that receive stolen millions over three years, then what exactly is left of justice?
MTN has every right to approach the DPP and push for a retrial or appeal. This is not vengeance; it’s a defense of the principle that justice must be seen to be done.
Conclusion: Business Cannot Thrive Without Trust
The case of MTN vs. ThreeWays Shipping will go down in history—not just for its financial stakes, but for what it reveals about the fragility of judicial trust in Uganda.
A legal system that fails to protect investors, punish fraud, or apply consistent logic is not merely flawed—it is dangerous.
If Uganda wants to attract investment, grow its economy, and compete on a global scale, then it must do more than pass favorable tax laws. It must guarantee that the courts are blind to influence and loyal only to the law.
Until then, every investor is one unexpected judgment away from a loss they may never recover.
