High Court Orders MTN Uganda to Pay Sh2.3 Billion to Richard Mwami

MTN Uganda Limited has been ordered by the High Court to pay over UGX 2.3 billion to its former Senior Manager, Richard Mwami, for malicious prosecution. The landmark judgment, delivered by Justice Isaac Bonny Teko on June 26, 2026, found that MTN maliciously instigated Mwami's prosecution in a multi-billion shilling mobile money fraud case, despite an internal forensic audit clearing him of any wrongdoing. Mwami, who was in fact the whistleblower, suffered significant reputational and financial damage. This decision underscores the critical importance of corporate accountability and due diligence in initiating criminal proceedings, particularly concerning employee whistleblowers, and sets a precedent for substantial damages in such tortious claims in Uganda.

In a significant ruling that reverberates through Uganda's corporate and legal landscape, the High Court has ordered MTN Uganda Limited to pay a staggering sum exceeding UGX 2.3 billion to its former Senior Manager, Richard Mwami. The judgment, delivered on June 26, 2026, by Justice Isaac Bonny Teko, found MTN liable for maliciously instigating Mwami's prosecution in a high-profile mobile money fraud case. This decision is not merely a substantial financial penalty but a powerful affirmation of the principles of corporate accountability and the protection of individuals against the misuse of the criminal justice system.

The case highlights the severe consequences for corporations that fail to exercise due diligence and act with proper motive when involving law enforcement in internal matters, especially when dealing with whistleblowers. Richard Mwami, initially the individual who exposed the fraud, found himself transformed into the primary suspect, enduring years of criminal proceedings and profound personal and professional detriment.

This article delves into the legal framework of malicious prosecution in Uganda, examining the elements required to establish such a claim and how the High Court applied these principles to MTN Uganda's conduct. It further explores the implications of this landmark judgment for legal practitioners and corporate entities operating within the Ugandan jurisdiction, emphasizing the need for robust internal governance and ethical engagement with the justice system.

Malicious prosecution is a common law intentional tort, deeply rooted in legal history, designed to safeguard individuals from unwarranted criminal proceedings. Its origins can be traced back to the writ of conspiracy and later the action on the case, with its principles firmly established in cases such as *Saville v Roberts*. In Uganda, as in many common law jurisdictions, the tort serves to strike a balance between the public interest in bringing criminals to justice and the necessity of protecting innocent persons from false accusations.

The factual matrix of the *Mwami v MTN Uganda* case originates from a multi-billion shilling mobile money fraud that occurred within MTN's Fundamo platform in December 2011. Richard Mwami, then serving as Senior Manager Public Access, was the first to detect and report these suspicious transactions to senior management, effectively acting as a whistleblower. Following his report, MTN commissioned an independent forensic audit by Grant Thornton, which, in its January 2012 report, unequivocally cleared Mwami of any involvement in the theft.

Despite the exculpatory findings of its own commissioned audit, MTN Uganda proceeded to pursue Mwami's prosecution. The company relied on a 'charge and caution' statement allegedly obtained from another suspect, Patrick Ssentongo, which was later deemed inadmissible by the Anti-Corruption Court, having been found to be illegally and involuntarily coerced. Mwami was subsequently arrested, subjected to criminal proceedings, and eventually acquitted in December 2015. The trial court, in its acquittal, sharply criticized MTN, describing Mwami as a "sacrificial lamb" who should have been a state witness rather than an accused person. This acquittal paved the way for Mwami's civil suit against MTN Uganda for malicious prosecution.

To succeed in a claim for malicious prosecution under Ugandan law, a plaintiff must prove four essential elements on a balance of probabilities: (i) that the criminal proceedings were instituted by the defendant; (ii) that the defendant acted without reasonable and probable cause; (iii) that the defendant acted maliciously; and (iv) that the criminal proceedings terminated in the plaintiff's favour. The High Court, in *Richard Mwami v MTN Uganda Limited*, meticulously applied these principles to the facts presented.

Regarding the first element, Justice Teko found that MTN Uganda was indeed the "moving force" behind Mwami's prosecution, despite the formal proceedings being conducted by state agencies. The court established that MTN employees were directly involved in the procurement of the discredited statement from Patrick Ssentongo, which formed the sole basis for implicating Mwami. MTN failed to rebut evidence linking its officials to this unlawful process. On the second element, the court concluded that MTN acted without reasonable and probable cause. Justice Teko highlighted that MTN knowingly disregarded its own forensic audit report, which had exonerated Mwami, and instead relied on a statement later ruled inadmissible. The judge stated that no prudent person, in possession of such exculpatory evidence, could honestly believe Mwami was guilty.

The third element, malice, was also established. Malice in the context of malicious prosecution extends beyond personal ill-will to include using the legal process for any purpose other than the proper administration of justice. The court found that MTN's actions, including Mwami's dramatic arrest by the Violent Crimes Crack Unit (VCCU) more than a year after investigations had concluded and despite his whistleblower status, demonstrated an improper motive. The court noted that MTN knowingly disregarded exculpatory evidence while facilitating criminal proceedings against its former employee. Finally, the fourth element was undisputed: Mwami's acquittal in December 2015, where the trial court found no evidence linking him to the fraud, clearly indicated that the proceedings terminated in his favour.

Consequently, the High Court awarded Mwami a total of UGX 2,309,750,000 in damages. This comprised UGX 1,809,750,000 in special damages for financial losses, including lost salary, housing allowance, and medical benefits; UGX 400,000,000 in general damages for harm to his reputation, liberty, and career; and UGX 100,000,000 in exemplary damages, intended to punish MTN and deter similar future conduct. The court further ordered interest at 10% per annum from the date of judgment until full payment, along with legal costs. This substantial award underscores the judiciary's commitment to holding powerful entities accountable for abusing the justice system.

The High Court's judgment in *Richard Mwami v MTN Uganda Limited* serves as a critical reminder for corporate entities in Uganda and across the continent regarding the profound legal and financial risks associated with malicious prosecution. It unequivocally establishes that companies cannot escape liability merely because criminal proceedings are formally conducted by state prosecutors if they are found to be the instigating force behind such proceedings. The case underscores the imperative for corporations to conduct thorough, impartial internal investigations, respect due process, and exercise extreme caution and integrity when involving law enforcement in employee-related matters.

For legal practitioners, this decision highlights the robust nature of malicious prosecution as a tort in Uganda and the potential for significant damage awards, particularly where there is clear evidence of malice and a lack of reasonable and probable cause. It reinforces the need for meticulous due diligence in advising corporate clients on initiating criminal complaints and emphasizes the importance of protecting whistleblowers. Companies must implement and adhere to strong ethical guidelines and internal policies that prevent the misuse of the justice system for collateral purposes. As this case may set a precedent for future claims, legal professionals should closely monitor any potential appeals and their outcomes, as they will further shape the landscape of corporate liability for malicious prosecution in Uganda.