By Staff Writer

The announcement that South Africa’s MTN Group, Africa’s largest telecoms operator, is under criminal investigation by the US Department of Justice (DoJ) grand jury should reverberate far beyond Johannesburg.

It is more than another potential case of corporate misconduct. It is a test of whether multinationals that allegedly profited in conflict zones or colluded with terrorists for profit—while Americans and Israelis paid with their lives—can finally be held to account under US law.

Grand jury scrutiny

Grand jury investigations are not routine regulatory inquiries or civil litigation. They are among the most powerful tools of the American justice system, conducted in secrecy and designed to determine whether criminal charges of the most serious nature should be filed.

In the US federal system, grand juries almost always return indictments when prosecutors seek them.

• The Bureau of Justice Statistics has found that fewer than two per cent of cases presented to a federal grand jury result in no indictment. In other words, the indictment rate is roughly 98 per cent.
• This is sometimes described by legal scholars as “the prosecutor’s strong hand” — grand juries generally follow the lead of the US Attorney’s office.

For MTN, the implications are profound:

• Corporate exposure: MTN could face indictments for providing material support to terrorism, triggering heavy fines, loss of US market access, and exclusion from global financial systems.
• Individual liability: Directors, executives, and even shareholders—past and present—may come under scrutiny if prosecutors find evidence of complicity or wilful negligence and face personal criminal prosecution.
• Geopolitical dimension: Unlike private litigation, a Department of Justice-led probe signals that the US government sees MTN’s conduct as directly touching on national security interests. The investigation will reveal the full extent of the illicit partnership structured between Ramaphosa’s ANC and Iranian generals and their proxies. It also places General Rudzani Maphwanya’s visit with Iranian generals—who directly control MTN-Irancell and its profits—in an entirely different light. The Grand Jury investigation explains why Mcebisi Jonas was rejected as Ramaphosa’s choice as his Special Envoy to the US-Jonas was already under criminal investigation by the US Justice Department when Ramaphosa nominated him as Special Envoy.

The difference is simple: civil lawsuits seek damages. A grand jury seeks justice for the American people.

Allegations linked to killings

The accusations against MTN are grave. Families of US service members, contractors, and Israeli civilians have alleged that:

• In Afghanistan, MTN paid millions of dollars in protection money from 2006 until 2021 and made concessions to Taliban-linked militants in exchange for keeping its mobile networks operational. These concessions, plaintiffs argue, funded the very groups that targeted and killed Americans.
• In Iran, MTN’s 49 per cent stake in MTN-Irancell from 2005 until 2025 funnelled billions of dollars of revenue to entities controlled by Iran’s Supreme Leader, the Ministry of Defence, and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC)—a US-designated foreign terrorist organisation—providing billions of dollars to terrorists responsible for rocket attacks, bombings, and killings of American and Israeli civilians.

If proven, these actions move beyond reckless corporate risk-taking into the realm of material support for terrorism. The criminal penalties under US law are among the harshest in the federal system: up to 20 years’ imprisonment per count, and where deaths result—as alleged here—life imprisonment. Any funds, property, or assets linked to the crime can be seized. A company can be barred from access to US financial markets and designated under terrorism sanctions programmes. The Department of Justice claims extraterritorial reach when Americans are killed and will seek arrest and extradition of perpetrators. There is nowhere to hide from this justice.

Risks for MTN and its executives

For MTN as a listed company, the fallout is already material. Its share price dropped nearly 9 per cent after the disclosure. But the risks run deeper:

• Investor flight: Pension funds and institutional investors—particularly South Africa’s Public Investment Corporation, MTN’s largest shareholder—face serious reputational risk by association and potentially financial penalties. ESG mandates and fiduciary duties will collide with allegations of complicity in terrorism.
• Financing and operations: Banks, partners, and regulators may be compelled to cut ties if indictments or sanctions follow, choking MTN’s lifelines in global markets.
• Board accountability: Past and present directors will come under scrutiny for governance failures. Did they knowingly partner with Iranian military-linked entities? Did they ignore red flags in Afghanistan? Prosecutors will want answers.

This is not just about corporate liability. It is about personal responsibility at the highest levels of MTN’s leadership and among its shareholders.

The fallout will not be limited to MTN. There will be repercussions for all the influential people who were paid to shield the company from scrutiny while its platforms were being used to kill Americans and Israelis—the lawyers, the lobbyists, the private investigators, and the journalists.

Why the case matters

The MTN probe highlights a broader lesson: the globalisation of American justice to protect the American people and their allies. US law now routinely reaches beyond America’s borders to hold corporations accountable when their actions contribute to the killing of US and allied citizens. The precedent is clear—from BNP Paribas’s sanctions-busting fines to French cement-maker Lafarge’s guilty plea for aiding ISIS.

For American and Israeli victims’ families, the case represents hope that justice may yet reach those who profited in blood-soaked markets. For corporate boards worldwide, it is a stark warning: decisions made in Tehran or Kabul may land before a US grand jury.

Conclusion: Justice awaits

MTN has denied wrongdoing and insists it will defend itself. But the fact remains: a DoJ grand jury does not convene on speculation. It convenes when prosecutors believe there is evidence worth pursuing.

The reckoning for MTN, its leaders, and its partners will be both legal and moral. If found complicit in financing terrorist groups that killed Americans and Israelis, its legacy as Africa’s corporate champion will be irreparably stained. And for its shareholders and directors, silence or denial will not shield them from accountability in the eyes of the law—or history.