The Uganda Telecom story keeps rolling over again and again. The recent weeks have not only unfolded drama as it happens at the national telecom carrier, but has also proven to be an exchange between government parties and the telco’s top administration.
Just the other week, Investment Minister Hon. Evelyn Anite told members of Parliament that government no longer has any control of UTL Operations, with no more access to the company premises for any audits to be done.
The company administrators would, in response, call a press conference to deny all the accusations posed by the minister insisting that neither refused government from accessing UTL premises nor that the administrators denied them the right to audit the company as was alleged by the Minister.
Ms Evelyn Anite didn’t take the response lightly, and replied by directing for the firing of Mr Twebaze Bemanya as the administrator of UTL, in a letter addressed to the Attorney General. Ms Anite directed him to get immediate replacement for Mr Bemanya, citing that all the concerned parties have lost confidence as the administrator and thus cannot work with him.
The most predictable action from the Attorney General was to heed to the minister’s call and replace Mr Twebaze. However, he has instead blocked the removal of the administrator citing that “there are no grounds to remove the administrator of UTL from office”.
In a letter dated 28th June 2019, the Attorney General Mwesigwa Rukutana has written back to the Ms Anite offering legal counsel on the matter. He states that the removal of an Administrator from office is provided for under the Insolvency Act, and thus finds it “noteworthy that under the law, a creditor would be a person listed as competent to apply to court to remove an Administrator from office”.
He added that the Minister of Finance, Planning and Economic Development “has no locus to apply to court to remove the Administrator from office”.
“They must relate to failure to comply with the duties imposed on the Administrator under the Administration Deed, the Insolvency Act or any other law or any orders or directions of court.”
The Attorney General further reminds the Minister that the Administration process has been extended on three occasions with the last two occasions under the consent of the Minister of Finance, Planning and Economic Development.
In the letter, he also questioned why the minister didn’t go by the Speaker’s ruling, which guided that the telco’s Administration is a court-controlled process and neither the legislature nor the executive should interfere with the process.
The Attorney General warns that any interference in the administration process is likely to fail the process of finding a strategic investor for the company, as this is one of the duties of the Administrator.
“If the company shareholders frustrate the efforts of the Administrator to achieve the purpose of the Administrator Deed, the process may be challenged by the creditors and the other shareholder and the company may end up in liquidation”.
Rukutana has advised Minister Anite to avoid interfering in the administration of UTL as she risks attracting liability on government.
