___STEADY_PAYWALL___.MTN Group is embroiled in a legal battle with the families of US service members and civilians who have been killed in Afghanistan. The central accusation is that MTN staff paid Taliban officials not to attack the SA-headquartered telecom company's towers in Afghanistan. MTN has also been accused of providing support to the Taliban by deactivating cell towers at the group's request, reports Bloomberg. MTN is one of several corporates accused of wrongdoing. The news agency notes that MTN operates in 21 countries across Africa and the Middle East, including parts of the world seen as too risky by many other carriers, countries such as Syria, Iran, and South Sudan. The Wall Street Journal carries the latest details on the law suit that just won't go away. – Jackie Cameron. Lawsuit Accusing Contractors of Paying Protection Money to Taliban Is ExpandedBy Jessica Donati(The Wall Street Journal) – WASHINGTON – Families of American soldiers and personnel wounded or killed in Afghanistan have accused two US contractors of paying protection money to the Taliban, expanding a lawsuit filed earlier.Two companies identified in an amended complaint received at least $1.7bn in contracts to implement US aid projects in Afghanistan over almost a decade through 2015, according to records cited in the lawsuit.US congressional investigations have documented widespread instances of US companies that paid money to warlords and insurgents in exchange for protection at the height of the war.The bipartisan Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan, created by Congress, wrote in its final report in 2011 that poor planning, management and oversight damaged US objectives. It cited payments by Afghan contractors to insurgent groups for protection as particularly alarming.A lawsuit filed last year on behalf of more than 100 families seeks compensation for deaths and injuries between 2009 and 2017, citing actions involving payments to insurgents by US and international firms.The amended complaint filed Friday added nearly 100 families seeking compensation for deaths and injuries between 2009 and 2017. There now are 239 families named in the lawsuit.The two new US companies named in the lawsuit are Wisconsin-based Blumont Inc., previously known as International Relief Development, or IRD; and Chemonics International based in Washington, DC. They undertook reconstruction projects in sectors including agriculture and road-building for the United States Agency for International Development, or USAID, in Afghanistan.In a statement, Blumont said the legal complaint was the first time the firm had been made aware of the allegations."The information outlined in the complaint predates Blumont's current structure and leadership," Blumont said, adding that IRD programs had been audited and reviewed numerous times. "Blumont prioritizes compliance with the guidance and directives of the donors and partners we work with, including USAID."USAID briefly barred the firm from receiving federal contracts in 2015, leading to an overhaul in the company's management. USAID didn't respond to a request for comment.Chemonics didn't comment. A spokeswoman said the company's offices were closed to show solidarity with victims of racial injustice.The lawsuit relies on confidential sources, congressional reports, news reports and government watchdogs, alleging that the companies either directly negotiated payments with the Taliban, or allowed subcontractors to deal with the insurgents to allow work to continue.The lawsuit was filed in US District Court in Washington by the litigation firms Kellogg Hansen and Willkie Farr & Gallagher. Also joining in the filing is Sparacino PLLC, an investigative law firm."The US government publicly opposed these payments, but the defendants made them anyway because they decided it was in their financial interest," Joshua Branson, a partner at Kellogg Hansen, told The Wall Street Journal.The original lawsuit filed in December named other major US contractors, the UK-based security firm G4S and South Africa-based telecom giant MTN. All have filed motions to dismiss.A G4S spokesman said the company "rejects these allegations in relation to any G4S group company and intends to vigorously defend any group company against any related claims."The amended lawsuit also contains new allegations – based on evidence from former employees and other sources – against MTN and one of the US defendants, contractor Louis Berger Group, now owned by Canada's WSP Global Inc."[We] remain of the view that we conduct our business in a responsible and compliant manner in all our territories," MTN Group President and Chief Executive Officer Rob Shuter told the Journal. "As a result, we intend to continue to defend our position."In its motion to dismiss, MTN said the company had helped bring telecommunications to the poorest people in Afghanistan, exposing itself to violent attacks in the process. The "plaintiffs have sued the wrong defendants in the wrong court based on insufficient allegations," it said.When asked to comment about the amended complaint, a spokesman for WSP said "Louis Berger is vigorously defending this lawsuit and at this time, we cannot comment on this ongoing civil litigation."To win a civil suit, lawyers need to persuade a jury that the preponderance of evidence supports their case, a lesser standard than in a criminal trial, in which the government must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.– Write to Jessica Donati at jessica.donati@wsj.com
___STEADY_PAYWALL___.MTN Group is embroiled in a legal battle with the families of US service members and civilians who have been killed in Afghanistan. The central accusation is that MTN staff paid Taliban officials not to attack the SA-headquartered telecom company's towers in Afghanistan. MTN has also been accused of providing support to the Taliban by deactivating cell towers at the group's request, reports Bloomberg. MTN is one of several corporates accused of wrongdoing. The news agency notes that MTN operates in 21 countries across Africa and the Middle East, including parts of the world seen as too risky by many other carriers, countries such as Syria, Iran, and South Sudan. The Wall Street Journal carries the latest details on the law suit that just won't go away. – Jackie Cameron. Lawsuit Accusing Contractors of Paying Protection Money to Taliban Is ExpandedBy Jessica Donati(The Wall Street Journal) – WASHINGTON – Families of American soldiers and personnel wounded or killed in Afghanistan have accused two US contractors of paying protection money to the Taliban, expanding a lawsuit filed earlier.Two companies identified in an amended complaint received at least $1.7bn in contracts to implement US aid projects in Afghanistan over almost a decade through 2015, according to records cited in the lawsuit.US congressional investigations have documented widespread instances of US companies that paid money to warlords and insurgents in exchange for protection at the height of the war.The bipartisan Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan, created by Congress, wrote in its final report in 2011 that poor planning, management and oversight damaged US objectives. It cited payments by Afghan contractors to insurgent groups for protection as particularly alarming.A lawsuit filed last year on behalf of more than 100 families seeks compensation for deaths and injuries between 2009 and 2017, citing actions involving payments to insurgents by US and international firms.The amended complaint filed Friday added nearly 100 families seeking compensation for deaths and injuries between 2009 and 2017. There now are 239 families named in the lawsuit.The two new US companies named in the lawsuit are Wisconsin-based Blumont Inc., previously known as International Relief Development, or IRD; and Chemonics International based in Washington, DC. They undertook reconstruction projects in sectors including agriculture and road-building for the United States Agency for International Development, or USAID, in Afghanistan.In a statement, Blumont said the legal complaint was the first time the firm had been made aware of the allegations."The information outlined in the complaint predates Blumont's current structure and leadership," Blumont said, adding that IRD programs had been audited and reviewed numerous times. "Blumont prioritizes compliance with the guidance and directives of the donors and partners we work with, including USAID."USAID briefly barred the firm from receiving federal contracts in 2015, leading to an overhaul in the company's management. USAID didn't respond to a request for comment.Chemonics didn't comment. A spokeswoman said the company's offices were closed to show solidarity with victims of racial injustice.The lawsuit relies on confidential sources, congressional reports, news reports and government watchdogs, alleging that the companies either directly negotiated payments with the Taliban, or allowed subcontractors to deal with the insurgents to allow work to continue.The lawsuit was filed in US District Court in Washington by the litigation firms Kellogg Hansen and Willkie Farr & Gallagher. Also joining in the filing is Sparacino PLLC, an investigative law firm."The US government publicly opposed these payments, but the defendants made them anyway because they decided it was in their financial interest," Joshua Branson, a partner at Kellogg Hansen, told The Wall Street Journal.The original lawsuit filed in December named other major US contractors, the UK-based security firm G4S and South Africa-based telecom giant MTN. All have filed motions to dismiss.A G4S spokesman said the company "rejects these allegations in relation to any G4S group company and intends to vigorously defend any group company against any related claims."The amended lawsuit also contains new allegations – based on evidence from former employees and other sources – against MTN and one of the US defendants, contractor Louis Berger Group, now owned by Canada's WSP Global Inc."[We] remain of the view that we conduct our business in a responsible and compliant manner in all our territories," MTN Group President and Chief Executive Officer Rob Shuter told the Journal. "As a result, we intend to continue to defend our position."In its motion to dismiss, MTN said the company had helped bring telecommunications to the poorest people in Afghanistan, exposing itself to violent attacks in the process. The "plaintiffs have sued the wrong defendants in the wrong court based on insufficient allegations," it said.When asked to comment about the amended complaint, a spokesman for WSP said "Louis Berger is vigorously defending this lawsuit and at this time, we cannot comment on this ongoing civil litigation."To win a civil suit, lawyers need to persuade a jury that the preponderance of evidence supports their case, a lesser standard than in a criminal trial, in which the government must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.– Write to Jessica Donati at jessica.donati@wsj.com
