Families of US soldiers sue MTN for war crimes

Willie Trombone

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 18, 2008
Messages
60,038

JOHANNESBURG - THE FAMILIES of US soldiers who were killed and injured in Afghanistan have alleged in court papers that MTN paid the Taliban for protection and deactivated its cell towers at the behest of the militants by switching off parts of its network at night to obstruct the US military operations that depended on active cell signals.

Ryan Sparacino, managing partner of Sparacino Plc, said MTN gave the Taliban enough money to commit every single attack many times over, with the mobile operator shutting its towers in the most contested, dangerous areas where the Taliban attacked his clients.

Sparacino said MTN also harboured anti-American motives as it aided its most important business partner, Iran.

“MTN professes outrage at these allegations, however, its evidence-free response rests mostly on rhetorical umbrage,” Sparacino said.

“What is outrageous is that a public company would partner with Iran, become Afghanistan’s largest mobilephone provider, use its position to support terrorists, and then try to dodge the only forum in which it will ever face accountability.”

The court papers, which were filed in a US court, claim that MTN contributed substantially to the Taliban’s terrorist insurgency through paying the group and deactivating cell towers.

The papers also claim that the shutting down its towers had the immediate aim of depriving US forces of vital intelligence.

“As MTN understood, the money and operational support it gave the Taliban – at a scale unrivalled by any other Western company – helped the terrorists kill and maim thousands of Americans.

“Plaintiffs and their family members are among the victims,” said the papers.

Families of the US soldiers who were killed or injured between 2009 and 2017 by the Taliban filed a case against MTN in December last year asserting claims for civil monetary relief under the US Anti-Terrorism Act.

In September, MTN requested the court to end the lawsuit and grant a judgment in its favour for two independent reasons – because the court lacked jurisdiction over MTN, which does not operate in the US, and because the complaint did not allege any conduct by MTN that would have violated the Anti-Terrorism Act.

The American victims’ families filed their papers in response to the request.

MTN spokesperson Nompilo Morafo said that the group remained of the view that the case should be dismissed.

“The plaintiffs cannot establish jurisdiction over MTN in the US or plead a viable claim,” Morafo said.

“Their response does not and could not fix those fundamental defects in their case.”

Morafo said that the plaintiffs’ response followed a schedule set by the court, under which MTN would now have an opportunity to file a written reply in support of its motion in February next year.

She said the next step after the written reply would be for the court to review the motion and make a determination.

A district judge presides over the case with the assistance of a magistrate.

Morafo said the magistrate would first issue a recommendation to the district judge on how to decide the motion to dismiss, and then further proceedings before the district judge were possible.

“The judges could schedule a hearing for the parties to make oral submissions or decide the motion on the written filings alone. There is no set timetable for the court’s ruling on the motion,” Morafo said.
 

Kola_CT

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2020
Messages
1,314
Why would the US military depend on a private sector company’s cellular signal for military operations?

I am not an MTN fan, but that just does not make much sense to me.
 

scudsucker

Executive Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2006
Messages
9,024
Why would the US military depend on a private sector company’s cellular signal for military operations?

I am not an MTN fan, but that just does not make much sense to me.
The US military does not depend on the signal for their own communications, but on tracking the cellular signal (location and possible signal interception) of suspected militants, which is not possible without working towers.
 

Willie Trombone

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 18, 2008
Messages
60,038
Why would the US military depend on a private sector company’s cellular signal for military operations?

I am not an MTN fan, but that just does not make much sense to me.
They have all sorts of equipment of their own including an eye in the sky with many ultra high Res cameras over Kabul and other places. MTN is used by private security firms for tracking but the guys I've used go for dual SIM systems. This is more about funding the Taliban and servicing Iran than the other points IMO.
 

Kola_CT

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2020
Messages
1,314
The US military does not depend on the signal for their own communications, but on tracking the cellular signal (location and possible signal interception) of suspected militants, which is not possible without working towers.

Yes I understand that, but being dependent on that to the extent where it can cost the lives of your personnel still makes no sense.

Like I said, not a fan of the company, and do not trust them much either, but dependance to that level without other means of verification of data is really not a good idea when people are going to get killed.
 

Gordon_R

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 5, 2009
Messages
20,833
The US military does not depend on the signal for their own communications, but on tracking the cellular signal (location and possible signal interception) of suspected militants, which is not possible without working towers.

Interesting!

However the original claim seems to be stretching the definition of 'terrorism', and way outside the actual jurisdiction of US courts...
 

Kola_CT

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2020
Messages
1,314
They have all sorts of equipment of their own including an eye in the sky with many ultra high Res cameras over Kabul and other places. MTN is used by private security firms for tracking but the guys I've used go for dual SIM systems. This is more about funding the Taliban and servicing Iran than the other points IMO.

If it is about Taliban funding and support and can be proven that is a very different situation.

To me that does raise the question why the US military is not doing this directly, or are they the driving force here leveraging the families?
 

Willie Trombone

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 18, 2008
Messages
60,038
If it is about Taliban funding and support and can be proven that is a very different situation.

To me that does raise the question why the US military is not doing this directly, or are they the driving force here leveraging the families?
US military has no interest IMO. Why would they, they are a government entity and have other ways of dealing with it. This appears to be a private case pursued by individuals and their families.
 

Sinbad

Honorary Master
Joined
Jun 5, 2006
Messages
81,186
I would have thought a tower blackout would help the Americans, stopping the locals from coordinating a response...
 

Kola_CT

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2020
Messages
1,314
US military has no interest IMO. Why would they, they are a government entity. This appears to be a private case pursued by individuals and their families.

Yes I know this is a private case, that is what the article states.

But, if this was really a thing, funding the Taliban, actions resulting in US military deaths, as suggested by the article, why does the US military have no interest?

Just curious really.

Is this a real issue, or lawyers chasing ambulances...
 

Willie Trombone

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 18, 2008
Messages
60,038
Yes I know this is a private case, that is what the article states.

But, if this was really a thing, funding the Taliban, actions resulting in US military deaths, as suggested by the article, why does the US military have no interest?

Just curious really.

Is this a real issue, or lawyers chasing ambulances...
They do have an interest. It's not new. MTN flouted international sanctions. Taking action is the difficult part.


Slap on the wrist...

 

Willie Trombone

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 18, 2008
Messages
60,038
Yes I know this is a private case, that is what the article states.

But, if this was really a thing, funding the Taliban, actions resulting in US military deaths, as suggested by the article, why does the US military have no interest?

Just curious really.

Is this a real issue, or lawyers chasing ambulances...
It's very likely chasing ambulances. This is the US after all.
 

Willie Trombone

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 18, 2008
Messages
60,038
I would have thought a tower blackout would help the Americans, stopping the locals from coordinating a response...
That depends on who's coordinating it.
No doubt those coordinating it will be prepared with alternatives.
 

Wut

Executive Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2004
Messages
5,892
Why would the US military depend on a private sector company’s cellular signal for military operations?

I am not an MTN fan, but that just does not make much sense to me.
Do you really believe all the movies that show a super-advanced US military bouncing everything off their super-duper satellites? A lot of their tech uses everyday civilian tech only it's normally encrypted when passing through it. There were big issues in Asia when a large Thai company sold their cellular service as a lot of US and Thai military communications were going through it which opened up a can of worms. Many believe that a brazen attack on a military base in the south of Thailand was a direct result of it.
 

Nanfeishen

Executive Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2006
Messages
8,937
Would think that cooperating with an occupying force by keeping their towers on is not part of their contractual obligations , and therefore are not liable for wrong doing in that regard.
 
Top