SICPA’s Africa file 2: The two partners behind Veritas

The record

The two partners behind the door

The first instalment of The Ledgers’ Africa file concerned a consultancy agreement dated 1 December 2019, described as signed by a communications company in Istanbul’s Levent district. According to the supplied dossier, the agreement tasked British Virgin Islands (BVI) company Veritas Communications Ltd. with developing relationships with government clients in Uganda, Kenya, Somalia and Tanzania. Two invoices requested a total of $820,000 in return. [1]

One clause reportedly extended the intermediary’s exclusivity if it arranged a face-to-face meeting at the level of a president or senior minister. The first article left a question unanswered: who owned Veritas? The new material supplied to the newsroom contains an ownership declaration addressing that question. It is not equivalent to an independently verified, current shareholder register. [1]

A post-office box in Tortola

The incorporation certificate in the dossier states that Veritas Communications Ltd. was incorporated in the BVI on 31 May 2005 as an International Business Company, registration number 659167. Its 31-page constitutional document gives the same address for its registered office and registered agent: Craigmuir Chambers, P.O. Box 71, Road Town, Tortola. [1]

That registration does not establish an independent operating office belonging to Veritas. Craigmuir Chambers also appears in the published address of Harney Westwood & Riegels (Harneys); P.O. Box 71 is a postal address. According to the dossier, HWR Services Ltd. handled the incorporation, with an authorised representative signing for the agent. No shareholders are named in the supplied incorporation documents. Use of a registered-agent address is not, in itself, evidence of wrongdoing. [1] [2]

“We are the ultimate beneficiaries”

The ownership information appears in a screenshot of an email signed “Alykhan”. Apparently written in response to a corporate due-diligence enquiry, it lists Veritas’ registered address, bank and commercial relationships. It then names the shareholders as Alykhan Hudani, with 50%, and Abubaker Mukasa Muyunga, with 50%, stating that they are the ultimate beneficiaries. [1]

The email says the company’s constitutional document and incorporation certificate are attached to speed up the process. Both are in the material supplied to the editorial team. But the screenshot does not show the email date or sender address; the original correspondence and current ownership have not been independently authenticated. [1]

The email lists L3Harris Technologies among Veritas’ commercial relationships. The Harris–L3 Technologies merger closed on 29 June 2019, but the planned company name had already been announced in October 2018. The name alone therefore cannot establish the email’s exact date or its chronological relationship to the December 2019 agreement. [3] [4]

The bank named in the email is CIBC FirstCaribbean International Bank. According to the supplied account, the Veritas account specified in the two 2019 invoices requesting $820,000 was also at that bank’s Tortola branch. The matching bank name does not prove that payment occurred. [1]

The email also claims that Veritas held annually renewed TRACE certification. TRACE describes certification as a due-diligence review based on information and documentation supplied by a company, rather than a guarantee against past or future misconduct. The file contains no Veritas certificate number, and the company’s certification status has not been independently verified for this publication. [1] [5]

Who is the partner?

The passport copy in the supplied dossier identifies Abubaker Mukasa Muyunga as a Ugandan citizen and businessman born in 1968. It appears to have been issued in Kampala in 2014 and to have expired in 2024. This is an account of the supplied document; the original passport has not been independently authenticated. Its number, signature and precise date of birth are not published here. [1]

Muyunga and Veritas appear in public records and contemporary reporting concerning Uganda’s and Burundi’s telecom sectors from 2007 onwards:

2007, Uganda. A Bizcommunity report dated 12 April 2007 described Veritas Communications as the local partner of Gulf-backed Hits Telecom in Uganda. It identified Veritas’ chairman as “Abu Mukasa” and reported that the company represented several businesses operating in the country. [6]

2008, Burundi. An ordinance signed by minister Philippe Njoni on 7 January 2008 granted Hits Telecom Burundi a 3G GSM and WiMAX licence. The concession agreement of the same date names “Abubaker Mukasa” as signing for the company while it was still being formed. Notarial records in the 1 July 2008 issue of Burundi’s official gazette identify Ugandan Abubaker Mukasa Muyunga as both shareholder and board member. He held 10,000 shares, compared with 99,970,000 held by Abu Dhabi-based International Investment House. [7] [8]

2008, Uganda. A France Telecom press release filed with the US Securities and Exchange Commission on 20 October 2008 announced Orange’s entry into Uganda through a partnership with Hits Telecom Uganda. It named “Veritas communications Limited” among Hits Telecom Uganda’s shareholders. [9]

2012, Burundi. Telecom regulator ARCT withdrew Hits Telecom’s licence in September 2012. PANA, citing the regulator’s then director, reported that the company had failed to provide the $1 million bank guarantee required before starting operations. Contemporary Burundian reporting said commercial operations had not begun under the licence issued in 2008. [10] [11]

2013, Uganda. A Techjaja article drawing on The Investigator reported that “Abu Mukasa Muyunga” of Veritas sought permission to sell 3,670,283 shares in Orange Uganda. It said Veritas was allowed to sell its holding to another company whose address was given as P.O. Box 71 in Tortola. This account of the transaction is attributed to contemporary reporting, not presented as an independent registry verification. [12]

These records point to a history consistent with the email’s claim that Veritas had previously been an Orange Uganda shareholder. They also show Muyunga’s participation in local partnership and signing arrangements for foreign telecom investment. Those earlier roles do not establish performance of the 2019 consultancy agreement or an unlawful payment.

The president’s “Abu Mukasa”

Another text is relevant to the agreement’s high-level-access clause. In an October 2024 commentary republished by The Independent on 22 October, Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni defended “Abu Mukasa”. Museveni said social-media posts had mentioned Mukasa after arrests of presidential staff ordered by the president. [13]

Museveni described Mukasa as an active supporter of the ruling NRM, an investor and an introducer of foreign investors to Uganda. He credited him with bringing billions of dollars of investment, citing Vitol and a UAE investor referred to as Sheikh Maktoum. Museveni also recounted meeting him years earlier in Washington, when, he said, Mukasa worked for US radio supplier Harris. These are Museveni’s own statements. [13]

The commentary does not use the surname Muyunga. The Ledgers has not independently established that Museveni’s “Abu Mukasa” is Abubaker Mukasa Muyunga, the person declared to be a Veritas shareholder. Contemporary reporting’s use of “Abu Mukasa” for Muyunga and the email’s reference to L3Harris make the connection worth examining; they do not conclusively establish identity. [1] [6] [12] [13]

Contemporary defence reporting described a US foreign military sales contract announced in 2015 for Harris radios destined for African countries including Uganda, Kenya and Somalia. That record does not establish Veritas’ involvement in the contract. [14]

There are also public records of Alykhan Hudani’s access to the presidency. Uganda’s Agriculture Ministry’s 2014/15 report records Museveni opening the $10 million Yo Kuku plant at Semuto in November 2014; the first instalment examined Hudani’s ownership connection to the company. A 2 August 2025 announcement by Sierra Leone’s High Commission in Nairobi also reported his appointment as honorary consul to Uganda. [15] [16]

These records provide context for possible access to the highest levels of government. The existence of access does not prove it was used for this agreement or that a public official received money.

The other names in the email

The Veritas email also lists Global Voice Group and Enverra Partners among its commercial relationships. The supplied editorial account describes Global Voice Group as a provider of telecom-traffic monitoring and revenue-assurance systems in Africa, while noting that a Ugandan public contract for the company could not be verified. Enverra Partners’ precise legal identity and the nature of its relationship with Veritas have not been established for this publication either. Mention in an email is not independent confirmation of the claimed relationships. [1]

Where did the $820,000 go?

The first article noted that the file contained no bank record proving payment. Transfer receipts have still not been supplied for the preparation of this publication. [1]

The source who provided the dossier to The Ledgers says the $820,000 was used for a Ugandan tender at the time and that records showing transfers to Uganda will be added. That claim has not yet been substantiated by documents. The sum is not presented as a proven payment or a bribery amount. [1]

If the bank records are supplied, the questions will be:

• Did the Levent company pay, or did another company?
• Did the money first enter Veritas’ Tortola account?
• To whom in Uganda was it transferred, when and in what amounts?
• Did the timing match the tender, and who won it?

A criminal complaint is being prepared

According to the source, the documents are being assembled, together with the expected bank records, for submission to the competent prosecutor. A filed complaint or an opened investigation has not been verified. Preparing or submitting a complaint does not establish a crime; it asks the competent authorities to examine allegations. [1]

According to the supplied dossier’s account, SICPA is not named in any of the examined contracts, invoices or company documents. Who the Levent company represented, and whether SICPA knew about the arrangement, remain open questions. The series title and the SICPA logo on its cover identify the investigation’s context; they do not establish a payment, contractual participation or guilt.

No new response from the parties was obtained for this article. Authentication of the original documents, current ownership records and the payment chain remains ongoing.