Eni & CSDDD

Wow! CSDDD will catch up with the Italian oil giant Eni! 

Will the company finally carry out "DueDiligence” on my case? 

Time will tell! 

Read more about "EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) in this LINK. 

Questions to Eni's Board of Directors

As Eni has been refusing, over these more than 22 long years, to carry out "due diligence" on my case, neglecting and disregarding its own commitments (such as the Code of Ethics), in addition to the international commitments that Eni boasted to the world that it "accepts" and follows" (such as the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, UNGP 31 and UN Global Compact), I would like to ask the Board of Directors some questions to help them see the company's real situation, making it clear that it was not a threat or intimidation, but just to serve as a warning:

Questions 01: How does our current situation align with Eni’s stated values regarding business ethics, human rights and whistleblower protection? How can the resolution of this case be seen as an opportunity for Eni to reinforce its leadership and commitment to ethical business practices? What is the opportunity for Eni to lead by example and demonstrate its commitment to fairness, transparency and integrity? What common interests can we identify that would help us find a mutually satisfactory solution for both sides? Are there precedents for how Eni has handled similar cases in the past? How can we ensure consistency with these precedents in resolving this conflict?

Questions 02: What are Eni's expectations if we continue without an agreement? What will be the costs of not resolving our conflict? Has Eni considered the serious consequences, including reputational ones, that it will face if our problem remains unresolved? Or does the company believe that the continuation of this conflict will not affect the corporate reputation among its Stakeholders?

Questions 03: In the event that we do not reach an agreement, what does the company imagine I will continue to do to satisfy my interests? What does Eni advise me to do? What will be our benefits if we do not end this dispute? How would Eni’s executives act if they were in my position, dealing with the damage and losses that I have accumulated over the years?

Questions 04: From now on, what path will Eni follow? What does Eni intend to do if we don't reach an agreement? Will the company continue with the strategy of attacking my honor and reputation? Will Eni continue with the strategy of playing the victim? Will the company continue to maintain the 3 SLAPP lawsuits in the Italian court? What will be the costs of this decision, not only financially, but also in terms of time, work of Eni’s employees and the impact on the company's internal morale? 

Read more:

1) "Fully proven facts known to the Board of Directors of Eni"

2) "Chronology of Facts" (2001 to 2022)

Eni x CSDDD: due diligence on my case!

I have already been waiting for 22 long years, and if necessary, I will continue to wait until 2027 to demand from the Italian courts that Eni finally carry out due diligence on my case!

Read more:

1) "Fully proven facts known to the Board of Directors of Eni": 

2) "Chronology of Facts" (2001 to 2022): 

PM Italy: I request your help!

Dear Mrs. Giorgia Meloni,

Two facts are undeniable! The first is that Italy is a "signatory government" to the “United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights”, also known as “UNGP 31”. 

The second fact is that the Italian government is the "controlling shareholder" of the Italian oil giant and, therefore, as the Prime Minister, you have decision-making power in Eni's Board of Directors.

Note that, during almost 23 long years, I fought against Eni to restore and rescue my name, honor, and reputation that was "attacked" and "destroyed" by the company.

Also note that, in all these years, five different Boards of Directors, under the management of three different CEOs, were contacted by me (2002, 2009, 2014, 2020, and 2023). But Eni didn't respond to my persistent messages! Furthermore, Mr. Mauro Meggiolaro, a journalist and “critical shareholder” of the company, took my case to be discussed at four Shareholders' Meetings (2017, 2018, 2020, and 2021), but, even though it positioned itself as our “mediator”, Eni never agreed to participate in a “mediation meeting”.

As if that wasn't more than enough, two other Italian journalists published my story in the first investigative book that told the “problems” in Eni's management for 25 years. The book, entitled “Eni: The Parallel State”, became a bestseller in Italy in just a few months.

Despite the facts being fully proven, Eni never carried out “due diligence”. Even during the "Good Offices", offered by the NCP Brazil in 2022 and 2023, by "neglecting" and "belittling" the “OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Business Conduct”, the company refused to carry out a "due diligence" of my case. 

It's indisputable how Eni has been handling my case! In addition to using the Courts to punish me, as I am a “defendant” in three SLAPP lawsuits, the "corporate strategy" is a: “systemic imposition of retaliations with attacks on my honor and reputation, and victimization instrumentally architected to exempt the Eni from its own responsibilities”.

If you still have doubts about my case, I suggest you talk to the former director of Eni’s Board, Mr. Luigi Zingales, a professor at the University of Chicago. He knows me personally and knows that I speak the truth!

However, in the UNGP 31, "Principle 4" - which establishes “The State-Business Nexus” - guides the adherent nations to: 

“States should take additional steps to protect against human rights abuses by business enterprises that are owned or controlled by the State […] including, where appropriate, by requiring human rights due diligence”.

Therefore, I request your help so that the Italian government "requires" from Eni's Board of Directors that they, at last, carry out a "due diligence" of my case in light of the “UNGP 31”.

Read more:

1) "Fully proven facts known to the Board of Directors of Eni" 

2) "Chronology of Facts" (2001 to 2022)

I’m the founder and CEO of the Brazilian Business Ethics Institute which, for over 20 years, has been promoting Ethics in Brazil in the business and student environment. In fact, we are the "only" institution in my country that promotes the topic of Business Ethics to students, the leaders of tomorrow's companies… And what drove me to found this institution? My story with the Italian oil giant Eni!

It's been more than 22 long years that I've tried to rescue and restore my name, honor and reputation that were destroyed by Eni.

In all these years, five different Boards of Directors, under the management of three different CEOs (2002, 2009, 2014, 2020 and 2023), were contacted by me. But Eni doesn't respond to my persistent messages!

Furthermore, a journalist and "critical shareholder" of the company took my case to be discussed at four Shareholders' Meetings (2017, 2019, 2020 and 2022), but, even though he positioned himself as our "mediator", Eni never agreed to participate in a "mediation meeting".

As if that wasn't more than enough, two other Italian journalists published my story in the first investigative book that told the "problems" in Eni's management for 25 years. The book, entitled "Eni: The Parallel State", became a bestseller in Italy in just a few months.

You can learn more details about this story of "David" against "Goliath" in the attached files that demonstrate Eni's "attacks" against me that are totally contrary to "corporate commitments" (such as the Code of Ethics and Eni’s Declaration on Human Rights) and the "international commitments" that Eni trumpets to the entire world that it "follows" and "accepts": "OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises", "UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights", and the UN Global Compact .

Despite the facts being fully proven, Eni never carried out "Due Diligence". Quite the opposite! The company's strategy, in addition to using the courts to punish me, as I am a defendant in three "SLAPP lawsuits", is: “systemic imposition of retaliations with attacks on my name, honor and reputation, and victimization instrumentally architected to exempt Eni from its own responsibilities".

I would like you to tell my story, not because this story is unique, but because it is not!

Read more:

1) "Justification of Mr. Douglas Flinto to the major shareholders of Eni - Addition of new item to the AGM 2023 Agenda (May 10, 2023)"

2) "Chronology of Facts" to describe the events between ENI and DLF from 2001 to 2022

Eni it doesn't do what it says!

In my case, in more than 22 long years, the Italian oil giant Eni never complied with the words and spirit of the Code of Ethics because it never protected the whistleblower, quite the opposite! The company has been unfairly attacking my name, honor and reputation. 

And what's even worse! Eni, disregarding and neglecting the international commitments that the company claims to the market to “accept” and “follow”, never carried out the necessary "due diligence" on my case, even though I had contacted "five" different Boards of Directors under the management of "three" different CEOs (2002 - Mr. Vittorio Mincato, 2009 - Mr. Paolo Scaroni and 2014, 2020, 2023 - Mr. Claudio Descalzi). 

Furthermore, Mr. Mauro Meggiolaro, a "critical shareholder" of Eni took my case to four shareholder meetings (2017, 2018, 2020 e 2021) and, even though he positioned himself as our "mediator", Eni never agreed to participate in a "mediation meeting". 

The company had similar conduct during the "Good Offices" offered by the NCP Brazil, disregarding and neglecting the guidelines of the "OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Business Conduct", and refusing to carry out "due diligence" and make a "reparation" consistent with the adverse impacts that were fully proven.

This is Eni's Way!

OECD WPRBC: Thank you very much for your help!

After requesting help from the Chair of the "OECD Working Party on Responsible Business Conduct" (Mrs. Christine Kaufmann), NCP Brazil removed a paragraph from the Final Declaration of the Special Instance nº 04/2020 - in which I appear as Submitter and, the Italian oil giant Eni, as Respondent - that presented a text (demonstrably) untrue and that attacked my name, my honor, and my reputation. However, there is still a long way to go before this Final Declaration is completely “reliable” with everything that was presented and proven by me to NCP Brazil.

That’s because, said document was written in a disorganized manner, difficult to understand and omitted several important facts - fully proven - which resulted in the decontextualization of a history of almost 22 long years, privileging the Submitter. As if that were not enough, the wording of this document evidences an active, haughty and defensive participation of the NCP Italy in favor of the Respondent, revealing a serious and questionable conflict of interest in this Specific Instance, given that the NCP Italy is part of the “direct public administration” of the Italian government, “controlling shareholder” of Respondent.

Therefore, I will continue to fight, with all legal means at my disposal, for this Final Declaration to be drafted again.

Open Letter to the Chair of the OECD WPRBC

Dear Mrs. Christine Kaufmann,

The first time I contacted you, as chair of the “OECD Working Party on Responsible Business Conduct” (WPRBC), was in May 2023. I informed you that the "Final Statement" of Specific Instance nº 04/2020, conducted by the NCP Brazil, was written, undoubtedly, in a disorganized manner, as well as difficult to understand and omitting several important facts that resulted in the decontextualization of a history of more than 22 long years, favoring the Italian oil giant Eni. Furthermore, this document highlights an active, proud, and defensive participation of the NCP Italy in favor of the “interests” of the Respondent, revealing a serious and questionable “conflict of interest” because the NCP Italy is part of the direct public administration of the Italian government, the “controlling shareholder” of the Respondent.

After just a week, I received your "response", stating that the WPRBC cannot interfere in the the NCP Brazil because the NCPs have “autonomy” in conducting Specific Instances.

I countered your response, claiming that this “autonomy” does not mean that the NCP Brazil can “neglect” its role granted by the OECD, conducting a Specific Instance “at its pleasure”, nor can it allow the NCP Brazil to publish a Final Statement that is not a “mirror” of everything that was manifested and fully proven by more than 100 documents (“depriving” the Submitter of obtaining “minimal” reparation), much less gives the right to the NCP Brazil to “harm” a Submitter.

In August 2023, I made new contact with WPRBC. On this occasion, I demonstrated and proved that the aforementioned Final Statement, by involving the “OECD Secretariat” itself, wrote paragraphs with “untrue content” that attack my honor and reputation, directly violating article 12 of the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights”, the “UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights”,  and Principles 01 and 02 of the “UN Global Compact”.

Despite the seriousness of the fact, after 5 months, strangely, I still have not received any response from the WPRBC, much less the necessary “clarification” from the "OECD Secretariat" regarding the conduct of the NCP Brazil.

I hope to receive a response consistent with the seriousness of this issue, otherwise my disappointment with the NCP Brazil will turn into the certainty that the “OECD Guidelines” are only for multinational companies to gain reputational points with their Stakeholders as they boast to the whole world that they “follow” and “accept” the Guidelines. However, when “adverse impacts” are fully proven, these companies do not behave in accordance with the guidance in the “OECD Due Diligence Guide for Responsible Business Conduct”. And, as if that were not more than enough, these companies count on the invaluable help of the NCPs that cause even more damage and harm to the people affected by publishing a Final Statement that is not “reliable” to everything that was presented and proven by the Submitters.

Best Regards.

Douglas Linares Flinto
Founder & CEO Brazilian Business Ethics Institute &
Submitter of Specific Instance nª 04/2020 - NCP Brazil

Read more: 

1) E-mail May 15, 2022: New Eni's Board: "due diligence" of my case 

2) E-mail Sept. 11, 2022: New Eni's Board: Whistleblowing Report vs Human Rights 

3) Eni's Board: Request Douglas Flinto - Addition item to the agenda AGM 2023 Eni SpA

4) Chronology of Facts to describe the events between ENI and DLF from 2001 to 2022

This is Eni's Way

Title: Eni's corporate governance is rubbish... And the Board of Directors is a joke!

Do you think the title of this post contains strong words? So, I ask for your kindness in reading the summary of my story of more than 22 long years with Eni in an attempt to rescue and restore my name, my honor, and my reputation unfairly deprecated. I am quite sure that after reading my post, you will agree with me:

In 2001, after complying with the words and spirit of Eni's Code of Ethics and denouncing a million-dollar scheme of internal fraud and acts of corruption at the Brazilian subsidiary, I was unfairly fired — in proven “retaliation” — by the executives I had exposed, including members of the Board of Agip Brazil.

So, in addition to the presidency of the Brazilian operation (2001) and the Ethics Committee in my country (2002), I made contact – requesting a “due diligence” of my case – with five different Boards of Directors and three different CEOs: Vittorio Mincato (2002), Paolo Scaroni (2009), and Claudio Descalzi (2014, 2020 and 2023). Despite being insistent, Eni never responded to my contacts!

Furthermore, Mr. Mauro Meggiolaro, a journalist and critical shareholder of Eni, took my case to be discussed at four shareholder meetings (2017, 2018, 2020, 2021). In fact, during the 2018 AGM, Mr. Meggiolaro used the microphone, spoke about the “Flinto Case” to everyone present, including members of the company's Board, and offered to be our “mediator”. He even suggested that a meeting be organized to overcome the emotional barrier of our conflict so that we could talk about concrete facts to try to put an end to this story. But the “mediation meeting” was never scheduled!

After the 2020 AGM, I decided to take my case to the NCP Brazil and made a “report” about Eni’s non-compliance involving the “OECD Guidelines”. This report of mine, fully proven by hundreds of documents, concerned the “abuses” of human rights, due to Eni’s “attacks” against my honor and reputation. But the company, once again, refused to engage in dialogue to resolve this ethical conflict and, much less, as advised in the “OECD Guide”, it refused to carry out “due diligence” to verify whether the company caused (or did not cause), contributed (or did not contribute) to the adverse impacts that I have been suffering over these two decades.

Therefore, if the Italian oil giant fulfilled its commitments (such as the Code of Ethics) and, in fact, “accepted” and “followed” international commitments (such as the Global Compact, the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, and the OECD Guidelines), Eni would have another type of conduct concerning my case.

So, is Eni's corporate governance rubbish or not? And is the Board of Directors a joke or not?

2024: Public Challenge to Italian oil giant Eni.

I want to start the year 2024 by launching a “PUBLIC CHALLENGE” to Italian oil giant Eni.

After more than 22 long years, hashtag Eni will finally need to carry out an “in-depth investigation” into my case – in light of the commitments made by the company (to its internal and external Stakeholders) through its own policies and codes, declarations, standards, and procedures as well as international pacts, conventions, principles, and guidelines accepted and followed by Eni, including the Italian government, controlling shareholder of the company, appearing, in many of these international commitments, as adherent, signatory or ratifier – to analyze the facts and the dozens of documents that I presented to hashtag Eni over all these years (see file below).

And the result of this "DUE DILIGENCE", the company will present here, on the largest professional social network in the world, intending to provide “TRANSPARENCY” to our case.

Eni should not be worried about pointing out its mistakes and errors in handling my case. This is because, even with best practices, any company can cause or contribute to negative and harmful consequences that it did not foresee or was unable to avoid.

Eni's Board of Directors and C-Level executives must understand that opposing positions do not mean opposing interests. My position may be different from Eni's position. However, I believe we have a common interest far superior to our positions. And this common interest is precisely the solution to this conflict!

In this public space, LinkedIn, there is a great opportunity for conciliation because we are the "protagonists" in resolving this conflict. Therefore, I have great expectations that, from our dialogue – which never happened – a very positive solution may emerge because this attitude is the right thing to do!

Read more:

1) E-mail May 15, 2022 - New Eni's Board: "due diligence" of my case

2) E-mail Sep 11, 2022 - New Eni's Board: Whistleblowing Report vs Human Rights