2002: The first version of my dismissal

In the previous publications, we saw that I sought to use every internal mechanism available within the Company itself.

First, I sent a formal letter to the CEO of AGIP do Brasil.

After receiving no response, I turned to Eni's Ethics Committee, exactly as provided for by the ENI Group's Code of Ethics.

Only after that communication did I receive the Company's first official response.

On 19 February 2002, the CEO of AGIP do Brasil replied to the e-mail that I had addressed to the Ethics Committee.

This response occupies an important place in the chronology because it represents the Company's first formal institutional statement regarding the circumstances surrounding my dismissal.

Regardless of any conclusion, every historical reconstruction requires that the different versions of events be preserved and examined together with the documents from which they originated. That is precisely the documentary exercise this series seeks to undertake.

In his message, the CEO stated that my dismissal had not resulted from a "breach of trust", but rather from an "administrative and organizational restructuring" of the Cuiabá Regional Office.

The message also states that my employment was terminated without cause and notes that certain benefits were voluntarily maintained by the Company after my dismissal.

Finally, it asserts that any reference to the Eni Group's Code of Ethics was unnecessary, adding that the Code "has always been and will always remain the guiding principle of all our actions".

That response became a permanent part of the chronology of this case.

Not because it resolved the issues previously raised.

But because, from that moment onward, there was a formal institutional position adopted by the Company regarding the events.

Once again, the purpose of this publication is not to debate that response.
It is simply to document that this was Eni's first official version of the circumstances surrounding my dismissal.

In the upcoming publications, this institutional position will be examined alongside the chronology and the documentary evidence produced over the years.

Because the reconstruction of events does not depend on interpretations.

It depends on the sequence of the documents.

Because, from this point forward, the documents will continue to speak for themselves.

To be continued next week.


✅ Learn more:

1️⃣ E-mail from the CEO of AGIP do Brasil (19 February 2002):
🔹 Original Portuguese Version – Email reply from the CEO of Agip do Brasil – February 19, 2002
🔹 English Version

2️⃣ Chronology of Facts for the Reconstruction of Events

3️⃣ Memorial (1999 - 2025)

When I turned to Eni's own Ethics Committee

In the previous publication, we saw that, just two days after my dismissal, I sent a formal letter to the CEO of AGIP do Brasil requesting that the circumstances surrounding my dismissal be reviewed impartially.

No reply was ever received.

Faced with that silence, I chose to follow the path established by the Company itself.

It was not I who chose this course of action. It was Eni's own Code of Ethics that instructed employees to report irregularities and to rely on the Company's internal ethics and governance mechanisms.

On 1 February 2002, I formally invoked Eni's Code of Ethics and submitted a communication to the Company's Ethics Committee, copying the President and the entire Board of Directors of AGIP do Brasil.

At that moment, my objective remained exactly the same.

I was not seeking compensation.

I was not pursuing litigation.

I was not looking for public exposure.

I simply wanted Eni itself to examine the facts in light of the available documentation.

My decision to approach the Ethics Committee was not accidental.

It was the natural consequence of the Company's failure to respond to the letter I had sent to the CEO in August 2001.

If the Code of Ethics required irregularities to be reported and properly examined, then that was precisely the mechanism I expected to see operating.

Once again, I presented the facts.

Once again, I made myself fully available to provide documents and clarifications.

Once again, I requested only that the Company conduct an independent, impartial and objective review.

This document demonstrates that, long before approaching any Brazilian or Italian authority, I sought to use Eni's own internal governance mechanisms.

At that time, I genuinely believed that a company which publicly affirmed that ethics was at the heart of its corporate culture would carefully examine a report submitted by one of its own employees, especially when that report was supported by documentary evidence and accompanied by the whistleblower's permanent willingness to cooperate with any independent investigation.

Once again, the purpose of this publication is not to persuade anyone.

It is simply to demonstrate, through the chronology and the documentary evidence, that every available internal institutional avenue was pursued before any external initiative was ever taken.

Because, from this point forward, the documents will continue to speak for themselves.

To be continued on Friday.

✅ Learn more

1️⃣ Letter to the ENI Ethics Committee (01 February 2002):
🔹 Original Portuguese Version
🔹 English Version

2️⃣ Chronology of Facts for the Reconstruction of Events

3️⃣ Memorial (1999 - 2025)