The "Institutional Narrative" of the Flinto Case

In my previous post, I explained that I submitted a formal complaint to the Ethics Committee of IIA-The Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA Global) concerning the conduct of Marco Petracchini, then Chief Audit Executive of Eni.

Today, I present a document that would later play a significant role in the years that followed.

After receiving my complaint, Marco Petracchini - then a member of the Board of Directors of the AIIA | Associazione Italiana Internal Auditors - sent a letter to roberto fargion, then Director General of the association, setting out his version of the events.

That document ultimately became the foundation of the "institutional narrative" that Eni would later use in different communications concerning the Flinto Case.

However, after carefully examining the letter, I believe one aspect deserves particular attention.

My complaint to IIA Global was essentially technical.

It compared facts and documentary evidence with specific provisions of the IIA Code of Ethics and the International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing.

Yet the letter does not address those issues.

Instead of responding to the technical aspects of the complaint, it seeks to construct an "institutional narrative" about the Flinto Case, containing statements regarding my conduct that I dispute on the basis of the documentary evidence accumulated over the past twenty-five years - evidence that is now being presented publicly through this campaign, ENI'S WAY — 25 YEARS OF TRUTH.

The letter focuses primarily on my activities, the legal proceedings involving the case, my communications with the company, and my public disclosures through the ENI'S WAY website, blog, and social media channels.

Naturally, everyone has the right to present their own version of the facts.

But when the matter under review concerns compliance with the professional standards governing Internal Auditing, one fundamental question remains:

📌 Were the technical grounds of the complaint ever truly addressed?

That question became even more relevant because the same "institutional narrative" was subsequently reproduced in several official Eni communications concerning the Flinto Case.

After twenty-five years, I continue to ask for exactly the same thing:

🔴 that the documents be examined for what they actually demonstrate, independently, impartially, and transparently.


❎ Learn more:

1️⃣ Letter from Marco Petracchini to the AIIA Italia:
🔹 Original in Italian
🔹 English translation

2️⃣ Complaint submitted to the Ethics Committee of The IIA Global

3️⃣ Agip do Brasil Internal Audit Report
🔹 Original in Portuguese
🔹 English translation

The Guardians of Ethics vs. Their Own Ethics

Throughout this series, I have presented several issues that, in my view, should have been examined by the Internal Audit of Eni's Brazilian subsidiary.

But my search for an independent review did not end within the company.

Years later, I submitted a formal complaint to the Ethics Committee of The Institute of Internal Auditors (The IIA Global) concerning Marco Petracchini, then Senior Executive Vice President of Internal Audit (Chief Audit Executive) of Eni and a member of the Board of Directors of the AIIA | Associazione Italiana Internal Auditors.

My complaint alleged possible violations of the IIA Code of Ethics and the International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing in connection with his validation of the Agip do Brasil Internal Audit Report.

My complaint was not based on opinions.

It compared specific conduct against the objective requirements established by the IIA's own Code of Ethics and International Standards.

Among other issues, I questioned whether the following fundamental principles had been respected:
🔹 independence;
🔹 objectivity;
🔹 due professional care;
🔹 proper risk assessment;
🔹 adequate documentation of audit conclusions;
🔹 transparent communication of audit results.

The complaint was supported by dozens of documents and pieces of evidence gathered over many years.

At the conclusion of the proceedings, however, the Ethics Committee determined that there were no grounds to establish any ethical violation.
Naturally, I respect that institutional decision.

But I continue to reflect on a question that, in my view, goes beyond my own case.

📌 How should the very institutions entrusted with safeguarding ethics respond when they are asked to examine an alleged violation of their own ethical principles?

This question is not limited to my case.

It concerns everyone who believes that independent internal auditing is one of the essential pillars of corporate governance, integrity, and public trust.

After twenty-five years, I continue to ask for exactly the same thing:

🔴 that all the documentation be examined independently, impartially, and transparently.


❎ Learn more:

1️⃣ Complaint submitted to the Ethics Committee of The Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA Global):

2️⃣ Agip do Brasil Internal Audit Report:
🔹 Original in Portuguese
🔹 English translation

3️⃣ Chronology of Facts for the Reconstruction of the Events

4️⃣ Memorial (1999–2025)