Six Boards of Directors... One unanswered request!

Before continuing the publication of the next documents in the ENI'S WAY – 25 YEARS OF TRUTH series, I would like to share a brief update.

Over the past twenty-five years, I have formally presented my case to six different Boards of Directors of Eni.

The Directors have changed.

The Chairpersons have changed.

The Corporate Governance structure has evolved.

The Company has adopted new public commitments regarding ethics, compliance, transparency, and whistleblower protection.

Yet one thing has remained exactly the same:

🔹 Institutional silence.

Before Eni's 2026 AGM, I wrote to Giuseppina Di Foggia, then the incoming Chair of the Board of Directors.

After she assumed office, I sent a new communication presenting my case once again and making the complete documentary record available for an independent review.

After allowing a reasonable period of time, I sent a follow-up message simply to confirm that my communication had been received.

To date, I have received no response.

I would like to make one point absolutely clear.

I have never asked Eni to accept my version of events.

For twenty-five years, I have been requesting something far simpler - and fully consistent with the principles of corporate governance, transparency, accountability, and integrity that the Company publicly embraces:

📌 an independent, objective, and transparent review of the existing documentary evidence.

Today, that documentation is organized in a clear chronological structure.
It includes the Memorial, the Chronology of Events, official correspondence, corporate documents, court decisions, and other documentary evidence that allows the events dating back to 2001 to be reconstructed step by step.

During this period, Eni has had six different Boards of Directors, yet none has undertaken an independent review of the documentation that has been formally submitted.

This observation is not intended as criticism of the individuals who have served - or currently serve - on those Boards.

On the contrary, it reinforces the importance of ensuring that every new Board of Directors has the opportunity to examine this documentation independently, free from inherited interpretations of the past and in accordance with the principles of good corporate governance that guide its responsibilities.

That is precisely why this series continues.

If the Company chooses not to undertake this documentary reconstruction, it will continue to be presented publicly, in chronological order, allowing every reader to examine the documents and reach their own conclusions.

Because transparency requires far more than institutional statements.

It requires a genuine willingness to examine the facts.

And the facts are documented.

On Tuesday, the publication of the ENI'S WAY – 25 YEARS OF TRUTH series will resume exactly where it left off.

Because history deserves to be reconstructed.

And the documents will continue to speak for themselves.

 

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)