Ep76 - A new Board. The same request: investigate!

In the previous episode, I showed that the mediation related to Eni’s second lawsuit against me ended without an agreement.

But a new opportunity seemed to be emerging.

📌 2020. A new Eni Board of Directors.

At the Annual General Meeting in May of that year, a newly composed Board took over the company’s governance.

There was a new Chairwoman, Lucia Calvosa.

CEO Claudio Descalzi remained in office.

The new Board was composed of: Lucia Calvosa, Claudio Descalzi, Ada Lucia De Cesaris, Filippo Giansante, Pietro Guindani, Karina Litvack, Emanuele Piccinno, Nathalie Tocci e Raphael Vermeir CBE.

For me, however, the fundamental question was different:

🔴 Would a new governance be willing to do what I had been asking for nearly two decades?

🔹 Investigate.

Not simply accept my version.

Not simply accept the versions presented by the company itself.

But conduct a truly independent investigation, examining the facts, the documents and the different versions concerning my dismissal.

That is what I asked the new Board of Directors once again.

I submitted documents and asked the new governance to conduct an independent review of the Flinto Case - a due diligence of the facts and documents accumulated since 2001.

My request was simple:

🔹 Examine the documents.

🔹 Compare the different versions.

🔹 Establish the facts.

🔹 And reach an independent conclusion.

After almost 20 years, I was not asking the new Board to believe me.

I was asking it to investigate.

And that remains the essence of the ENI’S WAY — 25 YEARS OF TRUTH campaign.

🔴 25 years later, my request remains the same: that Eni allow a truly independent investigation into the facts and documents of the Flinto Case.

I am not asking you to believe me. I am asking you to examine the documents before reaching an independent conclusion.

But would the new Board respond to this request?

The answer - or the absence of one - would lead me to seek a new institution outside Eni.

📌 NEXT EPISODE:

TAKING THE FLINTO CASE TO THE OECD - OCDE.


❎ Learn more:

1️⃣ Message to Eni’s new Board of Directors (2020)

2️⃣ Memorial - The Flinto Case

3️⃣ Chronology of Facts for the Reconstruction of Events

Ep75 - The Court-referred mediation

In the previous episode, I showed that, at Eni’s Annual General Meeting in May 2020, 13 questions concerning the Flinto Case were submitted to the company.
One of them asked:

🔹 Would Eni participate in the mediation related to the second lawsuit filed against me?

There was a reason for that question.

📌 October 29, 2019. Rome.

During a hearing in the second lawsuit, the judge recorded that the mediation procedure had not been initiated and referred the parties to mediation.

📌 July 3, 2020. Rome.

The mediation finally took place before the Rome Mediation Body.

The official record of that meeting expressly identifies the procedure as:

🔴 COURT-REFERRED MEDIATION.

I was represented by my Italian lawyer.

🔹 No agreement was reached, and the mediation ended without a settlement between the parties.

This was not the first attempt at mediation.

In 2018, during Eni’s Annual General Meeting, critical shareholder Mauro Meggiolaro, representing Fondazione Finanza Etica, had offered to mediate a meeting between Eni and me.

That meeting never took place.

In 2020, the circumstances were different.

This time, the mediation took place after the parties had been referred to it by the judge.

And it ended without an agreement.

But my fundamental request was - and remains - much simpler:

🔴 That Eni allow a truly independent investigation into the Flinto Case, examining the facts, the documents, and the different versions of my dismissal presented by the company itself over these 25 years.

I am not asking anyone to believe me. I am asking them to examine the documents before reaching an independent conclusion.

And another opportunity for that would arise.

Eni had just begun a new governance cycle.

A new Board of Directors. The same request: investigate.

📌 NEXT EPISODE:

A NEW BOARD. THE SAME REQUEST: INVESTIGATE.


❎ Learn more:

1️⃣ Mediation Record (July 3, 2020)
🔹 Original document
🔹 English translation

2️⃣ Memorial (1999-2025)

3️⃣ Chronology of Facts for the Reconstruction of Events

 

Ep74 - Eni's AGM 2020: 13 questions... One Answer!

In the previous episode, I showed that, on April 19, 2020, I wrote directly to Lucia Calvosa, then nominated to become Chairwoman of Eni’s Board of Directors.

I presented the Flinto Case, provided documents and pointed to questions that remained unanswered.

A few weeks later, the case would once again reach Eni’s Annual General Meeting.

📌 May 13, 2020.

For the third time, critical shareholder Mauro Meggiolaro, through Fondazione Finanza Etica, brought my case to Eni’s AGM.

Eni’s official document included a specific section:

🔹 “Section III on behalf of the whistle-blower Douglas Linares Flinto.”

And 13 questions were submitted.

Among them:

🔹 What facts, evidence and documents supported Eni’s version of my dismissal?

🔹 Why did Eni state at the 2017 AGM that my case had been published in the “Eni 2002 Financial Statements” if, according to my challenge, there was no reference to me in that document?

🔹 Would Eni participate in a meeting with me, mediated by Fondazione Finanza Etica?

🔹 Would Eni participate in the mediation within the second lawsuit?

🔹 Where were the documents exchanged between Eni headquarters and Agip Brazil concerning my case?

🔹 Would Eni conduct an independent investigation into the Flinto Case?

And finally:

🔴 If an independent investigation found mistakes by Agip Brazil — and Eni itself — would the company acknowledge them so that, after 19 years, I could restore my reputation?

13 questions.

What was Eni’s answer?

🔴 “Answer to questions 1.1 to 1.13”

Eni stated that the case was the subject of pending disputes and therefore:

“Eni does not consider this to be the place to deal with them and further discuss them, since they are already under the attention of the judiciary.”

No individual answers.

No indication of where my case appeared in the Eni 2002 Financial Statements.

No answer about the documents, mediation or an independent investigation.

📌 Eni chose not to address the substance of the 13 questions.

And this raises an inevitable question:

If, in 2017, Eni’s AGM was considered an appropriate place for the company to present its version of the Flinto Case, why, in 2020, was the same AGM no longer considered an appropriate place to answer questions challenging that version with documentary evidence?

In 2017, Eni presented its version.

In 2020, when confronted with questions and documents, it referred the matter to the judiciary.

Yet the Italian judiciary itself had opened another path:

🔹 mediation.

📌 July 1, 2020.

That will be another document in this story, which I will present next Monday.


❎ Learn more:

1️⃣ AGM 2020 - Questions and Answers

2️⃣ Memorial (1999-2025)

3️⃣ Chronology of Facts for the Reconstruction of Events

Ep73 - 2020: A new Chairwoman. But...

In 2020, before Eni’s Annual General Meeting (AGM), I once again attempted to bring the Flinto Case to the attention of the company’s corporate governance.

The Italian media began reporting the names of those who would make up Eni’s new Board of Directors, which would be formally appointed at the AGM in May.

Among them was lawyer and university professor Lucia Calvosa (Università di Pisa), nominated by the Italian government - the largest shareholder of the Italian oil giant - to become Chairwoman of the company.

For me, a new composition of the Board also meant a new opportunity:

📌 to present the documents to people who had not been directly involved in the previous events.

So, on April 19, 2020, I sent a message directly to Lucia Calvosa.

The subject of the email was:

🔹 “Eni's Chairwoman x Eni's Whistleblower”

At the very beginning, I wrote:

🔹 “I need you to know my Ethical Clash with Eni”.

And I explained that my message and the attached documents would allow her to learn about my documented version of the events before hearing the version presented by the company’s executives.

It was not an isolated message.

📎 The email included four attached documents, including a detailed account of the facts and documents related to the Shareholders’ Meetings and the questions I had been raising with the company.

Over three pages, I reconstructed the main events since 2001.

🔹 I spoke about my whistleblowing report.

🔹 I spoke about the book “Eni: Lo Stato parallelo”.

🔹 I spoke about the questions presented at the 2017 AGM.

🔹 I spoke about the mediation proposal made by Mauro Meggiolaro at the 2018 AGM.

🔹 I spoke about Eni’s lawsuit and the decision of the Rome Court of Appeal.

And I ended that long message with an extraordinarily simple question:

🔴 “Please, can you help me?”

After almost two decades, I was not asking a new Chairwoman simply to believe my version of the story.

🔹 I was providing documents.

🔹 I was pointing to court decisions.

🔹 I was highlighting questions that remained unanswered.

🔹 And I was giving Eni’s new leadership an opportunity to examine the Flinto Case before reaching its own conclusion.

A few weeks later, Lucia Calvosa would become Chairwoman of Eni’s Board of Directors.

And the Flinto Case would once again reach the company’s Annual General Meeting.

For the third time!

That will be the next part of this story.


❎ Learn more:

1️⃣ Email sent to Lucia Calvosa (April 19, 2020)

2️⃣ Memorial (1999–2025)

3️⃣ Chronology of Facts for the Reconstruction of Events

Ep72 - 2019: The Court-referred mediation

Yesterday, I showed what happened on October 16, 2019.

The Rome Court of Appeal rejected Eni’s appeal in the first lawsuit brought against me and the Brazilian Institute of Business Ethics (Instituto Brasileiro de Ética nos Negócios).

🔹 First instance: lawsuit rejected.

🔹 Second instance: Eni’s appeal rejected.

Just 13 days later, something particularly significant happened.

📌 October 29, 2019.

The word “mediation” reappeared in the history of the Flinto Case.

But this time, it was not during a Shareholders’ Meeting.

It was within the Italian judicial system itself.

On that day, a hearing was held before Judge Antonella Di Tullio of the Ordinary Court of Rome, in the context of the second lawsuit brought against me.

Represented in the proceedings were Eni S.p.A., Marco Petracchini (then-Chief Audit Officer), Massimo Mantovani (then-Chief Legal Officer), Douglas Linares Flinto, and the Brazilian Institute of Business Ethics.

The Judge then recorded:

🔹 “Having noted that mediation proceedings had not been initiated, the Judge invites the parties to proceed with mediation”.

The hearing was adjourned to June 23, 2020.

For the second time in less than two years, therefore, a concrete opportunity emerged to bring the parties to the mediation table.

The first had arisen on May 10, 2018, during Eni’s Annual General Meeting.

Critical shareholder Mauro Meggiolaro, representing Fondazione Finanza Etica, publicly offered to mediate the conflict.

The meeting never took place due to a lack of interest from the Italian oil giant.

Now it was different.

📌 The possibility of mediation was emerging within the judicial proceedings themselves.

After years of letters, complaints and lawsuits, there was once again an opportunity to try another path:

🔹 Bring the parties face to face.

🔹 Bring the different versions face to face.

🔹 Bring the documents face to face.

And this time, there is another document.

A document recording what happened when the mediation proceedings actually reached the Organismo di Mediazione Forense di Roma - the Rome Bar Association Mediation Body.

📌 July 1, 2020.

The document expressly states:

🔴 “DELEGATA DAL GIUDICE” — “COURT-REFERRED MEDIATION”.

What happened during that mediation?

Was there a willingness to discuss the Flinto Case and seek a solution?

That will be another document in this story.


❎ Learn more:

1️⃣ Minutes of the hearing before the Ordinary Court of Rome (Oct 29, 2019):
🔹 original
🔹 English

2️⃣ Memorial (1999–2025)

3️⃣ Chronology of Facts for the Reconstruction of Events