Thursday, May 19, 2016

What would you do? This is Eni's Way!

What would you do?

You, following the Code of Ethics of your company, make a complaint to the internal channels about a millionaire scheme of frauds and corruption. Nothing happens and you are fired in retaliation.

You invoke the Ethics Committee and they don't do anything either. Then, you can only appeal to the Board of the company. The directors of the Board, including the global CEO, don't take any action regarding your case. However, to try to intimidate and silence you, they sue you for libel and slander, demanding an indemnity of US$30 millions.

There is no law for the protection of whistleblower in the country where the mentioned facts happened. 

What would you do?

This is Eni's Way!

Monday, May 16, 2016

The Corporate Governance doesn't do the right thing

In 2002, the Board of Eni kills the whistleblower of the company's Brazilian subsidiary.

In 2010, the Chairman, the CEO and the other directors tried to bury the whistleblower in Italy.

Now, the Board of the Italian giant pretends that nothing happened. And what is worse! Continues with their "lying version" of the facts and tries to keep a "frivolous lawsuit" in Rome, demanding a millionaire indemnity (30 million Euros) from the whistleblower.

Get to know the details of this story that, this year, was published in an "investigative book" (Eni: The Parallel State) written by two renowned Italian journalists (Andrea Greco and Giuseppe Oddo).

Note: See more in: 

Sunday, May 15, 2016

Eni admits! And now SEC?

Royal Dutch Shell A : U.S.$1.1billion Malabu Scam - Italian Oil Giant, Eni, Admits Wrongdoing

After coming under intense questioning from its shareholders, the management of Italian oil giant, Eni has finally admitted to wrongdoing in the infamous Malabu Oil deal.

Eni, as well as Royal Dutch Shell, had previously insisted that it followed the law in the purchase of one of the most lucrative oil blocks in Nigeria, OPL-245, which belonged to Malabu Oil, a company owned by a convicted former minister, Dan Etete.

Mr. Etete was the petroleum minister under Sani Abacha. PREMIUMTIMES' previous investigations had detailed how he fraudulently awarded the oil block to himself and friends, including Mohammed Abacha, Mr. Abacha's son, in contravention of Nigerian laws.

Eni and Shell took over ownership of the oil block after paying $1.1 billionto Malabu.
Despite UK court documents showing the contrary, Eni and Shell insisted that they were not aware the money paid to the Nigerian government would be transferred to Mr. Etete.

In fact, Eni claimed its internal investigation that probe its role in the scandal said the company followed due process and "did not find evidence of illegal conduct".

However, after coming under intense queries by vexed shareholders, the company admitted that the investigation did not interview personnel involved who are suspects in a criminal investigation linked to the deal. The company also admitted that it did not follow the Italian legal criminal procedure rules for the conduct of defence investigations.

"Obviously these interviews talks [sic] did not regard those known to be listed in the register of suspects at the Milan prosecutor's office, in order not to interfere with the judiciary's investigations. Being an independent internal audit on a voluntary basis, it was not necessary to refer to the rule of the Code of Criminal Procedure governing defence investigations," Eni's management told shareholders.

According to them, further analysis of the investigation recently commissioned by the board of directors "had confirmed, in a transparent manner, the adequacy" ... "of the analyses carried out by other consultants".

"Eni's investigation failed to interview key people inside and outside the company who negotiated the corrupt deal, and failed to access key documentation that forms the basis of the allegations against the company," said Barnaby Pace, a campaigner with UK-based anti-corruption organization, Global Witness.

"Eni has to come clean over this corrupt deal, the company told its investors it had found no evidence of illegal conduct but given what we now know about their investigation this isn't good enough. Investors should be seriously worried about the systemic risks that the company might be facing if this is how they react to serious corruption allegations,"Mr. Pace added.

Elena Gerebizza of Re: Common, an Italian organization campaigning for financial integrity, said Eni has to do more than merely admitting to wrongdoing.

He said as the biggest shareholders of Eni, the Italian government has to make sure that those involved are made to face justice, in line with its avowed anti-corruption stance.

"Eni's claim to a zero tolerance approach to corruption does not seem to line up with their actions on the OPL 245 case. The management admitted to current CEO Claudio Descalzi's talks with a known convicted criminal during the negotiations for the deal but refused to disclose the content of the conversations or say what action has been taken over this this deeply problematic situation. As the largest shareholder in Eni, the Italian Government has a responsibility to intervene, it cannot maintain an anti-corruption stance but ignore such credible evidence within Italy'sbiggest company," she said.
The infamous oil deal has elicited multiple investigations across the world. In Italy, the office of the Public Prosecutor of Milan is investigating Eni and Shell as well as Mr. Etete who has been named as a suspect.

In Holland, financial police working on a joint investigation team alongside Italian authorities, raided Shell headquarters at The Hague in February.

UK court ordered that $190 million paid by both oil giants to Mr. Eteteand his middleman be frozen.

Back home, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commissions, EFCC, is probing the deal. In 2014, the House of Representatives recommended that the deal be cancelled as it runs against the dictates of Nigerian laws.

Dotun Oloko, a Nigerian anti-corruption campaigner said: "All culpable parties must be held to account and face serious consequences for the cycle of corruption to be broken both in Nigeria and western boardrooms".

Note: Copyright Premium Times. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (, source News Service English

Wednesday, May 11, 2016

Will the Board of Eni finally answer?

A former executive – a whistleblower who was dismissed after following the Code of Ethics of the company, reporting a millionaire scheme of internal fraud and corruption at the Brazilian subsidiary of the Italian giant Eni – demands answers from the members of the Board of Eni during the Shareholders Assembley 2016, which is taking place on May 12th.

1. What is Eni’s Code of Ethics for? The words and spirit of this instrument are for real or just to meet the requirements of the market and investors? What are the obligations of Eni’s Ethics Committee existing in all its subsidiaries around the world?

2. Why the internal channels of Eni’s Brazilian subsidiary, after receiving a complaint of a millionaire scheme of fraud and corruption, didn’t investigate it as it should and, moreover, punished with resignation, a committed, dedicated and brilliant executive who did exactly what Eni’s Code of Ethics demands of any company employee, in any country Eni operates?

3. What Eni’s Brazilian subsidiary tried to hide by dismissing this “whistleblower”? How far would reach the ramifications of the scheme of fraud and corruption that this “whistleblower” identified and helped – through the information contained in all your correspondence – Eni to annihilate?

4. Why the management of the CEO Vittorio Mincato neither listened nor answered and, much less, investigated the facts narrated by this “whistleblower”? Why the management of the CEO Paulo Scaroni preferred to propose an “Indemnity Lawsuit” at Italy, demanding 30 million Euros from the “whistleblower”? Why the management of the CEO Claudio Descalzi continued with this lawsuit? What is Eni trying to hide with this attitude contrary to its own Code of Ethics?

5. Why Eni doesn’t open an internal investigation, with independent auditors to check whether there was a mistake in the lawsuit of this “whistleblower”? Judging by the amount of corroborating documents, there is an overwhelming evidence that this “whistleblower” has always spoken the truth! This would be the fairest way to emerge the real truth of the facts presented here.

If Eni is an Ethical Company, it will answer: Why did Eni kill a whistleblower? 

Will the Board of Eni finally answer?