What wasn't investigated... Why?

Throughout this week, I presented the Internal Audit Report of Eni’s Brazilian subsidiary, dated July 26, 2001 - after my whistleblowing report and just six days before my dismissal.

The document confirmed serious irregularities at the Cuiabá unit, including “fictitious invoicing”, missing records, weak controls, similar transactions and companies under investigation by the Fuel Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry.

I also showed that the report failed to examine key matters raised in my dossier:
🔹 two Agip-owned service stations allegedly operated through third parties for the Regional Manager’s benefit;
🔹 tanker trucks linked to the same manager and used for deliveries and product transfers;
🔹 fictitious financing granted to customers to fund those vehicles;
🔹 who received Agip’s payments for those operations.

The report was not irrelevant.

It confirmed part of the irregularities, but failed to reveal the full extent of the facts reported to Agip do Brasil’s Commercial Directorate.

An effective investigation should have cross-checked corporate records, contracts, financing, payments, ownership records, transport operations and the true economic beneficiaries, as I did in my dossier.

None of this appears in the report’s conclusions.

My report also identified personal, family and commercial relationships involving other Regional Sales Managers and Agip do Brasil’s Commercial Director.

These relationships do not, by themselves, prove wrongdoing. But they represented conflicts of interest that should have been disclosed, assessed, managed and documented by a truly independent audit.

Beginning on August 3, I will present three of these cases.

Later, I will also present the complaint submitted to the Ethics Committee of IIA-The Institute of Internal Auditors concerning Marco Petracchini, then Eni’s Chief Audit Officer, and the Agip do Brasil Internal Audit Report.

The complaint questioned whether his conduct complied with the internal auditors’ Code of Ethics and Eni’s own Internal Audit policies. I will also present the response issued by the AIIA | Associazione Italiana Internal Auditors, whose governing body at the time included Petracchini.

The question that closes this week is simple:

📌 Why did an audit that confirmed serious irregularities fail to examine all the facts presented by the whistleblower?

After twenty-five years, I continue to ask for only one thing:

🛑 an independent, impartial and transparent review of all the documentation.


✅ Learn more:

1️⃣ Agip do Brasil Internal Audit Report:
🔹 original in Portuguese
🔹 English translation