Eni Ghana Exploration and Production, one of the oil production companies that sued the government of Ghana and the Ghana National Petroleum Corporation (GNPC) at the International Arbitration Tribunal, has reacted to the ruling of the tribunal.

The Office of the Attorney General, which represented Ghana in the case, issued a statement on July 9, 2024, indicating that the ruling of the tribunal was a massive victory for Ghana.

However, Eni Ghana, in a statement seen by GhanaWeb, also indicated that the ruling of the tribunal is in its favour and that of the co-claimant, Vitol Upstream Ghana Limited.

The company stated that the tribunal ruled that the government of Ghana was wrong in its directive for the unitization of the Sankofa oil field with an adjacent oil discovery.

It added that the tribunal also ruled that it could claim damages if the government of Ghana still enforces the unitization directive.

"Eni Ghana Exploration and Production and Vitol Upstream Ghana have received a positive decision from an international arbitral tribunal regarding their unitization dispute with the Republic of Ghana, ruling in favour of their long-standing opposition to the Ministry of Energy's unitization directives.

"The international arbitral tribunal has concluded that the unitization directives were wrong and unlawful and that the Republic of Ghana's actions breached Ghanaian law and the terms of the OCTP Petroleum Agreement. The ruling is also without prejudice to Eni and Vitol's right to claim damages if the wrongful directives are henceforth enforced," part of the statement reads.

The company also explained that it pointed out to the government that the order to unitize the oil field was illegal, which is why they could not heed the directive.

"Eni Ghana and Vitol remain committed to Ghana and to the OCTP project, a flagship project backed by the World Bank, which supplies Ghana with a significant share of its gas for domestic use. Eni and Vitol have consistently maintained their willingness to assess the case for and against unitization if the process were conducted fairly, transparently, and in line with best international practices and Ghanaian law. However, they oppose the process adopted by the Republic of Ghana because of its failure to meet the applicable legal and industry requirements."

It added that it hoped the ruling of the tribunal would bring the dispute to a close and allow "all parties to focus on the continued development of Ghana's oil and gas sector."

Background:

In a statement dated July 8, 2024, the Office of the Attorney General stated that the tribunal has dismissed all claims for damages and compensation in a suit filed by Eni Ghana and Vitol as well as the claimants' request to declare that Ghana breached a petroleum agreement by "refusing to withdraw or prevent reliance by third parties on the Unitization Directives."

Ghana's Attorney-General and Minister for Justice, Godfred Yeboah Dame, noted that the ruling represented a major victory for the government.

He urged the public to disregard what he described as false publications by misguided elements seeking to cast aspersions on the government.

"The Attorney-General has observed a series of false publications by elements who were not party to the proceedings, the Award of which was released within the premises of a confidentiality agreement executed by the parties, but who are on a vile and misguided mission to cast aspersions at the Government of Ghana's recent impeccable record in international arbitration proceedings since assuming office.

“The public is hereby entreated to disregard such false publications about the 'ENI/Vitol Award,' which, within the circumstances, represents a major victory for the Republic of Ghana," the statement read.

However, a case brief from the arbitration shared by ghlawtrends.com pointed out that the tribunal ruled that Ghana's Minister of Energy was wrong in directing Springfield & Eni to begin a process of Unitization of the Afina & Sankofa fields, which was the main relief sought by the claimants.

The tribunal did not grant the damages sought by the claimant because, in its view, no substantial damage was caused.

"The tribunal concludes that the Minister of Energy did not fulfill the precondition of finding the existence of a single accumulation within the meaning of section 34 before ordering the initiation.

"The order of unitization is premature. The imposition of unitization terms is wrongful. It is improper for the Minister to decide tract participation solely based on the GNPC report without calling for any independent analysis.

"The claim of loss by the Claimants caused by the breaches of the Respondents is unsubstantiated, and the same is dismissed. Counterclaims by the Respondent are unfounded and are dismissed. The Republic of Ghana is ordered to pay 189,000 euros to the Claimants," parts of the case brief read.

Read the full statement by Eni Ghana below:



BAI/OGB



Watch the latest episode of Everyday People on GhanaWeb TV below:





Ghana’s leading digital news platform, GhanaWeb, in conjunction with the Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital, is embarking on an aggressive campaign which is geared towards ensuring that parliament passes comprehensive legislation to guide organ harvesting, organ donation, and organ transplantation in the country.