Morean firm: FW Oil claimed TT bobol

Did corrupt former State officials ask US oil firm, FW Oil, for a bribe to access Southwest Soldado Oilfield? And if so, is this bobol now the basis for a legal claim by FW Oil, or are they claiming for a breach of contract by the State in wrongfully terminating the Soldado deal? These are the two key issues in a war of words between Attorney General Glenda Morean and FW Oil. On Thursday Morean had said this country faces a $600M lawsuit from FW Oil which she said is claiming among other things that a former UNC government minister and officials of Petrotrin had asked FW Oil for bribes to win the contract for Southwest Soldado Oilfield. But on Friday FW Oil said Morean’s statement was inaccurate. FW Oil denied it had been approached for a bribe, and said its claim was actually based on wrongful termination of its contract by Petrotrin and Trinmar. FW Oil had stated: “FW Oil notes that it did not allege that a former minister of the government requested any payment. The basis of its claim is the unlawful termination of the tender contract by the state companies Petrotrin and Trinmar”. However yesterday Morean issued a statement reiterating her position, citing as evidence the court documents filed by FW Oil itself. Morean said: “Given the nature of the arbitration proceedings between the two parties, the Ministry of the Attorney General has been very careful in releasing any information on the dispute but now feels constrained to respond, in the public’s interest.”

She cited FW Oil’s “Summary of the Dispute”, a document it filed in its claim against the Government for US1.5 million compensation for the termination of the Soldado contract. Morean quoted: “FW Oil’s claims in this arbitration results from corruption and other unlawful conduct by officials of TT state enterprises...”. The complete document sent to Sunday Newsday continued: “In retaliation for FWO’s refusal to pay a US$1.5 million bribe in connection with an oil and gas contract, senior officials of the TT state oil and gas company engaged in wrongful conduct that caused a subsidiary to breach its contractual obligations to FWO and to violate rights guaranteed to FWO as an investor under the Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) between Trinidad and Tobago and the United States. This conduct was part of the plan to avoid the acknowledged contractual rights of FWO.” The FW Oil document explained that in February 2000 Trinmar had invited FW Oil to tender for South West and West Soldado oil and gas fields, and in September 2000 FW Oil had been awarded the contract, after a detailed nine-month evaluation supervised by independent auditors. FW Oil’s proposed capital commitment to the project was over US$60 million (over TT$360 million). FW Oil’s Summary of the Dispute continued: “During the negotiations, however, and without FWO’s knowledge, certain TT officials hoping to benefit personally from the Trinmar project, had embarked on a course of conduct that would ultimately cause Trinmar wrongfully to withdraw the award of the contract. “In July 2000, acting through intermediaries, certain TT officials demanded a US$1.5 million bribe and threatened to block FWO’s proposals unless the bribe was paid. FWO refused. They later caused a fax to be sent to FWO listing a Cayman Island bank account and demanding that US$200,000 be deposited into the account as the first payment of a bribe. FWO again refused. The officials then commenced a campaign of disinformation, designed to force FWO’s removal as the successful bidder and abused their oversight positions in Petrotrin and the TT Government to block Trinmar from proceeding with the award. These officials ultimately caused Trinmar to withdraw the award in February 2001.

“Finally in June 2001, TT submitted the project to a new tender. In breach of its contractual obligations and duties of good faith and confidence to FWO, TT modelled its new tender on FWO’s confidential business plans and economic models. “By its conduct, TT has breached its agreements with FWO and its obligations under TT law, the BIT, and international law, and has caused FWO substantial damage and loss. FWO respectfully requests that it be awarded compensation for its lost profits and wasted costs.” The Attorney General sent to Sunday Newsday a continuation of the FW Oil’s court documents, entitled “Continuing discussions between FWO and TT”, describing it as “an affidavits supplied by FW Oil which accuses a named [former] government minister of blocking the project for his own personal interests”. The ex-minister’s name was deleted from the supplied document. The affidavits of FW Oil  said that at a meeting on 19 March 2001, Trinmar told FW Oil that Petrotrin had put the Soldado project on hold, but that the Trinmar letter of 26 February 2001 did not actually withdraw the award from FW Oil. But the statement (in its censored form sent to the media by the AG’s Office with the ex-minister’s name deleted) said: “However, acting in his own self-interest and without board approval, a  Minister inserted the final paragraph of the letter withdrawing the award from FWO. He held an interest in an energy company that was a potential bidder for the Soldado Fields Project. It was thought that he was trying to ‘guide’ the project to that company.” In Morean’s statement she lamented FW Oil’s reference to “TT officials” and “officials of TT state enterprises”, and she concluded: “Based on the allegations contained in FW Oil’s claim, the Government has initiated its own enquiries, which also informed the statements made by the Attorney General on the matter...The Attorney General reiterates her position that the Government will do everything possible to protect the interest of the people of Trinidad and Tobago in bringing settlement to this issue.”