Page 4 of the signed renegotiated ExxonMobil agreement showing the address of Nigel Hughes’ law office is listed as its registered office.
Earlier this week, Minister of Natural Resources, Raphael Trotman, finally admitted that there were problems with the renegotiated contract between ExxonMobil and Guyana, which was signed off on by the APNU+AFC Coalition Government. And he absolved himself of any responsibility, blaming the technical staffers of the Guyana Geology and Mines Commission (GGMC).
Trotman had said, “My only comment is that as a non-technical person, I was not the one to negotiate the contract, and that, at all material times, I acted on the advice and direction of the GGMC…how could I see something as an indictment on myself if I didn’t draft it? I relied on the officers at GGMC at all times and was advised when the agreement was ready for signature.”
Notably, his comment came after reports on the visit by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) delegation, during which the Coalition Government, for the first time, expressed concern that the lack of ring-fencing could negatively affect revenue earned from the agreement it signed with Esso Exploration and Production Guyana Limited (EEPGL) for the 6.6 million acres Stabroek Block.
Meanwhile, GGMC staffers have made clear that they had no input in the finalizing of the agreement. Responding to the issues, Opposition Leader, Bharrat Jagdeo, noted that the Parliamentary Opposition had warned against the exclusion of technical persons from the negotiation. “We said inept negotiations would cost the country billions,” he said.
In May 2018, Jagdeo had pointed out that responses from Minister Trotman to questions raised a meeting of the Parliamentary Sectoral Committee on Natural Resources indicated that the renegotiation of the Exxon- Mobil contract was not based on national considerations or what is good for Guyana and the Guyanese people.
He noted that Trotman admitted that the Coalition Government initiated the renegotiation of the contract and the move was based on threats to Guyana’s territorial integrity by Venezuela. During the Parliamentary Sectoral Committee on Natural Resoan responded, “The Government of Guyana did.” Lumumba asked, “Why?” Trotman responded, “We did it because of the threat of Venezuela.”
Jagdeo had questioned Trotman’s response and pointed out that a renegotiated contract was not needed to keep ExxonMobil from continuing its work since oil was already discovered. “You did not need a new contract to keep Exxon in that geographic area…ExxonMobil had already found oil, they wurces meeting, PPP/C Parliamentarian, Odinga Lumumba specifically asked Trotould explain some of the very contentions clauses and how they managed to find themselves in the contract. I must say I was disappointed.”
Moreover, he noted the worrying admission that there is “no paper trail” regarding the Coalition Government’s engagement with ExxonMobil on significant matters. Jagdman, “Who initiated the changes to the 2016 agreement?” Trotmere going to drill in any case in that same location,” he said. According to him, the controversial clauses in the ExxonMobil were not addressed significantly in the renegotiation. “When he (Trotman) was asked about the stability clause he said it was plucked from somewhere,”
Jagdeo said. The Opposition Leader added, “…I think all of Guyana paid careful attention to the hearing convened by the Parliamentary Sectoral Committee on Natural Resources. At that meeting, Trotman sought to explain the thinking behind the renegotiated contract signed with ExxonMobil. All of Guyana was hoping that the Minister noted Trotman’s comments about the government hiring an international law firm to help with the negotiations of future oil contracts, reflects what the Parliamentary Opposition has been calling for since 2015.
“We have been saying that we need to get the best people in the room,” he said, adding that the Government cannot tout international experts and then ignore their advice. All considered, the Opposition Leader charged that the circumstances surrounding the signing of a renegotiated contract with ExxonMobil remain murky.
