The World Bank, Red Flags and the Looting of Nigeria’s Oil Revenues
The IFC’s investment in Seven Energy:
What would have been your call?
The World Bank has invested almost a quarter of a billion dollars in Seven Energy, an oil and gas company operating in Nigeria. Months before the first investment was made in 2014, the then Governor of Nigeria’s Central Bank alleged that the company’s flagship contract involved operating a scheme that was looting billions of dollars in state revenues. A number of the people associated with the contract are now either on the run or charged with money launderingSeven Energy has distanced itself from those on the run, saying the fugitives hadad no involvement in the running of the Company since November 2011. The World Bank insists that it conducted “comprehensive due diligence” prior to investing. But, given what was known at the time and what has emerged since, would you have invested if you had been working at the World Bank and tasked with undertaking the due diligence? What does the investment tell us about the Bank’s due diligence procedures? Do they comply with international anti-money laundering rules and regulations?
As things currently stand, the Bank’s private sector arm, the International Finance Corporation (IFC), is a major shareholder in a company that has defaulted on its debts and is claimed by the Federal Republic of Nigeria in court pleadings to be partly owned by two suspected criminals who are alleged to have used Seven Energy as a vehicle for laundering stolen oil funds.
Quite where that latter development places the World Bank is one for the lawyers. But, from a lay perspective, it is surely not unreasonable to conclude that, should the allegations be proven, the IFC might find itself accused having profited from money laundering and, thus, of unlawful enrichment.
Written by Nicholas Hildyard
Nicholas Hildyard works with The Corner House, a UK research and solidarity group. He is author of “Corrupt but Legal: Institutionalised Corruption and Development Finance” and, for the past six years, has been working with Global Witness, HEDA and Re:Common to bring Shell and Eni to account for their corrupt acquisition of the OPL 245 oil field in Nigeria (https://shellandenitrial.org/)
Published by
Corner House Research, United Kingdom
Corner House Research [“Corner House”] is a UK-registered non-governmental organisation. It began investigating alleged corruption surrounding the sale of the OPL 245 oil license in Nigeria in 2012. It was a signatory to the criminal complaint that triggered the current prosecutions of Shell and others in Italy and Nigeria.
web: http://www.thecornerhouse.org.uk/
Global Witness, United Kingdom
Global Witness is a non-governmental organisation based in London and Washington, that investigates and campaigns to prevent natural resource related conflict and corruption, and associated environmental and human rights abuses. It has been investigating OPL 245 since 2008 and was also a signatory to the complaint that led to the Italian and Nigerian prosecutions of Shell and others.
web: https://www.globalwitness.org/en/
HEDA, Nigeria
Human and Environmental Development Agenda (HEDA Resource Centre) (HEDA) is a Nigerian based non-governmental organisation. HEDA’s involvement in the OPL 245 began in 2013, when it submitted a petition to Nigeria’s Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), demanding investigation of the transaction. Following the petition, an investigation was opened by the commission, culminating in recent prosecution of parties to the deal.
web: http://hedang.org/
Re:Common, Italy
Re: Common is an independent and not-for-profit “association of social promotion” under the Italian law. It has been investigating OPL 245 since 2013 and is also a signatory to the criminal complaint that triggered the current prosecutions of Shell and others in Italy and Nigeria.
web: https://www.recommon.org/eng/
