Deloitte report on Oil and Gas in Iraqi Kurdistan

As part of the KRG’s drive to promote transparency, Deloitte have been commissioned to produce an audited report detailing oil and gas exports, production costs, and revenues for the second half of 2021.

The report, which analyzes the oil and gas industry on a quarterly basis, is now available as a PDF in English, Kurdish and Arabic on the KRG website.

Click here to download the reports.

(Source: KRG)

The post Deloitte report on Oil and Gas in Iraqi Kurdistan first appeared on Iraq Business News.

Jiyad: IEITI Annual Reports Continue, but Changes are Needed

By Ahmed Mousa Jiyad.

Any opinions expressed are those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Iraq Business News.

IEITI Annual Reports Continue but Changes in Form, Quality and Substance are Crucial and Needed

Iraq Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative (IEITI) issued its 2018 annual report and, currently, is processing its combined annual report, i.e., for 2019 and 2020 in a single issue.

Releasing the annual reports, though with two year time-lag, is undoubtedly commendable efforts. But the qualitative aspects and lack of impacts of these reports have been constantly identified with flaws and, thus, cause much concerns and raise very serious questions.

Consequently call upon IEITI and EITI is long overdue to undertake thorough revision aiming at making such annual reports different, better, relevant and helpful in enhancing real and effective transparency in the extractive industry in Iraq, more than what has been the case so far.

IEITI issued its tenth annual report, covering 2018, by end March 2021. 2018 preliminary report was delivered on 5 February 2020 and the final version was supposed to be released by latest end of 2020. Due to Covid-19 effect an extension of three months was granted by the International Secretariat of EITI- Oslo; it was release by 20 March 2021.

Currently, IEITI is processing its combined annual report, i.e., for 2019 and 2020 in a single issue; the preliminary report was presented to the MSG on September 2021 and the final report is scheduled for publication on March 2022.

Davinci Consulting / Geneva Group international (DCGGI) was contracted as the Independent Administrator- IP (according to EITI guidelines) to produce the annual reports for 2018, 2019 and 2020.

I reviewed all previous nine IEITI annual reports, and this current review is a continuation of my constant follow-up and monitoring of IEITI activities and my database relating to this topic.

This review covers first IEITI 2018 report followed by brief notes on the preliminary report of the forthcoming 2019/2020 combine report and ends with a few concluding remarks

IEITI 2018 Report

The 2018 Report comprises seven sections with executive summary and list for terms and abbreviations. It is a rather long report, 131 pages, and has 25 files (accessed through different web-links)

After reading the report I can make the following brief remarks on this report.

The executive summary, comparative to previous annual reports, is poor and  limited in coverage, conceptually ambiguous, misleading and, though it is short, its’ data was presented twice in tabular and graphic forms; totally unnecessary.

Except a few substantive improvements much of the contents of the main report were repetition from previous reports and sometimes using the usual copy, modify and paste- CMP method.

The web-links to the above mentioned 25 files indicate those files are either prepared or provided by the related entities, mostly Iraqi entities. Some of the files are in MS Excel with many sheets of varying size, while others are in MS Word.

The consultant, i.e., the IP did not analyse or provide explanatory notes or reconciliation of the contents of most of these files. A random check on the contents of some of these files raises many questions on the validity, accuracy and relevance of their contents. IP left the burden of assessing and using these files on the readers. And since no comments on or revision of the annual report were posted on IEITI website, it seems the MSG members, probably did not read thoroughly the report itself and most or all these 25 files!!!

The reports uses excessively and unjustifiable both tabulations and graphs even for simple two items; this lengthened the report (page wise) and increase its size (bitwise). Moreover, some of the graphs are confused and confusing.

All tables in the reports haves no number and no title and some of them are not professionally done. No references were provided for these tables and thus, it is impossible to check their accuracy or validate their contents.

There are many methodological and conceptual flaws, which could cause serious misunderstanding; below are a few examples.

Neither all activities of the Ministry of Oil nor all activities of the Ministry of Industry and Minerals are “extractive”!!!

Similarly, “associated gas”, “free gas”, “dome gas” all are “natural gas”; but the distinction between them is vital when one considers their data and how it is used. Moreover the term “gas burnt non-investable” is technically wrong and misleading as it justifies flaring!!!!  Also there is difference between “liquid gas” and LPG!!

There is no “Amman” oil in SOMO’s export price setting mechanism for the Asian market. This error has been repeated in previous annual reports due to CMP method; but, why SOMO representative in the MSG did not correct this apparent repetitive flaw!!

Also SOMO do not use “ICE Brent” or “NYMEX WTI” as marker crudes in its price formula for European and Americas markets.

SOMO is not “The revenue recipient government agency” for “Crude oil exports” and not recipient government agency for “the value of oil loaded by IOCs operating within the licensing rounds”.!!!!

Moreover, IOBs do not make direct payment of export revenues to DFI.

When it comes to SOMO, the IP seems to be totally confused in understanding the role of SOMO and the flowchart of oil export revenues, or different parts of the report were written by different people without coordination among them!!!

The focus on “Budget allocation” and “actual transfer” regarding petrodollar and governorate development funds is misleading because it ignores the chronic problems regarding actual spending and how it was done; as the experience since 2010 demonstrates.

There is no West Qurna oilfield; what there are WQ1 and WQ2 oilfields and each is contracted to very different consortiums of IOCs, offered under different bid rounds and thus having different technical service contracts.

Moreover, Majnoon oilfield has been under the National Efforts since mid-2018.

There are no reconciliation done for “Quantities and Values of Crude Oil, Oil Products and Gas provide to Refineries, Oil Products Distribution Company and Ministry of Electricity during” between related entities and MoE.

Occidental (Oxy) relinquished its participation interest in Zubair oilfields in 2016; so why it lifted more than 7.6 million barrels in 2018!!

I have computed that average oil price for “Crude oil lifted by the licensing round companies in exchange for cost recovery and remuneration fees entitled to them” was $64.29426 a barrel, while the average oil price for “Exported crude oil to International Oil Buyers” was $65.73435 a barrel; IP provides no explanation or clarification for this price differentials or aware of it at all??

The report provides no information or data on DFI but refers to 18 page report, so who supposed to do the needed reconciliation comparative to SOMO or IOBs data!!??

The Report says “The revenues of crude oil exports in both the federal Iraq and the Kurdistan region are considered material revenues as their contribution to the total revenues of the extraction sector exceeds the materiality threshold of 1%.” This is a manifestation of gross confusion and total misunderstanding, on part of the IP, of what “materiality threshold of 1%” is all about and what the purpose behind it.

The percentage of unpaid CIT by IOCs amounts to 19% of due CIT; this huge difference should have been investigated, specified and explained in details by the IP, but did not do it convincingly.

Total oil production was reported without making specific reference to the effect of the natural decline on base-line production particularly for the six oilfields contacted under first bid round. Ignoring this fact is erroneous and causes serious miscalculation especially with regards to remuneration fees and related CIT.

The “the value of internal service payments made by the MoF through SOMO to the North Oil Company to cover the cost of production that is exported” does not correspond to oil exported by this company compared to other NOCs such as Missan OC and ThiQar OC; IP provides no clarification or explanation!!

There are more important comments, but I think the above provides enough indication on the quality of the report.

IEITI Forthcoming Joint 2019/2020 Annual Report

Currently, IEITI is processing its combined annual report, i.e., for 2019 and 2020 in a single issue; the preliminary report (99 pages) was presented on September 2021 and the final report is scheduled for publication on March 2022.

The structure of the preliminary report is, in substance, similar to that for 2018, with one important difference or improvement, i.e., MSG remarks on 2019/20 report.

Item twelve of the preliminary report provide 44 different remarks made by MSG members; some of the remarks are broad and generic, while others are specific and to the point.

It remains to be seen whether and how IP addresses, these remarks as well as my notes mentioned in the previous part above, in its final joint report due in March 2022.

As there are only three months left to deadline for releasing the 2019/2020 annual report, it might be a farfetched hope for a well improved report.

Concluding remarks

  • By end March 2022 IEITI have had issued twelve annual reports; on the face of it this is impressive record. IEITI should have accumulated enough human and systemic professional capacity at its National Secretariat to have active, proactive and impacting contribution in preparing the annual reports and to ensure its quality control;
  • It is about time that IEITI and EITI (IS-Oslo) take a stock of the experience so far and revise the structure, contents, methodology and the process for future annual reports that should focus on recent issues and their future implications more than the repetition of a distant past.
  • Future reports should focus on providing detailed and verified data relating to the operational aspects of bid rounds field development in terms of reconciled costs (Capex and Opex), payments, remuneration fees, taxes-CIT among others more than repetition of their contracts terms that have been known since 2009/2010.
  • Comparative data for field manged by national efforts and those manged by IOCs should be provided in as much details as possible and reconciled accordingly.
  • The same applies to different SOMO activities according to a well-articulated matrix comprising different types of crude for different market configurations and related data reconciliation framework. Records of actual oil export price setting during the year should be provide instead of repeating SOMO’s standard document.
  • Corruption has become very serious complex problem in the country, and much of it is in the extractive activities; yet not a single word on corruption was mentioned in IEITI Final Annual Report 2018 or in the preliminary report for 2018/2020 report. Future IEITI should provide sufficient cover on this issue.
  • All contracts signed under the bid rounds have mandatory obligations to undertake at least two Environmental Impact Assessments-EIAs. IEITI annual report should call upon MoO and related IOCs to undertake and publish these EIAs.
  • All contracts signed under the bid rounds have non-refundable contribution to TTS Fund which has a total annual allocation that exceeds $55 million. IEITI annual report should provide comprehensive reconciled data on the annual utilisation for such funding.
  • A “Validation” mission, as per EITI framework, is scheduled for July 2022; it could be an opportunity to address the necessity and feasibility to improve IEITI future annual reports as proposed here. Unless such change and improvement take place, future IEITI reports will be released unnoticed, with no real impacts and become unnecessary formality.

Click here to download the full report in pdf format.

Mr Jiyad is an independent development consultant, scholar and Associate with the former Centre for Global Energy Studies (CGES), London. He was formerly a senior economist with the Iraq National Oil Company and Iraq’s Ministry of Oil, Chief Expert for the Council of Ministers, Director at the Ministry of Trade, and International Specialist with UN organizations in Uganda, Sudan and Jordan. He is now based in Norway (Email: mou-jiya(at)online.no, Skype ID: Ahmed Mousa Jiyad). Read more of Mr Jiyad’s biography here.

The post Jiyad: IEITI Annual Reports Continue, but Changes are Needed first appeared on Iraq Business News.

Deloitte Report on Kurdistan Region Oil and Gas

Deloitte report on Oil and Gas review in the Iraqi Kurdistan Region – Q1 and Q2 of 2021

The KRG has published the reports containing verified statistics covering the Kurdistan Region’s oil exports, consumption and revenues for covering period 1 January 2021 to 30 June 2021.

During the first half of 2021, the KRG exported 77.35 million barrels through Kurdistan Export Pipeline. In addition, 3.95 million barrels were allocated to local refineries. Of the exported crude oil, 76.869 million barrels were lifted by the buyers from Ceyhan Export Terminal, at an average price of 53.446 $/bbl.

The KRG has generated revenues of USD 4.1 billion from crude oil export sales during the first half of 2021. After making payments to oil producers, pipeline operators, and repayments to the buyers, the KRG retained net revenues from crude oil sales of US$ 1.737 billion.

The KRG is has engaged in discussions with international buyers and oil producers in continuing its efforts to maximize sales prices and reduce production costs to maximize value for the people of Kurdistan.

Transparency is central to the cabinet’s agenda. The report, available in Kurdish, English and Arabic, provides a quarterly analysis of oil export information and average prices which have been independently reviewed and verified by Deloitte.

The KRG acknowledges the positive feedback received from domestic and international stakeholders. The council reiterates its commitment to the people of Kurdistan that Deloitte will continue to independently review and verify the statistics of the Kurdistan Region’s oil and gas sector.

A frequently asked questions handbook (also available in Kurdish, English and Arabic) has also been developed to help readers to understand the report’s contents.

Click here to download the reports.

(Source: KRG)

The post Deloitte Report on Kurdistan Region Oil and Gas first appeared on Iraq Business News.

Deloitte Report on Kurdistan Region Oil and Gas

Deloitte report on Oil and Gas review in the Iraqi Kurdistan Region – Q1 to Q4 of 2020

The KRG has published a report containing verified statistics covering the Kurdistan Region’s oil exports, consumption and revenues for period 1 January 2020 to 31 December 2020, along with the consolidated report for the year 2020.

The report, available in Kurdish, English and Arabic, provides a quarterly analysis of oil export information and average prices.

The data verification was performed by Deloitte.

Transparency being central to the cabinet agenda, the KRG regularly assesses what additional disclosures would enhance the transparency of its oil and gas sector. Accordingly, from 2019 the KRG started providing information on the prepayment balances it owes to oil traders and in 2020 disclosures are further extended to include reconciliation between production and exports and local consumptions.

The KRG acknowledges the positive feedback received so far from domestic and international stakeholders. The council reiterates its commitment to the people of Kurdistan that Deloitte will continue to independently review the region’s oil and gas sector.

A frequently asked questions handbook (also available in Kurdish, English and Arabic) will help readers to understand the report’s contents.

Click here to download the reports.

(Source: KRG)

The post Deloitte Report on Kurdistan Region Oil and Gas first appeared on Iraq Business News.

Deloitte Report on Kurdistan Region Oil and Gas

Deloitte report on Oil and Gas review in the Iraqi Kurdistan Region – Q1 to Q3 of 2020

The KRG’s Regional Council of Oil and Gas Affairs has published a report containing verified statistics covering the Kurdistan Region’s oil exports, consumption and revenues for period 1 January 2020 to 30 September 2020.

The report, available in Kurdish, English and Arabic, provides a quarterly analysis of oil export information and average prices.

The data verification was performed by Deloitte.

Transparency being central to the cabinet agenda, the KRG regularly assesses what additional disclosures would enhance the transparency of its oil and gas sector. Accordingly, from 2019 the KRG started providing information on the prepayment balances it owes to oil traders and in 2020 disclosures are further extended to include reconciliation between production and exports and local consumptions.

The Regional Council for Oil and Gas Affairs acknowledges the positive feedback received so far from domestic and international stakeholders. The council reiterates its commitment to the people of Kurdistan that Deloitte will continue to independently review the region’s oil and gas sector.

A frequently asked questions handbook (also available in Kurdish, English and Arabic) will help readers to understand the report’s contents.

Click here to download the reports.

(Source: KRG)

The post Deloitte Report on Kurdistan Region Oil and Gas first appeared on Iraq Business News.

Jiyad: EITI Restores Iraq’s Compliance Status

By Ahmed Mousa Jiyad.

Any opinions expressed are those of the authors, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Iraq Business News.

EITI Restores Iraq’s Compliance Status, with Conditions Attached

The board of the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) decided on 16 October 2019 to reinstates Iraq status as a “compliant” country in conformity with the EITI “Standard” and roles of procedure; this is a welcoming and encouraging development.

The decisions was premised on an extensive thorough and transparent “validation” report done by the international secretariat of EITI, which assessed all what Iraq had taken through series of measures and actions designed specifically to address what had caused the Board to suspend Iraq status with EITI in October 2017.* 

Iraq and, particularly, the Ministry of Oil should be congratulated for reinstating the country’s status with EITI; and, while I fully share the sense of achievement as expressed by the MoO announcement on 20 October 2019, I emphatically call upon the Ministry to do what is needed to sustain and enhance this achievement.

Hence, if this case has any meaning and implications for the future of transparency in Iraq generally and in the extractive industry particularly, a set of reminders are mentioned first followed by a set of suggestions for moving forward.

Important Cautions and Reminders

In order not to lose sight and to avoid the false sense of complacency that is, once again, emanates from “mission accomplished” conviction, it is vital to highlights that EITI Board decision was in fact with qualification and conditional. The Iraqi authorities, the Ministry, the civil society organization among others should be aware of and be informed of the following.

First, according to the final “Scorecard”, Iraq’s overall score was “Meaningful progress”, which means “significant aspects of the requirements have been implemented and the broader objective of the requirements is being fulfilled.”

In other words the “Meaningful progress” is in fact the minimum threshold for maintaining the compliance status. The implications are Iraq should, at the minimum, maintain the “Meaningful progress” and should enhance it significantly towards “Satisfactory progress”. Actually, looking at the Scorecard it is really easy and doable to move from “Meaningful progress” to “Satisfactory progress” or even “Beyond”. But any retreat lower than the “Meaningful progress” could cause, once again, another suspension;

Second, EITI Board decision endorses the “Validation Committee” view that Iraq should take necessary corrective measures and actions. Twelve corrections were specifically mentioned and they are related to “Requirements” 1.2; 1.4; 1.5; 2.6.a; 4.1; 4.5; 4.8; 4.9; 6.1; 7.1; 7.3 and 7.4. Again, these gaps and related corrective measures are primarily directed to those requirements that Iraq scored Meaningful progress aiming at elevating the progress to higher levels i.e., Satisfactory or Beyond. Practically, EITI Board is helping Iraqi authorities by specifying where and how to take corrective actions and thus provide a roadmap for what to do next.

Third, the timeframe for taking these corrective actions and their verification is not open-ended; EITI Board decided that progress in addressing the above mentioned corrective actions will be subject to the next “Validation” due to commence on 16 April 2021. This implies that Iraqi EITI (IEITI) and related authorities has eighteen months to finalize what has to be done on each of these corrective actions to insure Iraq remains a compliant country; the failure to do so would risk a repetition of suspension;

Fourth, the above corrective actions should be understood as they are over and above and additional to other requirements that has scored satisfactory progress. In other words there is no tradeoff between “Meaningful progress” and “Satisfactory progress”; what should be there is progression from “Meaningful progress” to “Satisfactory progress” of “Beyond” for all EITI requirements listed in the scorecard and pursuant to latest EITI Standard adopted in Paris, June 2019.

Planning the Way Forward

The IEITI, chaired by the Minister of Oil, is responsible for and should take all necessary actions and measures through agreed-upon plan regarding the following:

First, IEITI should read carefully the documents prepared and presented by EITI that led to EITI Board decision on 16 October 2019. The purpose is specifically to prepare a checklist on what has to be done, how, when, by whom and implement the planned actions well before 16 April 2021;

Second, make specific suggestions regarding how to improve the quality and coverage of the IEITI Annual Report; the IEITI Work-Plan; the IEITI Activity Report and any other publications by IEITI. All such documents should, preferably, be subject to external quality control before releasing them to the public since the experience of the last ten years indicates that these reports, particularly the annual reports are full of inaccuracies, flaws, copy & paste, wrong data among others;

Third, how to make MSG more proactive, productive and have effective role in particularly the following: drafting the ToRs for the Independent Administrator; preparation process of the annual report through more participatory approach; the coverage of the annual report pursuant to the latest EITI Standard; insure grater and growing impacts and encourage wider societal engagement and connectivity among other;

Fourth, IEITI should be an example of transparency by publishing on its website all what is related to its activities including records of MSG meetings, MSG members attendance verified by their signatures; issues debated and how decisions are taken, etc;

Fifth, insure full and timely data disclosure on every aspects of the extractive industry in the country, particularly by the Ministry and its State Companies operating in the upstream petroleum sector including both volumes and fiscal indicators; such data disclosure should be posted monthly and accessible through IEITI website;

Sixth, grant priority to the development of the human and systemic national efforts of the IEITI National Secretariat and their involvement in particularly the preparation of the annual reports, in the development of the needed database, in providing technical and professional supporting activities, in organizing workshops and activities among others;

Seventh, IEITI suffers from declining external financial support and funding that bound to impact the level and frequency of its activities. That was due largely to the removal of Iraq from the priority screen of NRGI; the suspension of Iraq by EITI in October 2017 and by the significant reduction of the World Bank funding. Luckily, Iraq had concluded recently (or in fact renewed) it is cooperation agreement with Norway’s NORAD’s Oil for Development program and, thus, IEITI is strongly advised to capitalize on this agreement and utilize different opportunities it offers;

Eighth, the entire above are feasible, doable and useful; IEITI should start promptly working on them. It might be relevant for IEITI to convene a well prepared “professional, action oriented workshop” for specialist and expert with proven track record to address the above aiming at drafting the workable and functional roadmap.

 

* I have covered, monitored and written extensively on IEITI since its inception; for background information and analysis on IEITI and that phase onwards, interested readers find more on my contributions, in Arabic and English, that are accessible through the following links:

http://www.iraq-businessnews.com/category/oil-gas/ahmed-mousa-jiyad/

http://www.akhbaar.org/home/search/?sq=Ahmed%20Mousa%20jiyad

http://www.alnoor.se/author.asp?id=7149

 

Mr Jiyad is an independent development consultant, scholar and Associate with the former Centre for Global Energy Studies (CGES), London. He was formerly a senior economist with the Iraq National Oil Company and Iraq’s Ministry of Oil, Chief Expert for the Council of Ministers, Director at the Ministry of Trade, and International Specialist with UN organizations in Uganda, Sudan and Jordan. He is now based in Norway (Email: mou-jiya(at)online.no, Skype ID: Ahmed Mousa Jiyad). Read more of Mr Jiyad’s biography here.

Jiyad: EITI Restores Iraq’s Compliance Status

By Ahmed Mousa Jiyad.

Any opinions expressed are those of the authors, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Iraq Business News.

EITI Restores Iraq’s Compliance Status, with Conditions Attached

The board of the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) decided on 16 October 2019 to reinstated Iraq status as a “compliant” country in conformity with the EITI “Standard” and roles of procedure; this is a welcome and encouraging development.

The decisions was premised on an extensive thorough and transparent “validation” report done by the international secretariat of EITI, which assessed all what Iraq had taken through series of measures and actions designed specifically to address what had caused the Board to suspend Iraq status with EITI in October 2017.* 

Iraq and, particularly, the Ministry of Oil should be congratulated for reinstating the country’s status with EITI; and, while I fully share the sense of achievement as expressed by the MoO announcement on 20 October 2019, I emphatically call upon the Ministry to do what is needed to sustain and enhance this achievement.

Hence, if this case has any meaning and implications for the future of transparency in Iraq generally and in the extractive industry particularly, a set of reminders are mentioned first followed by a set of suggestions for moving forward.

Important Cautions and Reminders

In order not to lose sight and to avoid the false sense of complacency that is, once again, emanates from “mission accomplished” conviction, it is vital to highlights that EITI Board decision was in fact with qualification and conditional. The Iraqi authorities, the Ministry, the civil society organization among others should be aware of and be informed of the following.

First, according to the final “Scorecard”, Iraq’s overall score was “Meaningful progress”, which means “significant aspects of the requirements have been implemented and the broader objective of the requirements is being fulfilled.”

In other words the “Meaningful progress” is in fact the minimum threshold for maintaining the compliance status. The implications are Iraq should, at the minimum, maintain the “Meaningful progress” and should enhance it significantly towards “Satisfactory progress”. Actually, looking at the Scorecard it is really easy and doable to move from “Meaningful progress” to “Satisfactory progress” or even “Beyond”. But any retreat lower than the “Meaningful progress” could cause, once again, another suspension;

Second, EITI Board decision endorses the “Validation Committee” view that Iraq should take necessary corrective measures and actions. Twelve corrections were specifically mentioned and they are related to “Requirements” 1.2; 1.4; 1.5; 2.6.a; 4.1; 4.5; 4.8; 4.9; 6.1; 7.1; 7.3 and 7.4. Again, these gaps and related corrective measures are primarily directed to those requirements that Iraq scored Meaningful progress aiming at elevating the progress to higher levels i.e., Satisfactory or Beyond. Practically, EITI Board is helping Iraqi authorities by specifying where and how to take corrective actions and thus provide a roadmap for what to do next.

Third, the timeframe for taking these corrective actions and their verification is not open-ended; EITI Board decided that progress in addressing the above mentioned corrective actions will be subject to the next “Validation” due to commence on 16 April 2021. This implies that Iraqi EITI (IEITI) and related authorities has eighteen months to finalize what has to be done on each of these corrective actions to insure Iraq remains a compliant country; the failure to do so would risk a repetition of suspension;

Fourth, the above corrective actions should be understood as they are over and above and additional to other requirements that has scored satisfactory progress. In other words there is no tradeoff between “Meaningful progress” and “Satisfactory progress”; what should be there is progression from “Meaningful progress” to “Satisfactory progress” of “Beyond” for all EITI requirements listed in the scorecard and pursuant to latest EITI Standard adopted in Paris, June 2019.

Planning the Way Forward

The IEITI, chaired by the Minister of Oil, is responsible for and should take all necessary actions and measures through agreed-upon plan regarding the following:

First, IEITI should read carefully the documents prepared and presented by EITI that led to EITI Board decision on 16 October 2019. The purpose is specifically to prepare a checklist on what has to be done, how, when, by whom and implement the planned actions well before 16 April 2021;

Second, make specific suggestions regarding how to improve the quality and coverage of the IEITI Annual Report; the IEITI Work-Plan; the IEITI Activity Report and any other publications by IEITI. All such documents should, preferably, be subject to external quality control before releasing them to the public since the experience of the last ten years indicates that these reports, particularly the annual reports are full of inaccuracies, flaws, copy & paste, wrong data among others;

Third, how to make MSG more proactive, productive and have effective role in particularly the following: drafting the ToRs for the Independent Administrator; preparation process of the annual report through more participatory approach; the coverage of the annual report pursuant to the latest EITI Standard; insure grater and growing impacts and encourage wider societal engagement and connectivity among other;

Fourth, IEITI should be an example of transparency by publishing on its website all what is related to its activities including records of MSG meetings, MSG members attendance verified by their signatures; issues debated and how decisions are taken, etc;

Fifth, insure full and timely data disclosure on every aspects of the extractive industry in the country, particularly by the Ministry and its State Companies operating in the upstream petroleum sector including both volumes and fiscal indicators; such data disclosure should be posted monthly and accessible through IEITI website;

Sixth, grant priority to the development of the human and systemic national efforts of the IEITI National Secretariat and their involvement in particularly the preparation of the annual reports, in the development of the needed database, in providing technical and professional supporting activities, in organizing workshops and activities among others;

Seventh, IEITI suffers from declining external financial support and funding that bound to impact the level and frequency of its activities. That was due largely to the removal of Iraq from the priority screen of NRGI; the suspension of Iraq by EITI in October 2017 and by the significant reduction of the World Bank funding. Luckily, Iraq had concluded recently (or in fact renewed) it is cooperation agreement with Norway’s NORAD’s Oil for Development program and, thus, IEITI is strongly advised to capitalize on this agreement and utilize different opportunities it offers;

Eighth, the entire above are feasible, doable and useful; IEITI should start promptly working on them. It might be relevant for IEITI to convene a well prepared “professional, action oriented workshop” for specialist and expert with proven track record to address the above aiming at drafting the workable and functional roadmap.

 

* I have covered, monitored and written extensively on IEITI since its inception; for background information and analysis on IEITI and that phase onwards, interested readers find more on my contributions, in Arabic and English, that are accessible through the following links:

https://www.iraq-businessnews.com/category/oil-gas/ahmed-mousa-jiyad/

http://www.akhbaar.org/home/search/?sq=Ahmed%20Mousa%20jiyad

http://www.alnoor.se/author.asp?id=7149

 

Mr Jiyad is an independent development consultant, scholar and Associate with the former Centre for Global Energy Studies (CGES), London. He was formerly a senior economist with the Iraq National Oil Company and Iraq’s Ministry of Oil, Chief Expert for the Council of Ministers, Director at the Ministry of Trade, and International Specialist with UN organizations in Uganda, Sudan and Jordan. He is now based in Norway (Email: mou-jiya(at)online.no, Skype ID: Ahmed Mousa Jiyad). Read more of Mr Jiyad’s biography here.

EITI Lift’s Iraq’s Suspension

The EITI Board has decided that Iraq has made meaningful progress in implementing the EITI Standard.

Validation, the EITI’s quality assurance process, found that Iraq’s performance in implementing EITI Requirements has improved markedly since the country’s first Validation in 2017. Iraq’s suspension as a result of poor results in its first Validation has now been lifted, a development that reflects a substantial rate of progress over the last two years.

“Iraq’s implementation of the EITI Standard is now disclosing some USD 45bn in crude oil sales annually,” said Chair of the EITI Board Helen Clark. “The challenge now is for Iraq to strengthen multi-stakeholder oversight of its extractive industries and to use this emerging transparency to enhance accountability in the governance of its natural resources.”

Breaking ground in data disclosures

The Board recognised Iraq’s progress, through the EITI, in disclosing information that was previously inaccessible to stakeholders, ranging from data on oilfields and petroleum property rights to publishing the financial statements of oil and gas state-owned enterprises.

Iraq’s most recent EITI reporting also provides a diagnostic of the efficacy of government oversight of the extractives, including in identifying arrears of undisbursed subnational transfers of ‘petrodollar’ allocations. Validation has acknowledged these tangible gains in the transparency of Iraq’s oil and gas sector, building on a series of first-ever disclosures.

“The results of this second Validation reflect our concerted efforts to open up the management of Iraq’s oil and gas industry through regular and comprehensive disclosures,” said Iraq’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Oil Thamer Al-Ghadhban. “We want to use the EITI not only to frame our systematic disclosures of oil and gas data but more importantly to support an evidence-based debate on our reforms.”

From transparency to accountability

Yet this emerging transparency has not been matched by commensurate efforts to ensure the data contributes to public debate and decision-making. Systematically disclosing data required by the EITI Standard would enable Iraq to focus on using EITI data to improve accountability in the governance of the oil and gas sector.

The Board encouraged Iraq to integrate its systematic disclosures of EITI data to ongoing public finance management reforms, such as the World Bank and European Union’s modernisation of Public Financial Management systems project.

The Board also urged Iraq to strengthen its multi-stakeholder oversight of the extractives to ensure more active contributions from companies and civil society to the government’s management of the extractive industries, including through the Multi-Stakeholder Group overseeing EITI implementation.

The decision by the EITI Board gives Iraq 18 months to address 12 gaps in its implementation of the EITI Standard before a third Validation on 17 April 2021.

Iraq submitted an adapted implementation request for its 2016-2018 EITI Reports, and the Board did not therefore take account of weaknesses in coverage of Iraqi Kurdistan in its assessment of Iraq’s progress in implementing the EITI Standard.

(Source: EITI)

EITI Lift’s Iraq’s Suspension

The EITI Board has decided that Iraq has made meaningful progress in implementing the EITI Standard.

Validation, the EITI’s quality assurance process, found that Iraq’s performance in implementing EITI Requirements has improved markedly since the country’s first Validation in 2017. Iraq’s suspension as a result of poor results in its first Validation has now been lifted, a development that reflects a substantial rate of progress over the last two years.

“Iraq’s implementation of the EITI Standard is now disclosing some USD 45bn in crude oil sales annually,” said Chair of the EITI Board Helen Clark. “The challenge now is for Iraq to strengthen multi-stakeholder oversight of its extractive industries and to use this emerging transparency to enhance accountability in the governance of its natural resources.”

Breaking ground in data disclosures

The Board recognised Iraq’s progress, through the EITI, in disclosing information that was previously inaccessible to stakeholders, ranging from data on oilfields and petroleum property rights to publishing the financial statements of oil and gas state-owned enterprises.

Iraq’s most recent EITI reporting also provides a diagnostic of the efficacy of government oversight of the extractives, including in identifying arrears of undisbursed subnational transfers of ‘petrodollar’ allocations. Validation has acknowledged these tangible gains in the transparency of Iraq’s oil and gas sector, building on a series of first-ever disclosures.

“The results of this second Validation reflect our concerted efforts to open up the management of Iraq’s oil and gas industry through regular and comprehensive disclosures,” said Iraq’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Oil Thamer Al-Ghadhban. “We want to use the EITI not only to frame our systematic disclosures of oil and gas data but more importantly to support an evidence-based debate on our reforms.”

From transparency to accountability

Yet this emerging transparency has not been matched by commensurate efforts to ensure the data contributes to public debate and decision-making. Systematically disclosing data required by the EITI Standard would enable Iraq to focus on using EITI data to improve accountability in the governance of the oil and gas sector.

The Board encouraged Iraq to integrate its systematic disclosures of EITI data to ongoing public finance management reforms, such as the World Bank and European Union’s modernisation of Public Financial Management systems project.

The Board also urged Iraq to strengthen its multi-stakeholder oversight of the extractives to ensure more active contributions from companies and civil society to the government’s management of the extractive industries, including through the Multi-Stakeholder Group overseeing EITI implementation.

The decision by the EITI Board gives Iraq 18 months to address 12 gaps in its implementation of the EITI Standard before a third Validation on 17 April 2021.

Iraq submitted an adapted implementation request for its 2016-2018 EITI Reports, and the Board did not therefore take account of weaknesses in coverage of Iraqi Kurdistan in its assessment of Iraq’s progress in implementing the EITI Standard.

(Source: EITI)