Springfield Exploration and Production Limited (SEP) has rejected what it described as “false and unfounded” allegations stemming from a petition reportedly submitted by Petraco Oil Company SA to the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO).
In a statement issued in Accra yesterday, the indigenous upstream oil and gas firm said the claims being circulated in the media misrepresent a purely commercial dispute currently under arbitration.
According to Springfield, the petition and resulting media coverage were part of an attempt to cast aspersions on its corporate reputation without basis.
“The allegations contained in Petraco’s petition are false, unfounded, and entirely without merit. They do not reflect the facts of the commercial relationship between Springfield and Petraco and should not be treated as evidence of criminal conduct,” it said.
The dispute arises from a USD 100 million facility agreement signed on February 7, 2023, under which Petraco disbursed an initial tranche of USD 50 million.
As part of the agreement, Springfield provided security through a charge over 10 per cent of its issued shares. However, Petraco registered its interest over the entire 10 per cent, despite only partially disbursing the facility.
Springfield maintains that the deal was entered into after Petraco and its legal advisers conducted “comprehensive legal and technical due diligence” on its operations and assets, particularly its interest in Ghana’s West Cape Three Points Block 2.
The firm insists that it fully cooperated with this process and that the agreement was finalised only after Petraco expressed full satisfaction.
“This was, and remains, a straightforward commercial arrangement. Attempts to reframe it as a matter of criminality whilst it is being addressed in arbitration are not only misleading, but deeply damaging,” it said.
The company expressed concern over what it called “a series of negative and sensationalised reports” based on the unverified petition.
It warned that continued publication of what it described as defamatory and speculative content could result in legal consequences.
Meanwhile, Ghanaian energy company, GMP has refuted media reports, purportedly based on a petition filed by Petraco Energies DMCC to the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO).
GMP has clarified that the matter in question stems from a commercial disagreement under a 50/50 profit-and-loss sharing joint venture with Petraco Energies DMCC not Petraco Oil Company SA, as erroneously cited in some reports.
The company explained in a statement issued yesterday that it transferred $10 million to Petraco to procure petroleum products.
However, while GMP claims to have transparently disclosed sale prices, Petraco allegedly failed to provide purchase cost details and ignored repeated requests for a formal audit of the transactions.
Key cost elements such as freight and hedging remain unverified, according to GMP.
“This is a purely commercial dispute. There is no evidence of fraud or criminality,” the company stated.
GMP added that the matter is currently under arbitration in Dubai, where it is pursuing a counterclaim and demanding accountability.
GMP expressed concern that certain publications had relied solely on unverified claims from a petition without seeking balance or input from the company.
“These one-sided reports create a false narrative and offer detractors an opportunity to discredit our operations and reputation,” it noted.
