Springfield Exploration and Production Limited (SEP), a Ghanaian oil and gas company, has vehemently refuted allegations of impropriety leveled against it by Petraco Oil Company SA, a Swiss oil trading company. The allegations, stemming from a petition submitted by Petraco to Ghana’s Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO), have been circulating in various media outlets, prompting Springfield to issue a robust rebuttal. Springfield characterizes the allegations as false, unfounded, and a deliberate attempt to smear its reputation and leadership. The company maintains that the dispute is purely commercial in nature, revolving around a financing agreement, and is already subject to arbitration proceedings. Framing the dispute as a criminal matter, Springfield argues, is not only inaccurate but also detrimental to Ghana’s business environment.
The core of the disagreement lies in a $100 million facility agreement signed between Springfield and Petraco in February 2023. This agreement stipulated that Springfield would provide security for the facility, which included a charge over 10% of its issued shares. While Petraco disbursed the initial tranche of $50 million, they subsequently registered an interest in the full 10% shareholding. Springfield asserts that this action was fully justified and in accordance with the terms of the legally binding agreement, which was predicated on thorough due diligence conducted by Petraco and its external advisors. Springfield cooperated fully with the due diligence process, and the agreement was executed only after Petraco expressed satisfaction with its findings.
Springfield criticizes the media for uncritically publishing unverified allegations and sensationalizing the issue without seeking its perspective. While acknowledging the importance of media scrutiny, Springfield emphasizes the need for responsible journalism based on factual accuracy and fairness, not on speculation or unfounded accusations. The company expresses disappointment with certain media outlets that it believes have become instruments in a campaign to discredit Springfield and its leadership. The company asserts its commitment to transparency and accountability, emphasizing that it welcomes scrutiny based on facts, not conjecture.
Springfield’s statement further underscores its proactive engagement with media houses, offering accurate information and context to counter the narrative being propagated. Despite these efforts, the company laments that certain media outlets have chosen to prioritize sensationalism over balanced reporting. This selective reporting, according to Springfield, reflects a deliberate attempt to tarnish the company’s image. It warns against the continued publication of defamatory statements and false claims, reserving its right to pursue legal action against those who perpetuate such misinformation.
The company highlights its commitment to ethical business practices and contributing to national development. It stresses the importance of a fair and unbiased media landscape that promotes accurate reporting and avoids sensationalism. Springfield calls for a more responsible approach to journalism, urging media practitioners and commentators to prioritize fact-checking and balanced reporting over speculative narratives. The company reiterates its belief that a thriving business environment in Ghana requires responsible reporting that adheres to journalistic ethics.
In concluding its statement, Springfield pledges ongoing engagement with stakeholders and the media, emphasizing the importance of interactions grounded in professionalism and a genuine pursuit of truth. The company reiterates its willingness to address legitimate inquiries and provide accurate information, but insists on a respectful and professional dialogue, free from unfounded accusations and sensationalist reporting. Springfield emphasizes its commitment to transparency and accountability within a framework of responsible journalism that prioritizes facts and fairness. The company’s statement serves as a strong defense against what it perceives as a deliberate campaign to damage its reputation and undermine its operations.
