Petroleum Africa
Find us on: 
Friday, November 12, 2021
Swedish authorities have brought charges against former Lundin Energy executives for complicity in war crimes carried out by the Sudanese military in southern Sudan from 1999 to 2003.
Lundin Energy has strongly pushed back against the allegations. A partial release of the Company’s statement follows:
Lundin Energy AB has further considered the Swedish Prosecution Authority’s criminal charges against Ian H. Lundin and Alex Schneiter for complicity in crimes against international law, gross crime, following the Company’s initial announcement on 11 November 2021. The Company is therefore today publishing a summary of its position on the indictment from its defence counsel to provide further reassurance as to the defence. Ian H. Lundin, Alex Schneiter and the Company continue to strongly deny the criminal charges, and the Company reaffirms that there are no grounds for the allegations of wrongdoing by any of its representatives. The Company also reaffirms that it sees no circumstance in which a corporate fine or forfeiture could become payable and does not foresee any impact on the operational and financial guidance set out previously.
Following a comprehensive review of all the pre-investigation materials, and an initial assessment of the details of the indictment decision itself, the Company and its defense counsel are of the view that it is simply not possible to conclude that any representative of the Company, either directly or indirectly, was complicit in encouraging anyone to commit crimes against international law — let alone that any perpetrator as a result of such encouragement would have committed any such crimes. Since the Prosecutor cannot, on an objective assessment, expect a conviction in an indictment against the Company representatives, he could be pursuing an unjustified indictment.
Nick Walker, President and CEO of Lundin Energy, commented: “This case is both unfounded and fundamentally flawed. There is no evidence linking any Company representative to the alleged primary crimes in this case and we see no circumstance in which a corporate fine or forfeiture could become payable given this fact. The Company intends to firmly contest the claims for a corporate fine and forfeiture of economic benefits and does not foresee any impact on the operational and financial guidance that has been set out previously.”
To learn more on the case, the full response can be found here.
" alt="First LNG Realized at the Greater Tortue Ahmeyim Project">
" alt="United Energy Acquires Western Desert Producer APEX">
" alt="Baker Hughes Announces Major Gas Technology Orders for Venture Global LNG">
" alt="ReconAfrica: Naingopo Results Demonstrate a Working Petroleum System">
" alt="Tullow Highlights 2025 Operational Plans in Ghana">
" alt="TotalEnergies to Supply 1.5 TWh to STMicroelectronics in France Over 15 years">
" alt="Rockhopper Reaches Final Settlement with United on Egypt’s Abu Sennan Concession">
" alt="Oil & Gas Crucial for African Growth: AEC Calls for Industry Support to Defend African Market">
