By: Ousman F. M’Bai

Financial Crime, Regulation & International Asset Recovery Lawyer/UK;
Founder: ProffMaXX (Gambia) Ltd (Ground Water Drilling, Exploration & Production)

FAR Ltd: Jeopardising The Gambia’s Oil & Gas Prospects

FAR Ltd.’s handling of The Gambia’s oil and gas prospects in the Senegal/Gambia shared sub-basin has raised serious concerns about its operational competence and judgement that may have negatively impacted the nation’s resource future. Yet, the response from The Gambia’s government and other entities involved has been astonishingly muted. It begs the question: why has there been no investigation into how this debacle was allowed to unfold?

Despite FAR Ltd.’s troubling conduct, it continues to hold its 100% licence stake in The Gambia’s A2 and A5 blocks, with seemingly no repercussions. The Gambia’s government, along with the governments of Senegal, Woodside Energy, and Petronas, have all remained conspicuously silent. The inertia surrounding the matter signals more than mere oversight; it points seemingly to a potential systemic lack of scrutiny and accountability.

The Gambia’s Missed Opportunity and Senegal’s Tainted Windfall

The Gambia’s government, having effectively surrendered the country’s economic sovereignty to Senegal, maintains the position that there are no oil and gas resources in The Gambia. Remarkably, the Petroleum Minister recently issued a communiqué downplaying the nation’s oil and gas potential, reinforcing the false narrative that no significant resources exist within the country. This conclusion—potentially influenced by FAR Ltd.’s poor performance and Senegal’s control over the country’s unsophisticated elites overlooks a crucial fact: the issue is not whether oil is directly found in The Gambia, but rather The Gambia’s undeniable right to a fair share of the resources from the Senegal/Gambia sub-basin, which straddles the maritime boundaries of both countries.

Meanwhile, Senegal and its state-owned oil corporation Petrosen, together with Woodside Energy, celebrate what they claim is a monumental discovery. They proudly assert that this will contribute to Senegal’s sustainable development and provide lucrative returns for investors, notably Woodside Energy. However, they appear to omit critical discussion of how they stand to gain significantly from FAR Ltd.’s controversial claim that the SNE Sangomar oil and gas field does not extend into The Gambia’s A2 and A5 blocks. The ethical implication of this omission raises significant concerns and questions about transparency in the management of shared resources. At the core of this issue is the exclusion of The Gambia from its rightful share of the sub-basin’s resources. There can be no valid explanation for this mistreatment and exploitation of The Gambia, especially given that Senegal has resource-sharing agreements with both Mauritania to the north of the MSGBC basin and Guinea-Bissau to the south.

3D Seismic Data and FAR Ltd.’s Dubious Findings

Woodside Energy, Petrosen, and Petronas, through its Gambian subsidiary PC(Gambia) Ltd, all possessed clear 3D seismic data indicating that The Gambia’s A2 block is a contiguous extension of the prolific SNE Sangomar field. Yet rather than critically evaluating FAR Ltd.’s findings, these entities accepted without question the conclusions from FAR Ltd.’s failed drilling programme— raising concerns about the adequacy of due diligence.

From the outset, FAR Ltd lacked both the capital and technical expertise necessary for successful exploration. When it entered The Gambia in 2016, the country’s institutions were in disarray. FAR Ltd secured 100% stakes in the A2 and A5 blocks through a deal that has not been fully disclosed, raising concerns about transparency and potential exploitation of weak governance. A strategy often associated with problematic investment practices is to identify a gateway to the heart of government decision- making, then appoint the son, daughter or relative of that individual to represent the so- called investor’s interest.

Facing an inability to meet its obligations, FAR Ltd brought in Petronas as a joint venture partner through its subsidiary PC(Gambia) Ltd. However, Petronas’s presence in The Gambia has been equally shrouded in mystery. It has made no public disclosures, offered no transparency, and failed to release any transactional accounts or information regarding its operations in the country. FAR Ltd.’s assertions are the only source of information on this partnership.

FAR Ltd.’s Inadequate Drilling Programmes

FAR Ltd.’s amateurish approach to drilling was evident in the failure of its first well, Samo, in the A5 block, based on less accurate 2D seismic data or none. Unsurprisingly, FAR’s Chief Geologist admitted they had “drilled low.” Nonetheless, the company reported encountering two structures but failed to disclose any details regarding their relationship to the SNE Sangomar reservoirs. For its second well, Bambo, FAR Ltd concealed significant issues, including a major accident during drilling. Both the primary and secondary wells missed their targets, leading FAR Ltd to wrongly conclude that the Bambo and Soloo prospects were commercially non-viable. This conclusion ignored

clear evidence from 3D seismic data showing that the SNE Sangomar field extends into The Gambia’s A2 block. And FAR Ltd.’s own findings that both prospects have easy access to the prolific source kitchen that feeds oil into the SNE Sangomar field.

FAR Ltd.’s Financial Collapse and The Senegal Deal

Adding to the intrigue, in June 2020, FAR Ltd defaulted on a capital call for its joint venture stake in the SNE Sangomar field. In response, it was forced to sell its 13% stake to Woodside Energy for $126 million in July 2021. This transaction, structured to guarantee FAR Ltd future payments up to $55 million, raises serious questions. It appears that Woodside Energy and Petrosen conducted no meaningful due diligence before finalising this deal, preferring instead to validate FAR Ltd.’s dubious findings and dismiss The Gambia’s rightful claim to a stake in the SNE Sangomar field located inside the Senegal/Gambia sub basin.

Despite repeated requests for clarification from Woodside Energy, Petrosen, and Petronas on their role in this saga, no substantive responses have been provided. Woodside Energy’s reply, in particular, ignored the crux of the matter, deflecting to its pre-emption of FAR’s sale in the Rufisque, Sangomar, and Sangomar Deep (RSSD) joint venture. It made no mention of the default notice served on FAR Ltd, nor did it acknowledge the implications of FAR Ltd.’s actions in The Gambia. The strategic silence on these matters is telling.

FAR Ltd.’s poor financial standing left it ill-prepared to meet its obligations regarding development, production, and royalty payments under its licence, had it confirmed that the SNE Sangomar field extended into The Gambia’s A2 block. Such a finding would have compelled Woodside Energy and Petrosen to acknowledge The Gambia’s shared stake. FAR Ltd.’s ineptitude has effectively made The Gambia the sacrificial lamb.

The Case of Petronas and Lack of Transparency

In August 2022, barely a year after Woodside’s acquisition of FAR Ltd.’s stake, Petronas surrendered its interest in The Gambia’s A2 and A5 blocks back to FAR Ltd for an undisclosed amount. This move raises disturbing questions about the nature of the transaction, the nature of the relationship between Petronas and FAR Ltd and the potential denial of The Gambia its rightful share of the sub-basin’s resources. Petronas has yet to respond to inquiries on whether its actions comply with local and international regulations.

In an era where corporate transparency and accountability are paramount, the actions of Woodside Energy, Petronas, Petrosen, and FAR Ltd stand as an affront to ethical standards. The ongoing denial of The Gambia’s rights to its resources condemns millions of Gambians to perpetual poverty while benefiting a select few. This level of corporate governance raises serious ethical concerns that must be met with international outrage.

Environmental Risks Posed by the FPSO Vessel Near The Gambia’s Territorial Waters

Amidst all of this, The Gambia’s entire maritime coast and ecosystem is exposed to a significant risk of serious pollution from oil spills and leaks due to the presence of the FPSO Leopold Sedar Senghor in close proximity to its territorial waters. An FPSO (Floating, Production, Storage, and Offloading) vessel is a modified oil tanker, redesigned for use at sea as a facility for oil and gas production, processing, storage, and offloading. These vessels are directly connected to production wells deep below the seabed by numerous interlinked pipes, often spanning hundreds of kilometres. The multipurpose function of the vessel, combined with the extensive network of pipes, increases the risk of accidents through leaks and spillage. However, there is no evidence of any coordinated collaboration between The Gambia’s government, the government of Senegal, and Woodside Energy to implement proactive emergency safeguarding measures in the event of an accident.

Paralleling Precedent: The Mozambique Tuna Bonds Case

In the recent landmark corruption case in the High Court Commercial Division in London, the Mozambique “Tuna Bonds” case, Justice Robin Knowles described the scale of the scandal as “nothing short of a tragedy.” He criticised the defendants for focusing solely on their own financial gain, rather than on assisting Mozambique in making the most of its resources.

The parallel with The Gambia is clear. Just as Mozambique was exploited, The Gambia’s vulnerabilities as a small, weak state are being exploited by external entities and internal enablers. The international community must not allow this injustice to persist.

Conclusion: FAR Ltd, Woodside Energy, and The Gambia’s Future

The Gambia’s rightful share of the oil and gas resources in the Senegal/Gambia sub- basin has been sacrificed due to FAR Ltd.’s incompetence and the complacency, if not the lack of action from companies like Woodside Energy, Petrosen, and Petronas. FAR Ltd.’s reacquisition of 100% of The Gambia’s A2 and A5 blocks has put the nation in a perilous position, effectively holding the country hostage with a gun to its head.

Gambians must not remain silent in the face of this corporate exploitation. The ethical and legal failings of those involved must be addressed, and those who have sought to profit from The Gambia’s resources at its expense must be held accountable.

Woodside Energy, now holding 82% of the RSSD, has the power to right this wrong. However, their willingness to engage meaningfully with the reality of The Gambia’s situation will serve as a true measure of their commitment to justice, transparency, and the right to development. The world is watching.

Editor’s Note: On 28.08.24 The Fatu Network wrote to Woodside Energy, Petrosen and Petronas seeking clarifications and their response to the issues raised in this expose. To date, Petronas and Petrosen have not responded. Woodside Energy provided the following response attributable to a Woodside Energy spokesperson:

‘In December 2020 Woodside exercised pre-emption rights to acquire FAR Senegal’s participating interest in the Rufisque, Sangomar and Sangomar Deep (RSSD) joint venture. The transaction completed in 2021 and in no way related to any of FAR’s assets in The Gambia. Further details can be found in the announcement released to the Australian Securities Exchange at the time of the transaction.’

The Fatu Network wrote to FAR Ltd on 5.08.24 and they have not responded to date.

By: Mama A. Touray

Following the interview of the United Democratic Party leader on Kerr Fatou, where he stated that if the government tampered with the original 2020 draft constitution, his party’s parliamentarians would not vote for it, Momodou Sabally, special adviser to President Adama Barrow, has pleaded with opposition members to reverse their stance on the draft constitution.

“I am pleading with the opposition members who are saying that if there is any change to the 2020 draft constitution, they will not agree. I urge them to revise their position because it is not the correct position and will not benefit the country. Democracy is about consensus, debate, consensus-building, and compromise,” he said.

Sabally challenged, “Who can tell me that the 2020 draft constitution was perfect? Let one person stand and tell me it’s perfect. Those who are saying to bring back the 2020 draft constitution cannot say that it’s perfect. A draft that is plagiarized from the Kenyan constitution — you bring that and say it should be the holy book, and no one should question it.”

He continued: “You are not democratic; you are not behaving democratically. Perhaps you are not even interested in the country’s best interests. If your opinion is that we should have a new constitution, and the draft is presented, yet you say if they change anything, you won’t agree — then what you want cannot happen. You don’t own the country. There are political parties, interest groups, religious groups, and other stakeholders in the country.”

Sabally added that he was one of the first to criticize the Constitutional Review Commission, saying, “I didn’t agree with the way they were operating, and I believe that where it was heading was not what Gambians wanted.”

He urged stakeholders, including political parties and CSOs, to allow the process to go through the National Assembly. “It’s not like only National People’s Party parliamentarians are there. We have UDP NAMs and other NAMs to see how we can have a process of discussion and consensus to have a constitution that will move this country forward.”

On the issue of consultation, Sabally said the process taken by the Constitutional Review Commission was sufficient. “They traveled around the entire country, using our money, and even went abroad all in the name of consultation, only to plagiarize a foreign constitution. That’s enough consultation.”

“The draft constitution involved consultation, it included everyone’s views, and the government made adjustments that I believe were necessary. Government is not theoretical, it’s practical. Giving the National Assembly the powers of the President undermines the work of the National Assembly. If you are in the executive and understand how the country should be governed, you will understand why President Barrow and the cabinet made these adjustments,” he said.

By: Alieu Jallow

Residents of Nema Sukuta in the West Coast Region have decried the exacerbating severe flooding that has turned once dry, resilient land into a gentle stream, which locals attribute to persistent neglect by local authorities in addressing fundamental infrastructure needs.

Musa Samateh, a resident who has lived in the community for more than two decades, told this medium that for the past twenty years, they had never experienced flooding or waterlogging. However, the past two years have been a nightmare for them, following the illegal construction of concrete by residents who blocked the waterways to the main drain of the Kotu stream, leading to water flooding their houses and streets.

“This serious flooding started in 2022, 2023, and 2024, and it is increasing. We have discussed it as a community, but we couldn’t come to terms as individual interests override collective interest. So we are appealing to the authorities, either the NDMA, the WACA project—which once consulted us—or physical planning, that this is the right time to intervene before the problem escalates. As I speak, some compounds are submerged in water, which could cause further damage,” he decried.

While Mr. Samateh expressed gratitude to the WACA project for donating a mini pumping machine to help pump out water in compounds that are adversely affected, he highlighted their grievances regarding a significant issue rooted in the inadequate implementation of physical planning policies. A surge in population didn’t correspond with improvements in infrastructure, following inadequate zoning, with many settling along the waterways, thus creating a perfect storm for flooding.

“As individuals and as a community, we do not have the power to demolish anyone’s structure, so we are appealing to physical planning to take stringent measures before it’s too late to act. To the National Disaster Management Agency, you could help mitigate this issue and avoid giving us relief aid, which could be diverted to other places,” he appealed.

Meanwhile, Nyimading Sanneh, an aging woman, said that in the past, she ventured into both vegetable gardening and farming during the rainy season. However, she cited that the past two years have turned into horror with waterlogging taking center stage, leaving no crops or even grass surviving.

“For more than 10 years, I have been cultivating all types of crops ranging from maize, vegetables, and cassava. I used to cultivate sorrel, but today even that can’t survive, which leaves me in a dilemma as it’s my source of income. This issue has also led to the complete collapse of my mud house, leaving it beyond repair,” she emphasized.

Old Nyimading cited that her financial struggles have left her managing and coping with only the remaining part of her house to reside in. She calls on authorities to support efforts to mitigate her current predicament.

While many perceive the WACA project as a source of hope to address the disaster that continues to affect their community, they call on the implementing team to expedite the process to prevent future flooding disasters and build a resilient community that stands firm against nature’s fury.

By Alieu Jallow

The defense counsel for Yankuba Darboe, the Chairman of the Brikama Area Council, has filed a motion supported by a 20-paragraph affidavit dated 14th August 2024.

The Brikama Area Council Chairman is currently facing charges of sedition under Section 52(1)(b) of the Criminal Code, Volume 3, Laws of The Gambia 2009, and contempt of court under Sections 106(d) and (i) of the Criminal Code, Volume 3, Laws of The Gambia.

The prosecution alleges that on February 10, 2021, Yankuba Darboe made derogatory statements against the President of The Gambia, Adama Barrow, and the Gambian Judiciary.

On Thursday, 12th September 2024, his defense counsel, Kaddijatou Jallow, submitted their motion to Magistrate M.L. Thomasi of the Banjul Magistrate Court. The motion seeks the following orders:

1. An order staying the hearing and determination of the charges against the accused person/applicant pending the hearing and determination of the appeal at the Gambia Court of Appeal.
2. Any further or other order this court deems fit to make.

In their affidavit in support of the motion, Isatou Ceesay, a Gambian resident of Bakoteh who swore as the deponent, states that she is familiar with the facts of the matter by virtue of her position as a pupil barrister at Dandimayo Chambers.

1. That she has the authority of the accused person/applicant to depose the affidavit.
2. That, unless otherwise stated, the averments herein are derived from the accused person/applicant during consultations in Chambers.
3. That the accused person/applicant was charged with sedition and one count of abusive language. They argued that the court granted bail on the charges after the prosecution’s case was closed, and they filed a no-case-to-answer submission.

On August 17th, 2023, the court delivered its ruling on the no-case-to-answer submission, with the accused person/applicant expressing dissatisfaction with the ruling. This prompted the defense to file an appeal to the High Court of The Gambia on 28th August 2023.

Similarly, the accused person made an application for the records of proceedings to be transmitted to the High Court in order for the appeal to be heard. This order was granted by the High Court, and the Applicant was requested to facilitate the typing and transmission of the proceedings.

Furthermore, the first draft of the records of proceedings was typed but required vetting, which was not done, resulting in the High Court dismissing the case on July 11th, 2024. This verdict prompted the applicant to lodge an appeal with the Gambia Court of Appeal against the ruling dismissing the appeal on July 25th, 2024, a copy of which was attached and marked as IC1.

The defense further argued in their motion that the respondent has taken steps to hear the charges against the accused person and that unless restrained, the accused person/applicant will be rendered in a situation of total helplessness. The motion further states that unless the court intervenes, the appellant’s appeal shall be rendered nugatory, and thus, in the interest of justice, the status quo ante bellum should be maintained pending the hearing and determination of their appeal.

The case has been adjourned to the 20th of September 2024 at 10 a.m. for hearing.