Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
06QUITO2444
2006-10-05 12:05:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy Quito
Cable title:  

OCCIDENTAL FOCUSES ARBITRATION AGAINST GOE; GOE

Tags:  EINV EPET ETRD EC 
pdf how-to read a cable
VZCZCXYZ0000
OO RUEHWEB

DE RUEHQT #2444/01 2781205
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
O 051205Z OCT 06
FM AMEMBASSY QUITO
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 5403
INFO RUEHBO/AMEMBASSY BOGOTA 6035
RUEHCV/AMEMBASSY CARACAS 2066
RUEHLP/AMEMBASSY LA PAZ OCT LIMA 1010
RUEHGL/AMCONSUL GUAYAQUIL 1230
C O N F I D E N T I A L QUITO 002444 

SIPDIS

SIPDIS
TREASURY FOR SGOOCH
DEPT PASS USTR

E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/04/2016
TAGS: EINV EPET ETRD EC
SUBJECT: OCCIDENTAL FOCUSES ARBITRATION AGAINST GOE; GOE
DELAYS NAMING ARBITER

Classified By: DCM Jeff Brown. Reasons 1.4 b and d

C O N F I D E N T I A L QUITO 002444

SIPDIS

SIPDIS
TREASURY FOR SGOOCH
DEPT PASS USTR

E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/04/2016
TAGS: EINV EPET ETRD EC
SUBJECT: OCCIDENTAL FOCUSES ARBITRATION AGAINST GOE; GOE
DELAYS NAMING ARBITER

Classified By: DCM Jeff Brown. Reasons 1.4 b and d


1. (C) Summary: Occidental Petroleum (Oxy) is dropping its
arbitration case against Petroecuador while maintaining its
case against the Government of Ecuador (GOE) to facilitate it
management of the arbitration. In addition, the GOE has
stated it will not appoint its arbiter by Oct. 12, as
required by the arbitration rules. With presidential
elections scheduled for October 15, the GOE argues
(speciously) it must first consult with the president-elect
before naming an arbiter. Post is disappointed but
unsurprised by the GOE delay, which many will likely view as
a lack of respect for the arbitral process. Post recommends
that USG officials meeting this week with Trade Minister
Peribonio note that this apparent decision makes generating
positive movement on the trade agenda with Ecuador that much
harder. End Summary.

Oxy Drops Petroecuador Case to Focus on GOE
--------------


2. (SBU) Occidental Petroleum has dropped its international
arbitration case against the Ecuador's state oil company
Petroecuador, but at the same time will continue to press its
case against the GOE. When it initially filed for
arbitration, Oxy was simultaneously pursuing two cases, one
against the GOE and the other against Petroecuador. The case
against the GOE was based on the U.S.-Ecuador Bilateral
Investment Treaty, while that against Petroecuador was based
on its contract, which (as noted below),created
complications for Oxy's management of the arbitration. In
withdrawing the case against Petroecuador, Oxy maintained
that it has the right to pursue a separate arbitration at a
later date.


3. (SBU) Oxy told the Embassy that it had been discussing
internally for some time the possibility of setting aside the
Petroecuador case. The decision to withdraw the claim
against Petroecuador was a legal decision that accelerates
the case against the Government of Ecuador, clarifies the
legal situation, and removes the opportunity for the GOE and
Petroecuador to play off each other in ICSID. In taking this

step, Oxy believes a number of issues will be clarified:

-- Venue: Oxy,s agreement with Petroecuador specifies that
the venue for arbitration would be Quito. Although this
reportedly contradicts ICSID rules, Oxy does not want to risk
having ICSID okay the Quito venue, and then have the GOE
arbitration forced into a Quito venue as well.

-- Provisional Remedies: the Petroecuador agreement
specifies 1995 ICSID rules that do not specifically call for
a schedule for information exchange on provisional measures
in advance of forming a tribunal. The case against the GOE
would fall under 2006 rules that empower ICSID to establish
this type of briefing calendar for exchange of information on
provisional remedies prior to formation of a tribunal. This
gains Oxy about a month and half in obtaining provisional
remedies. Indeed, Oxy has requested and ICSID has sent a
letter to the GOE regarding setting a schedule for this.

-- Prevents reasonable doubt: If Petroecuador and the GOE
are both arguing it is the other,s fault, or if the tribunal
is uncertain which of the two are at fault, this could be
construed as reasonable doubt.

-- Stronger argument: Since the Minister of Energy was
responsible for the caducity statement; Oxy sees the argument
against GOE as stronger.


4. (SBU) Oxy has not ruled out a case against Petroecuador
in the future, but Oxy representatives are not sure it would
add much (it would entail more legal fees and time, and any
assets that might be attached are really GOE assets).

Ecuador,s Attorney General Delays Naming Arbiter
-------------- ---


5. (U) On October 2, Attorney General Borja sent a letter to
ICSID noting Ecuador,s upcoming elections and stating that
the GOE would consult with incoming officials before naming
an arbiter. Borja's letter did not state when Ecuador would
name its arbiter and simply noted that elections will be held
on October 15. However, it is quite possible that Ecuador
will not elect a president until the second round of
elections on November 26. Under ICSID rules, the GOE has

until October 12 to name its arbiter. Oxy has already
stated, in its letter to ICSID withdrawing the Petroecuador
case, that if the GOE does not name its arbiter by October
12, Oxy would request that ICSID appoint the arbiter, as
allowed under ICSID rules.


6. (U) Press reports on the two new developments in Ecuador
have generally been fairly even-handed, although some include
quotes from President Palacio saying that Oxy,s decision to
drop the Petroecuador case is "a victory for the people that
should be celebrated, news that is full of hope and joy for
the nation." Most reports note that Oxy is dropping the
Petroecuador case to focus on the case against the GOE, and
some quote Ecuadorian lawyers who believe Oxy's move actually
strengthens their case.


7. (C) Comment: We are disappointed but unsurprised by the
apparent delay in naming an arbiter. It is consistent with
the GOE's pattern on this issue over the past year -- delay,
obfuscate, avoid actions that could be politically criticized
and seek to push decisions further down the road. The GOE
is not taking the minimal step it could have taken to show
respect for the arbitral process )- appointing the
arbitrator that it is entitled to name. At the same time,
the action is not surprising because of the pending elections
and the desire of current GOE officials to avoid criticism or
possibly retribution from the next administration.
JEWELL