Manchester Journal of International Economic Law
Vol. 4, Issue 3, 2007
On January 11, 2006 the Government of Chad (GoC) unilaterally issued a revised Petrol Revenue Management Law (PRML). The revised text modified the initial PRML that had been endorsed by the GoC and the World Bank (the Bank or the WB). The involvement of the Bank in the execution of the Chad Cameroon Pipeline Project (CCPP) was important in securing the commitment of three multinational oil companies in the project. One of the clauses in the loan agreement between the Bank and the GoC was to the effect that unilateral actions adopted without sufficient consultation tantamount to a material breach. The Bank regarded the enactment of the revised PRML as constitutive of such a breach because it reduced funds that had to be allocated for social services; abrogated the future generations fund, and importantly, augmented the money to be used for security purposes. Apart from its fracas with the Bank, the GoC had to grapple with major differences that developed between the Government of President Idriss Dï¿½©by and some of the multinational oil companies involved in the CCPP. The main cause of the dispute with the companies was the non-payment of oil revenue taxes. This note considers the options of the GoC respecting its legal relations with the Bank and multinational oil companies. One of the main arguments submitted is that the GoC can avert some of the problems related to its ties with the Bank, the companies, as well as with its people, if it can consider the experiences of other countries including Norway and the Nunavut of Canada.