Cablegate: Gob Defies Court Decision On Hydrocarbons Contracts
VZCZCXYZ0041
PP RUEHWEB
DE RUEHLP #2399 2491449
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 061449Z SEP 06
FM AMEMBASSY LA PAZ
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 0431
INFO RUEHAC/AMEMBASSY ASUNCION 6073
RUEHBO/AMEMBASSY BOGOTA 3392
RUEHBR/AMEMBASSY BRASILIA 7242
RUEHBU/AMEMBASSY BUENOS AIRES 4508
RUEHCV/AMEMBASSY CARACAS 1773
RUEHPE/AMEMBASSY LIMA 1808
RUEHMN/AMEMBASSY MONTEVIDEO 3989
RUEHQT/AMEMBASSY QUITO 4408
RUEHSG/AMEMBASSY SANTIAGO 8977
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHINGTON DC
RHEBAAA/DEPT OF ENERGY WASHINGTON DC
RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHINGTON DC
RUEATRS/DEPT OF TREASURY WASHINGTON DC
UNCLAS LA PAZ 002399
SIPDIS
SENSITIVE
SIPDIS
STATE FOR WHA/AND
TREASURY FOR SGOOCH
ENERGY FOR CDAY AND SLADISLAW
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: BL ECON EINV ENRG EPET KJUS
SUBJECT: GOB DEFIES COURT DECISION ON HYDROCARBONS CONTRACTS
REF: LA PAZ 1157
1. (SBU) Summary: On September 4, the Bolivian Hydrocarbons
Chamber issued a press statement to publicize the
Constitutional Court's May ruling that the 74 existing shared
risk contracts between state oil company YPFB and private
investors are legally valid. In response, the Hydrocarbons
Minister continued to maintain that the contracts do not
legally exist. Negotiations between the GOB and private
hydrocarbons firms to sign new contracts began on September
5. At the outset of negotiations, both sides are posturing
to improve their negotiating positions, with the Hydrocarbons
Minister defying the court's decision and claiming that
because the contracts are invalid, the private firms must
sign new contracts or leave. The executive branch's
disregard for the court decision further erodes contract
sanctity and rule of law in Bolivia. End summary.
2. (SBU) The Bolivian Constitutional Tribunal ruled on May 10
that the 74 shared risk contracts signed by the Bolivian
state oil company YPFB with private investors in the late
1990s are legally valid, but that future contracts must be
approved by Congress. The press did not publicize the ruling
at the time. The Bolivian Hydrocarbons Chamber, an
association of private investors in the sector, issued a
press statement to make known the court's decision on
September 4 to strengthen its negotiating position prior to
impending talks with the GOB. In response, the GOB
maintained its argument that the contracts are legally
non-existent because they were not approved by Congress, as
required by the Bolivian Constitution, and lack the consent
of the people.
3. (SBU) Contract negotiations between the GOB and private
oil firms began on September 5. At the outset of these
negotiations, Hydrocarbons Minister Andres Soliz Rada
reiterated that the previous contracts are nonexistent, so
the companies must sign new contracts or leave (reftel).
4. (SBU) Comment: The court decision put private energy firms
in a better bargaining position vis a vis the GOB to
negotiate new contracts. However, the executive branch's
apparent disregard for the Constitutional Court's ruling on
hydrocarbons contract legality indicates the tenuousness of
contract sanctity in Bolivia and bodes poorly for private
investors. The Hydrocarbons Minister's flagrant disrespect
for the court's decision indicates that investment in the
hydrocarbons sector is likely to remain at the minimum level
necessary for the firms to meet their contractual
obligations, dampening Bolivia's long-term economic growth
prospects. End comment.
GREENLEE