FoE calls for more accountability from ENEOS Holdings and related parties (FoE Press Release)

In the world of global business, decisions ripple outward, affecting not just the bottom line but the lives of countless individuals. In Myanmar, an energy project with a shadowed past is now at the center of a debate about corporate responsibility and human rights. ENEOS Holdings, a Japanese energy conglomerate, recently announced its approved withdrawal from the Yetagun gas field project, sanctioned by Myanmar’s illegitimate military regime.

The announcement, however, left something to be desired. ENEOS’s statement was a mere sketch, devoid of critical details about the company’s responsibilities and how it intended to follow international guidelines on responsible business practices, such as the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights or the OECD Guidelines.

The Yetagun gas field project, once operated by Malaysia’s Petronas, had a complex web of partners. The Japanese government, Mitsubishi Corporation, and ENEOS’s subsidiary, JX Myanmar Petroleum Development, joined forces with Thailand’s PTTEP and Myanmar Oil and Gas Enterprise (MOGE). Although Petronas declared its intention to withdraw in 2022, the company has not revealed the steps taken to ensure a responsible exit from Myanmar.

Over the past two years, Mekong Watch, FoE Japan, and Justice for Myanmar (JFM) have been steadfast in their calls for ENEOS and its partners to maintain transparency, engage with local communities, and execute a responsible withdrawal. Their pleas, however, seemed to fall on deaf ears.

The consequences of inaction are concerning. ENEOS and its partners seemingly failed to prevent the profits of the Yetagun gas field project from funneling into the Myanmar military’s coffers during the withdrawal process. Additionally, it appears that no appropriate steps were taken to close the gas field, which is predicted to deplete in the near future. The prospect of MOGE, under the military regime’s control, conducting an environmentally responsible closure seems unlikely.

As JFM’s findings suggest, the Yetagun gas field project will be taken over by Gulf Petroleum Myanmar (GPM), part of the Thailand-based Northern Gulf Petroleum group. GPM’s ties to tax haven Bermuda and a holding company in Singapore raise concerns about secretive corporate structures potentially aiding payments to the military regime. The choice of GPM as a successor exposes ENEOS, the Japanese government, and Mitsubishi Corporation’s inadequacy in mitigating the negative environmental and social impacts of their withdrawal.

It is time for ENEOS, Mitsubishi Corporation, and the Japanese government to fulfill their accountability by clarifying the steps they will take to address human rights due diligence and the negative impacts related to their withdrawal from Myanmar. Only by aligning their actions with international human rights responsibilities can they begin to mend the fabric of trust and demonstrate their commitment to a just and responsible future.