MONROVIA – “Under 16.3 of the Oranto Production Sharing Agreement, every cent Oranto spent to acquire the block will be reimbursed to him when he flips. He will get back the signing bonus, money for the data, permit money. Even the cost of the pen they used to sign they will get back. Chey!!!!!” With this emphatic Facebook post, Representative J. Fonati Koffa of Grand Kru County District #2 launched a fierce critique of the controversial Atlas Oranto Production Sharing Agreement (PSA), warning that ratification could endanger Liberia’s petroleum sector and national interests.
A day later, Koffa drew sharp comparisons, noting that Ghana’s deep-water signature bonus of US$20 million funds major infrastructure like Airport City, while Oranto’s US$1.2 million bonus “is not even enough to pay for presidential limo.” He cited the 2016 Petroleum Law, stressing that all payments related to petroleum activities, except seismic data purchases, should be deposited into Liberia’s Consolidated Fund. Koffa condemned Oranto’s attempt to divert funds under Section 17 of the agreement as illegal, questioning why the Justice Ministry had not acted. “Injunction loading!!!!” he added.
Together with Musa Hassan Bility of Nimba County District #7, Koffa formalized their opposition in a joint letter dated October 29, 2025, addressed to the chairpersons of the Committees on Hydrocarbon, Investment and Concessions, and Judiciary. They described the PSA as marred by corruption, secrecy, and lack of institutional capacity, warning that ratification would be “a grave mistake” with long-term consequences for Liberia’s petroleum sector and the Legislature’s credibility. “Few moments in our sojourn as legislators will require us to stand up vigorously for the future of this country and the judgment of history. We are afraid one of those times is now,” the lawmakers wrote. “The Atlas Oranto Production Sharing Agreement should not be ratified and should be returned to the Executive for reasons stated below.”
Koffa and Bility revisited Oranto Petroleum’s controversial past in Liberia, recalling that in 2007 the company was granted three oil blocks, LB-11, LB-12, and LB-14, under widely questioned circumstances. Reports by ProPublica, Global Witness, and Forbes revealed that Oranto allegedly used a “straw man” company, Canadian Overseas Petroleum Ltd (COPL), to sell the blocks to Chevron for over US$200 million without drilling a single well or making direct investment in Liberia. According to the lawmakers, this previous deal violated the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and remains a stain on Liberia’s oil sector. “The history of dealings between Oranto Petroleum and Liberian authorities is marred by scandal and corruption,” they wrote. “The process was widely criticized for its lack of transparency and integrity.”
The lawmakers also criticized the secrecy surrounding the current Oranto deal, highlighting the absence of competitive bidding and lack of transparency about Oranto’s Liberian lawyers, government advisors, local beneficiaries, and the reason for reducing the signing bonus from US$10 million to US$1.2 million. They questioned Oranto’s technical and financial capacity to conduct ultra-deep-water drilling, which requires specialized expertise and investments of up to US$200 million per well. “With such an enormous panoply of companies, why did the Government see the need to engage Oranto at all?” they asked.
Describing Oranto as “a flipper,” Koffa and Bility argued the company acquires oil blocks cheaply and resells them for massive profit without adding value. A FrontPage Africa report, titled “The Oil Block Flipper Is Back,” corroborated these concerns. “He adds neither value nor substance to the blocks he has been awarded,” they stated.
In conclusion, Koffa and Bility called the PSA a “major policy decision with long-term implications for Liberia’s petroleum future” and urged fellow legislators to reject it, emphasizing the need for accountability, transparency, and protection of Liberia’s national resources. “To give out a significant public resource to a company with a scanty track record and no capacity to perform the contract is nothing less than a dereliction of duty,” they warned.
