Abdelbasit Al-Jabou’a, Director General of the Energy and Public Companies Sector Oversight Department at the Audit Bureau, told our source exclusively that, regarding the dispute that arose between the Central Bank of Libya and the National Oil Corporation, the Audit Bureau was involved in the matter and monitored it directly.
He explained that, at one stage, the Central Bank requested that certain payments be deferred, given its ability to influence the exchange rate and maintain exchange-rate stability. These payments included amounts related to fuel imports, partners’ shares—particularly those related to gas, and certain other supplies.
Al-Jabou’a added that efforts were made to address the issue of the fuel import bill, since the cost of imported fuel is deducted directly from oil revenues before being covered and paid to suppliers. Accordingly, some payments were deferred.
He said this deferral led to an increase in oil revenues. In addition, global oil prices were favorable, with prices remaining high. As a result, oil revenue transfers exceeded $3 billion in some months.
Al-Jabou’a stressed that this reflected the actual revenue—or the average monthly revenue that Libya should normally be receiving. However, the deferrals occurred because the Central Bank was managing foreign-currency transfers while also dealing with various financial needs.
“We hoped these months would provide an opportunity for oil revenues to remain at a good level, allowing the Central Bank, at least, to cover its needs, whether in terms of providing foreign currency or covering certain letters of credit,” he said.
Al-Jabou’a continued that this matter was also among the responsibilities he was monitoring. The Audit Bureau tracked movements in oil revenues and sought to defer some payments, invoices, and expenditures. When the following months arrived and efforts were made to settle the transactions that had been deferred, there was a decline in the amounts transferred to the Central Bank.
He noted that this was what prompted the Central Bank to move quickly to publish certain reports and make comparisons between different months, showing, for example, that revenues had reached $3 billion, while in the same period a year and one month later they had fallen to $1.3 billion.
Naturally, he said, these differences were justified because the Audit Bureau’s review of the invoices had been comprehensive and accurate.
Al-Jabou’a confirmed that the review covered the receipt of invoice payments, export proceeds, and even deferred invoices. In certain exceptional cases, some companies were granted payment grace periods of three or four months, and in some cases these periods extended to 180 days, or six months.
He explained that these amounts had been deferred, but remained fully payable.
He also pointed out that there were other amounts that were expected to be received during specified months. However, some customers purchasing crude oil did not transfer the payments on schedule due to agreements between them and the National Oil Corporation.
In such cases, late-payment penalties are imposed on the outstanding amounts, which the customer is required to pay. A customer may, for example, defer payment for one, two, or three weeks while paying the resulting late-payment penalties.
Al-Jabou’a concluded that this was one of the factors that affected the revenue figures, and that the Audit Bureau had reflected this impact in the reconciliation statement it prepared, which amounted to approximately $1.7 billion.
