Dear Editor,

President Ali frequently parrots the “sanctity of contract” in discussions of the Stabroek Block Petroleum Agreement (PSA) to convey that Guyana cannot change the contract. Yet the agreement was amended on April 26, 2019, by President Granger, to ensure that the 2% royalty could not be treated as a recoverable cost (see Stabroek News). Thus, the contract has changed since it was initially signed on June 27, 2016. President Ali is either misleading the Guyanese people or is unaware that the most important business contract in Guyana’s history has been modified.

Additionally, in Article 32 of the PSA, the stability clause of the 2016 Stabroek Block Production Sharing Agreement, expressly contemplates negotiation and amendment of the contract. Article 32.1 permits amendments with the contractor’s prior written consent, while Article 32.4 specifically provides for negotiations that may result in an amendment to the Agreement. Thus, “sanctity of contract” does not mean—and never has meant—that the parties are prohibited from negotiating mutually agreed changes to the contract.

On September 19, 2026, we published a letter, see https://kiskadeewatch.com/opinion/letters/apparent-discrepancy-of-us604m-in-oil-revenues-for-first-half-of-this-year/, referencing Section 15.6 of the Stabroek Block Petroleum Agreement, which states in part: “…royalty of two percent (2%) of all Petroleum produced and sold … Cash payment shall be due quarterly, thirty (30) days following the end of each calendar quarter.” At the time, we reviewed the 2026 Natural Resource Fund (NRF) reports available through July and identified an apparent difference in the royalty payments for the first half of 2026.

Those NRF reports showed that US$219 million had been paid in royalties. But using figures from the Bank of Guyana report, however, the implied royalty for the first half of 2026 is approximately US$302 million: US$92.50 per barrel × 163.3 million barrels × 2% royalty. That leaves an apparent difference of about US$83 million between the calculated royalty and the amount reported as paid by the NRF.

The August 2026 NRF report was released a few days ago. We had expected it to include an adjustment that would reconcile the US$83 million difference, but no such adjustment appeared. 

If the principle of sanctity of contract is to be applied consistently, it should apply to all parties to the agreement, including Exxon and its partners. We would therefore like President Ali to explain the discrepancy: if the full royalty amount was due under Section 15.6, has the Stabroek Block Petroleum Agreement been complied with by Exxon and its partners? If so, what accounts for the US$83 million difference?

Yours faithfully,

Darsh Khusial

Alfred Bhulai

Kenrick Hunte

Joe Persaud

on behalf of OGGN (www.oggn.org/about )