Section 4 of the EITI Standard 2019
This section outlines the procedures and criteria that the EITI Board uses in overseeing and validating EITI implementation. This includes the time frames established by the EITI Board for publication of EITI data and oversight of the Validation process.
Table of contents
- Article 1 – Adapted implementation
- Article 2 – Disclosure and reporting deadlines
- Article 3 – Initial Validation deadline
- Article 4 – EITI Validation process
- Article 5 – Safeguards
- Article 6 – Consequences of Validation
- Article 7 – Extensions
- Article 8 – Suspension
- Article 9 – Delisting
- Article 10 – Appeals
- Infographic: Consequences of Validation
Should the multi-stakeholder group conclude that it faces exceptional circumstances that necessitate deviation from the implementation requirements, it must seek prior EITI Board approval for adapted implementation. The request must be endorsed by the multi-stakeholder group and reflected in the work plan. The request should explain the rationale for the adapted implementation.
The EITI Board will only consider allowing adaptations in exceptional circumstances. In considering such requests, the EITI Board will place a priority on the need for comparable treatment between countries and ensuring that the EITI Principles are upheld, including ensuring that the EITI process is sufficiently inclusive, and that EITI disclosures are comprehensive, reliable and will contribute to public debate.
Implementing countries are required to publish timely information (Requirement 4.8). Implementing countries are required to publish the requested information (typically through an EITI Report) within 18 months of being admitted as an EITI country. Thereafter, the published data must be no older than the second to last complete accounting period, e.g. information pertaining to the financial year ending 31 December 2018 must be published at the latest by 31 December 2020.
If the data is not published by the required deadline, the country will be suspended. The suspension will be lifted if the EITI Board is satisfied that the outstanding data is published within six months of the deadline. If the outstanding data is not published within six months of the deadline, the suspension will remain in force until the EITI Board is satisfied that the country has published EITI data in accordance with Requirement 4.8. If the suspension is in effect for more than one year, the EITI Board will delist the country.
When the EITI Board admits implementing countries, it will establish a deadline for the commencement of Validation within two and a half years. Subsequent to considering the findings, the Board will establish a deadline for further Validations (Article 5).
The Validation process will assess the country’s progress in addressing each of the EITI Requirements. Detailed guidance on the types of evidence that are required in order to make an assessment on individual requirements is set out in the Validation Guide. Each individual EITI Requirement will be assessed using the following scale and assigned corresponding points:
Exceeded (100 points). In order for the EITI Board to conclude that a country has exceeded an EITI Requirement, Validation needs to demonstrate that all aspects of the requirement, including ‘expected’, ‘encouraged’ and ‘recommended’ aspects, have been implemented and that the broader objective of the requirement has been fulfilled through systematic disclosures in government and company systems.
Fully met (90 points). In order for the EITI Board to conclude that a country has fully met an EITI Requirement, the country needs to demonstrate that the broader objective of the requirement has been fulfilled and that all required aspects of the requirement have been addressed.
Mostly met (60 points). In order for the EITI Board to conclude that a country has mostly met an EITI Requirement, the country needs to demonstrate that significant aspects of the requirement have been implemented and that the broader objective of the requirement is mostly being fulfilled.
Mostly met with improvements (75 points). The country can demonstrate that it has made progress since the previous Validation where the EITI Requirement was assessed as mostly met.
Partly met (30 points). In order for the EITI Board to conclude that a country has partly met an EITI Requirement, Validation needs to demonstrate that significant aspects of the requirement have not been implemented and that the broader objective of the requirement is not fulfilled.
Partly met with improvements (45 points). The country can demonstrate that it has made progress since the previous Validation where the EITI Requirement was assessed as partly met.
Not met (0 points). In order for the EITI Board to conclude that a country has not met an EITI Requirement, Validation needs to demonstrate that all or nearly all aspects of the requirement have not been implemented, and that the broader objective of the requirement is far from being fulfilled.
A country may be awarded in total up to five additional points for the effectiveness and sustainability of EITI implementation. This is measured by the following five indicators:
EITI implementation addresses nationally relevant extractive sector governance challenges. This indicator also recognises efforts beyond the EITI Standard.
Extractive sector data is disclosed systematically through routine government and corporate reporting.
There is an enabling environment for citizen participation in extractive sector governance, including participation by affected communities.
Extractive sector data is accessible and used for analysis, research and advocacy.
EITI has informed changes in extractive sector policies or practices.
Validation will award the country zero, 0.5 or 1 point on each of the indicators. Detailed guidance on the types of evidence that are required in order to make an assessment on the effectiveness and sustainability indicators is set out in the Validation Guide.
The overall assessment will consist of component scores and an overall numerical score.
Component scores will be presented separately for each of the following areas: Stakeholder engagement (EITI Requirements 1.1 to 1.4), Transparency (EITI Requirements 2 to 6) and Outcomes and impact (EITI Requirements 1.5 and 7). The component score represents an average of the points awarded for each applicable requirement.
The points awarded on the effectiveness and sustainability indicators will be added to the component score on Outcomes and impact.
The overall score is the average of the three component scores.
The overall assessments are presented as a numerical score that is accompanied by a qualitative description according to the scale below:
Very high: Average of 93 points or over
High: Average 85 to 92 points
Moderate: Average of 70 to 84 points
Fairly low: Average of 50 to 69 points
Low: Below 50 points
In addition to the assessment of the requirements and the effectiveness and sustainability of EITI implementation, Validation will document:
- Efforts to go beyond the EITI Requirements. This will include efforts by the multi-stakeholder group to address ‘encouraged’ or ‘recommended’ aspects of the EITI Standard. It will also include efforts by the multi-stakeholder group to successfully achieve any work plan objectives that fall outside the scope of the EITI Standard, but that have been identified by the multi-stakeholder group to be necessary objectives for the EITI to address national priorities for the extractive sector.The multi-stakeholder group is encouraged to document the objectives of these efforts, as well as their actual and expected outcomes and impact.
These efforts and their outcomes will be documented in the Validation process but will not be assessed as part of Validation. The information provided by the multi-stakeholder group may be used to assess performance on the effectiveness and sustainability indicators.
- The direction of progress towards meeting each EITI Requirement as compared to the country’s previous Validation(s), indicating whether implementation is improving or deteriorating.
The results of the assessment will be documented in an assessment card and a narrative report, presenting the evidence, stakeholder views, references and conclusions.
If a country has partly met or not met any one of the requirements relating to stakeholder engagement (Requirements 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3), the Board will suspend the country in accordance with Article 8.
If, on the first Validation, a country has mostly met Requirement 1.3 on civil society due to a deficiency related to the civil society protocol, the country will not be suspended and will be expected to demonstrate progress in addressing the corrective actions established by the Board. Failure to demonstrate progress in addressing the corrective actions in subsequent Validations will result in suspension in accordance with Article 8.
The EITI Board will establish a date for the commencement of the country’s next Validation.
Very high. The components with a Very high score will be re-validated in three years. The component(s) that have a lower score will be validated according to the timeframes established below.
High. Each of the components with a High score will be validated again in 12 to 36 months. In establishing the commencement date for the next Validation, the Board will consider the nature of corrective actions and local circumstances.
Moderate or Fairly low. Each of the components with a Moderate or Fairly low score will be validated again in 12 to 24 months. In establishing the commencement date for the next Validation, the Board will consider the nature of corrective actions and local circumstances.
Low. The country is temporarily suspended if any of the component scores is Low. The suspension is lifted once the country has improved all component scores to at least Fairly low. Each of the components with a Low score will be validated in 12 to 24 months. In establishing the commencement date for the next Validation, the Board will consider the nature of corrective actions and local circumstances.
An implementing country may request an extension of this timeframe in accordance with Article 7. A country may also request to commence Validation earlier than scheduled by the EITI Board.
Stakeholders who are concerned that the level of implementation has significantly deteriorated may also request the Board for an early Validation or a targeted review under Article 8. The EITI Board will review the situation and exercise its discretion on whether to mandate an early Validation of one or several components.
Implementing countries are expected to improve their component and overall scores between Validations. If a country has not improved its score on at least one of the three components or there has been material deterioration in any of the components, the Board may temporarily suspend the country until it demonstrates progress. Repeated failure to make progress will lead to delisting.
The Board will take into account the following factors when determining whether to suspend or delist an implementing country:
The overall numerical score and component scores. Countries with a High or Very high score on all components will generally not be suspended for failure to demonstrate progress since the previous Validation;
The advice and recommendations of the Validation team and the Validation Committee;
The nature of the requirements that have not been implemented and how close the requirements are to being met;
The magnitude and complexity of the extractive sector of the country;
Other barriers to meeting requirements such, as but not limited to, state fragility and recent or ongoing political change, and the extent to which the multi-stakeholder group has undertaken actions to resolve barriers encountered;
The good faith efforts undertaken by the multi-stakeholder group to comply with the requirements;
The reasons and justifications for not complying with the requirements; and
Any plans agreed by the multi-stakeholder group to address the requirements in the future.
An implementing country may apply for an extension if it is unable to meet any of the deadlines specified above. The EITI Board will apply the following tests in assessing any extension requests:
- The request must be made in advance of the deadline and be endorsed by the multi-stakeholder group.
- The multi-stakeholder group must demonstrate that it has been making continuous progress towards meeting the deadline and has been delayed due to exceptional circumstances. In assessing continuous progress, the EITI Board will consider:
- The EITI process, in particular the functioning of the multi-stakeholder group and clear, strong commitment from government.
- The status and quality of EITI reporting, including meaningful progress in meeting the requirements for timely reporting as per Requirement 4.8 and efforts to address recommendations for improving EITI reporting.
- The EITI process, in particular the functioning of the multi-stakeholder group and clear, strong commitment from government.
- The exceptional circumstance(s) must be explained in the request from the multi-stakeholder group. These may relate to, for example, exceptional political instability.
Where it is manifestly clear that a significant aspect of the EITI Principles and Requirements are not adhered to by an implementing country, the EITI Board will suspend or delist that country. Where the EITI Board is concerned that adherence to the EITI Principles and Requirements is compromised, it may task the International Secretariat with gathering information about the situation and submitting a report to the EITI Board.
Suspension of an implementing country is a temporary mechanism. The EITI Board shall set a time limit for the implementing country to address breaches of the EITI Standard. During the period of suspension, the country will have the status “suspended”. If the matter is resolved to the satisfaction of the EITI Board by the deadline, the country’s status and level of progress will be reinstated. If the matter has not been resolved to the satisfaction of the EITI Board by the deadline, the EITI Board will delist the country.
The EITI Board may decide to suspend countries in cases where political instability or conflict manifestly prevents the country from adhering to a significant aspect of the EITI Principles and Requirements. Countries that are experiencing exceptional political instability or conflict may also voluntarily apply to be suspended. In this situation, the government should lodge an application for voluntary suspension with the EITI Board. The government’s application should note the views of the multi-stakeholder group.
The EITI Board will monitor and review the situation on a regular basis and retains the right to extend the suspension period or delist the country.
The government may apply to have the suspension lifted at any time. The application should document the steps agreed by stakeholders to restart the EITI implementation and Validation process, and the work plan to achieve compliance. If the EITI Board is satisfied that the reasons for suspension have been addressed, the suspension will be lifted. Upon lifting a suspension, the EITI Board will consider setting new reporting and Validation deadlines as appropriate. At all stages in the process, the EITI Board shall ensure its concerns and decisions are clearly communicated to the implementing country.
Delisting, i.e. revoking a country’s status as an EITI implementing country, will occur if:
- An implementing country has been subject to suspension and the matter has not been resolved to the satisfaction of the EITI Board by the agreed deadline.
- The EITI Board concludes that a country has repeatedly failed to demonstrate progress in Validation.
Where it is manifestly clear that a significant aspect of the EITI Principles and Requirements are not adhered to by an implementing country, the EITI Board reserves the right to delist the country. A delisted country may reapply for admission as an EITI country at any time. The EITI Board will apply the agreed procedures with respect to assessing EITI country applications. It will also assess previous experience in EITI implementation, including previous barriers to effective implementation, and the implementation of corrective measures.
The implementing country concerned may petition the EITI Board to review its decision regarding suspension, delisting or the outcome of Validation. In responding to such petitions, the EITI Board will consider the facts of the case, the need to preserve the integrity of the EITI, and the principle of consistent treatment between countries. The EITI Board’s decision is final. The country concerned may, prior to the notice periods under Article 7 of the Articles of Association, appeal a decision of the EITI Board to the next ordinary Members’ Meeting.