> > SACE, public-private connections: the Sequi case raises questions in the MEF

SACE, public-private connections: the Sequi case raises questions in the MEF

bandiera89a9577c4a41668a8de2ff00004b384f

Vice President of the public company and at the same time in key roles in private companies benefiting from state guarantees. A combination that raises doubts about transparency and conflict of interest

Hector Sequi, current Vice President of SACE – the public company controlled by the Ministry of Economy and Finance which manages billions of euros in guarantees to support Italian companies – is at the center of a potential conflict of interest that raises questions about the appropriateness and correctness of the dual role between public and private.

Sequi, former ambassador and former Secretary General of the Farnesina, today in fact holds important positions in private companies that are beneficiaries of the same public guarantees that SACE provides.

Between these Sorgenia, of which he is President, and the San Donato Group, of which he is Senior Advisor. Both entities are among the recipients of significant volumes of public guarantees provided by SACE.

 SACE, possible cconflict of interest?

This mix of public roles and private interests is potentially at risk since the decisions of SACE, a public entity, benefit private entities with which the company's managers - for reasons of opportunity and transparency - do not they should, in fact, have direct relationships.

Even more so in a historical moment in which SACE is undergoing reorganisation, with the current To Alessandra Ricci who is aiming for a problematic reconfirmation on which Sequi himself – at least according to rumours – is apparently spending himself in circles of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs with the aim of arriving at a functional understanding to the continuity of the current structure.

MEF, an evaluation is urgently needed

The case calls into question the liability of thepublic shareholder, Or the Ministry of Economy and Finance, and the attention of the supervisory bodies competent.

That is, to check whether a system of public governance can tolerate such an overlap of interests, without this being able to compromise the impartiality of administrative action. And it is not excluded that the case could also end up in Parliament.