SOCAR blocks access to information

Baku/09.06.23/Turan: Director of the Turan News Agency Mehman Aliyev has once again asked for assistance in obtaining information from the Ombudswoman Sabina Aliyeva. Earlier, the head of Turan asked for assistance in receiving a response from SOCAR state company to a letter that was sent to the company on April 14 this year.

Then, on May 19, the Ombudswoman's office announced that it would be ready to assist if no response was received. SOCAR's reply letter was sent to Turan agency on May 22 and was received by the editorial office a few days later.

It was signed by SOCAR Vice President Dashgyn Iskanderov. It  comes out that  Iskanderov did not understand the essence of the question and the compiled answer, which was signed by him, was, to put it mildly, not competent and aimed to provide cover for the illegal actions of the Azergaz Production Association, which is a structural subdivision of SOCAR.

Correspondence with SOCAR began after “Azerigaz” did not respond to letters and did not take action to eliminate illegal actions. The essence of the issue lies in the illegal accrual of debt and the illegal disruption of the seal from the meter by the contractor company acting on behalf of the “Azerigaz” software, as well as ignoring the request and call for the restoration of the seal by the software. However, during the investigation of these violations, it became clear that the problems and abuses have a wider scope.

İNFORMASİYA  SORĞUSU

Dear Mr. Najaf,

On April 14, I first addressed you by e-mail in connection with violations of the rights of consumers-subscribers by “Azerigaz”, on the unhealthy atmosphere in this production association. Then SOCAR called and asked to submit a facsimile letter. It was also sent to your address.

I would like to note that SOCAR actually ignored the appeal – no measures were taken, and I also did not receive a response from SOCAR within the time prescribed by law. The response was compiled by Vice-President Danshgyn Iskanderov only on May 22 and was received by the Turan agency on May 25. This also indicates an unhealthy atmosphere not only in “Azerigaz” software, but also in the company as a whole.

First, about Mr. Ikanderov's answer.

In response, the SOCAR Vice President acknowledges the fact that the counter of the G-160 model N 75054790 was sent for examination on July 7, 2020. The Department of Metrology “Azerigaz", which by its act of August 8, 2020, confirmed its malfunction (incorrect readings of gas consumption).

In practice, the incorrect indicator exceeded the real one by three times. This is confirmed by an elementary comparison of gas consumption for the same periods over four years (May- June) from 2018 to 2022. That is, two years before and after 2020.

The SOCAR vice president's response does not explain why he pretends that he does not understand what he is talking about. Mr. Iskanderov does not give an answer to the question, but how did the failure of the meter affect its indicators and why should residents pay for figures taken from the air?

Instead, he says that earlier the residents of the building had a debt of 9946 manats and they paid it. That is right, this is the amount that has accumulated over the winter period, and it was counted before the meter failed, and the residents do not dispute it and paid for the gas supplied.

There is one common gas meter in the building at the specified address and the main gas consumption occurs in winter, when a single boiler room works, which does not work in summer!

The essence of the residents' complaint is that the employees of Azerigaz in the Yasamal district of Baku are trying to fraudulently get more than 1560 manats from the residents of the house at 5 Gurban Khalilov Street for gas that they did not consume.

The essence of the matter is that the spoiled gas meter in the building counted the extra cubic meters. This was confirmed by an inspection by “Azerigaz,” but despite the reasonable demands of the residents of the house to write off the inflated cubic meters, “Azerigaz” refuses to do this.

In this case, how can the same volume of gas be consumed in May-June as in January or February?

There are no answers to these simple questions in Mr. Iskanderov's letter. From what has been said, it can be concluded that he did not understand the essence of the complaint or did not want to delve into it.

Mr. Iskanderov also noted in one line that the other facts indicated in the appeal of the director of Turan news agency  were not confirmed and it was not possible to conduct additional proceedings.

And this is despite the fact that other facts were promptly stated in a public letter dated September 10, 2022. https://www.turan.az/ext/news/2022/9/free/Want_to_Say/az/9189.htm

The appeal sets out in black and white violations on the part of “Azerigaz.” So far, after 9 months, despite appeals to “Azergaz” and SOCAR, the seal No. 14274829 on the gas meter G-4 No. 1802AZ130118065501 has not been restored.

In connection with the above, I am forced to address you with an information request in accordance with the laws on media, on access to information and on combating corruption.

Using my right to receive an answer as soon as possible (no more than 7 days) in receiving information, I ask you to answer the following questions:

 https://www.turan.az/ext/news/2022/9/free/Want_to_Say/az/9189.htm

1.Why was there a response to my letter dated April 14, 2023, for No. 558 within the statutory period of 24 hours to 15 days? Is not providing an answer the norm and an accident for SOCAR?

2. Why were the problems not fixed clearly and unambiguously indicated in the letter? Can this be considered as your solidarity with the illegal actions of your Azerigaz division?

3.According to our information, if there are more than 50 contracting organizations working with Azerigaz software, 90% of the work is conducted by two contracting organizations "Azeriqaz Laihe Inşaat" and LLC "Metin qazı"? Then what is the expediency of such a number of contractors? Who is behind these two monopolists? Is this a corruption abuse on the part of the management of “Azerigaz”?

4. “Azerigaz” is not a department of the ministry, but it is a full-fledged production association. From the point of view of economic feasibility, all production forces should be concentrated in the software structure in order to increase work efficiency and reduce costs. In fact, contractors perform locksmith and welding work, and this is not a specific activity that should be performed by any specialized contracting structure, for example in the field of ICT. And as I pointed out in question 3 and in the public address of September 10, 2022, such a system of relations leads to increased costs and abuses. Do you agree with this?

5. Recently, “Azerigaz” has replaced meters working on prepayment with mechanical meters with the principle of payment for the fact of gas use. My experience of researching this issue gives reason to believe that this will lead to:

- To the growth of subscribers' debt (a vivid example of this was given by Mr. Iskanderov in a reply letter),

-“Azerigaz” will lose subsidizing its activities due to prepayment, that is, crediting subscribers to purchase gas and provide services,

-Will increase the number of employees who have to take meter readings,

- In general, profitability and financial stability will be disrupted.

Do you agree with this?

Sincerely, Mehman Aliyev

2023-04-14-558.pdf

2023-05-31-561.pdf

2023-06-08-562.pdf

2023-04-14.pdf