BP's Ousted Chairman Publicly Disputes the Conduct Case Against Him
The Wall Street Journal's account of board-level clashes and Manifold's own denial extend a governance crisis at the London supermajor with no clear resolution.
The Wall Street Journal reported by 1 June (2026-06-01), citing people familiar with the matter, that Albert Manifold had clashed with non-executive director Simon Henry and maintained a fractious relationship with chief executive Murray Auchincloss in the months before BP's board voted him out. The detail of those clashes, arriving days after the dismissal, complicates BP's characterisation of a clean, unanimous decision.5
BP had announced the removal on Tuesday (2026-05-26), citing "serious" and "unacceptable" concerns about "governance standards, oversight and conduct." The board voted unanimously. BP shares fell 4.3% to 527.4 pence as of 4:12 p.m. in London on that day, a sharp single-session decline for a stock already trading under pressure over its strategic direction.1,3
Two days later, on Thursday (2026-05-28), Manifold hit back. He rejected what he called a "false narrative" around his departure and denied allegations of bullying and misconduct. A public rebuttal from an ousted chairman, disputing the specific grounds for his removal, extends the uncertainty beyond the initial announcement and leaves the board's stated rationale subject to further challenge.4
Manifold had been in the role for fewer than twelve months, appointed in July 2025 to replace Helge Lund. He is the third successive senior BP figure to leave the company under contested circumstances, a run that stretches back several years.1
Lund himself departed after a troubled final period. At BP's 2025 annual general meeting, he received a near-25% vote against his re-election, with shareholders divided over the company's approach to the energy transition. Rigzone noted that just under 76% of votes were cast in his favour, a figure it described as reflecting a significant protest vote. Before Lund, CEO Bernard Looney left under separate conduct-related circumstances and forfeited around £32.4 million in remuneration.3,1
Will Hares, senior energy analyst at Bloomberg Intelligence, said that interim chair O'Neill, who had joined BP's board only in April 2026, and any permanent successor "must rekindle investor confidence in the company's strategy and internal controls." The phrase "internal controls" is pointed: it tells institutional investors that the board's own oversight function is under scrutiny, not just the company's energy strategy.2
Maurizio Carulli, global energy analyst at Quilter Cheviot, called the dismissal "certainly a surprise" and said the news was "obviously a short-term negative" for the stock, while urging investors to keep their focus on BP's underlying business. That reasoning is harder to sustain when governance fractures are recurring and the ousted figure publicly disputes the rationale for his removal.4
The permanent chair search now belongs to an interim who had been on BP's board for barely a month when Manifold was removed. Whoever takes the role will inherit a board that has publicly disputed its own chairman's account of events, a CEO whose working relationship with the ousted chair was described as fractious, and a shareholder base on their third consecutive contested leadership exit. A permanent chair still needs to be named. Until then, BP's next significant strategic decision will be taken by a board that has not yet demonstrated it can run a stable succession.2,5,3