the toxic truth - Greenpeace

the toxic truth
Customs Authority later acknowledged that
they had taken little interest in Compagnie
Tommy’s application 457 but, on the contrary,
had facilitated the unloading of the waste by
allocating three customs officials to supervise
the operation. 458
Failure to inspect the ship
The Port Authorities were aware that the
Probo Koala was arriving in Abidjan to deposit
waste and they had a copy of Trafigura’s email
describing the waste as “chemical slops”, 459 so
they should have investigated the ship to verify
the nature of the materials it was carrying and
ensure that these were not hazardous (in line
with obligations under both Basel and Bamako
conventions). However, neither the Customs
Authority nor the Port Authority took any such
action. They did not inspect the ship; they did
not verify the nature of the waste; nor did they
consult or engage the Ivorian environmental
agencies. Even when one of the customs
agents noticed the strong smell and started
sneezing during the removal operation, 460 no
action was taken to investigate the waste.
Instead, the customs officials simply accepted
the statement of the head of Tommy, Salomon
Ugborogbo, that the waste was safe. 461
The National Commission of Enquiry also found
that, well before the arrival of the Probo Koala,
the General Director of Customs had prohibited
his agents from going on board oil tankers
and ships that did not unload merchandise. 462
The National Commission stated that this
prohibition, which was justified as a step
to avoid customs officials from bothering
the ships’ crews, “without a doubt prevented
control activities by custom agents on board the
Probo Koala”. 463 The National Commission also
described this as a “deliberate renunciation”
by the General Director of his control powers as
recognized by Article 49 of the Customs Code. 464
According to a second enquiry established by
the Ivorian authorities, the Ivorian authorities:
“ did not check whether the import of the
waste was compatible with ‘an efficient and
ecological rational management of such waste’
nor if it was done so as to protect human health
and the environments from any adverse effect
465
which could result from it. ”
Facilitating the departure
of the Probo Koala after the
toxic waste dumping
Following the dumping, the Ministry for the
Environment traced the waste material
back to the Probo Koala. The environmental
agency, CIAPOL, part of the Ministry for the
Environment, tried to prevent the ship from
leaving while investigations were conducted. 466
However, the port authorities insisted that
the Director of CIAPOL obtain a formal notice
from the Public Prosecutor, saying that this
was the only way to block the Probo Koala
ship. This was not the case. The port’s
General Director had the power to immobilize
all ships if information or investigation was
needed. 467 The National Commission of
Enquiry concluded that the port’s General
Director, “gravely disregarded the powers and
prerogatives linked to his responsibility as
the General Director of Abidjan Autonomous
Port and in fact aided the departure of the
Probo Koala ship and deprived the state of
Côte d’Ivoire of an essential piece of evidence
needed to uncover the truth”. 468
The Harbourmaster Commander also
facilitated the departure of the Probo Koala.
The ship’s anchor had been blocked and,
even while CIAPOL was attempting to prevent
the ship’s departure, the Harbourmaster
Commander “insisted that the IRES company
unblock the anchor to enable the Probo Koala
to leave quickly”. 469 The National Commission
of Enquiry concluded that, by acting in
this way, the Harbourmaster Commander
“substituted himself for the WAIBS consignee
whose role it was to assist the Probo Koala
ship”. 470 The Harbourmaster Commander
later told the National Commission of Enquiry
101
Chapter 8