the toxic truth - Greenpeace

the toxic truth - Greenpeace the toxic truth - Greenpeace

greenpeace.org
from greenpeace.org More from this publisher
01.06.2013 Views

“ We don’t know the facts. What needs to be Geneviève Diallo. © Private the toxic truth The limiTs of jusTice in AbidjAn done: • punish those responsible: those who are really guilty have not been punished; • with Trafigura’s money make a medical centre to follow up so that we know the longterm health consequences; • take care of those in the affected area: this has not been done. ” GeneviÈve Diallo Resident of Akouédo 566 In the aftermath of the toxic waste dumping, the Ivorian authorities took a number of legal and other measures to uncover the truth about what had happened and bring those responsible to justice. The Prime Minister established a National Commission of Enquiry and the State Prosecutor initiated prosecutions against a number of private actors and public officials. Victims’ associations and the government also attached themselves to the prosecution as parties civiles seeking damages. However, despite these initial steps, follow-up action was limited. The National Commission of Enquiry completed an investigation and published a report, but its key findings with respect to why the dumping happened and who was responsible were not pursued for reasons that remain unclear. Although three executives of the Trafigura Group were initially charged by the prosecutor, these charges were ultimately dropped. In 2007 the Ivorian government entered into a settlement agreement with the Trafigura Group. Under this agreement, the government received total compensation amounting to CFA95 billion (approximately US$200 million). This money was intended to compensate the state and the victims, and to pay for cleanup of the waste. However, the nature of the settlement created obstacles to the victims’ pursuit of justice and remedy. The settlement provided surety for bail and required that ongoing prosecutions against Trafigura parties be discontinued. It also limited the rights of the victims to seek compensation. This chapter examines the various attempts made to uncover the truth, pursue prosecutions and obtain legal redress for victims in Côte d’Ivoire. 127 Chapter 11

128 Amnesty internAtionAl And greenpeAce netherlAnds Chapter 11 The National Commission of Enquiry “ To all, we promise to accomplish our mission in all independence and all impartiality, without passion or hatred, with the sole aim of bringing to light the truth. ” On 14 September 2006 the Prime Minister announced his decision to create a National Commission of Enquiry (National Commission or Commission) on the toxic waste dumping in Abidjan. 567 The Commission was created by decree on 15 September 2006 and its mission was to: » carry out an enquiry into the dumping of toxic waste in the Abidjan district; » identify those who may be involved in the event; and » determine their degree of responsibility. 568 It was not specifically mandated to make recommendations to the Ivorian authorities. The Commission was composed of 14 experts drawn from Ivorian institutions, civil society, and the legal profession. It was chaired by a ‘Magistrat Hors Hiérarchie’ (high-ranking judge), Fatoumata Diakite. Under the enabling statute, all Ivorian authorities were obliged to provide any information requested by the members of the Commission. 569 The National Commission interviewed 78 individuals as part of its fact-finding process. These included witnesses, victims and a number of public officials involved in various aspects of the dumping, including port and customs officials, the governor of the District of Abidjan, and the director of the company managing the dumpsite. In its final report, published on 21 November 2006, the National Commission made a number of findings. These included systemic failures by Ivorian institutions in respect of the adequate discharge of their mandates, and ethical and administrative failings by individuals. As described in Chapter 8, the National Commission found deficiencies in relation to organization and control among most of the Ivorian authorities concerned with the dumping and its aftermath, and a lack of understanding of their statutes and powers. In its report, the National Commission further stated that: “ The attitude observed by the Commission among certain actors display hints of corruption and unrestrained pursuit of gains [with] a 570 disregard [for] human life. ” In addition to public officials, the report made findings in relation to private individuals and companies, including: Salomon Ugborogbo, the head of Compagnie Tommy, and executives and employees of the Trafigura Group, including from Puma, Trafigura’s subsidiary in Côte d’Ivoire, and West African International Business Services (WAIBS). The establishment of the National Commission and the publication of its findings were important steps taken by the Ivorian government to expose the truth in relation to the toxic waste dumping. However, the National Commission’s powers were relatively limited: the statute establishing the National Commission did not prescribe how the government should take forward the Commission’s findings; nor did it reference any follow-up mechanisms that could provide access to judicial recourse to ensure effective sanctions and remedies. For example, the statute did not require that public officials or private individuals found to be accountable be removed from public office or prosecuted. As a result, whether or not this was done appears to have been discretionary. As described earlier in Chapter 8, although the Prime Minister suspended officials named by the National Commission from public office, the then President reinstated the same officials by decree, just days after the publication of the National Commission’s report.

128 Amnesty internAtionAl And greenpeAce ne<strong>the</strong>rlAnds<br />

Chapter 11<br />

The National Commission<br />

of Enquiry<br />

“ To all, we promise to accomplish our<br />

mission in all independence and all impartiality,<br />

without passion or hatred, with <strong>the</strong> sole aim of<br />

bringing to light <strong>the</strong> <strong>truth</strong>. ”<br />

On 14 September 2006 <strong>the</strong> Prime Minister<br />

announced his decision to create a National<br />

Commission of Enquiry (National Commission<br />

or Commission) on <strong>the</strong> <strong>toxic</strong> waste dumping<br />

in Abidjan. 567 The Commission was created<br />

by decree on 15 September 2006 and its<br />

mission was to:<br />

» carry out an enquiry into <strong>the</strong> dumping of<br />

<strong>toxic</strong> waste in <strong>the</strong> Abidjan district;<br />

» identify those who may be involved in <strong>the</strong><br />

event; and<br />

» determine <strong>the</strong>ir degree of responsibility. 568<br />

It was not specifically mandated to make<br />

recommendations to <strong>the</strong> Ivorian authorities.<br />

The Commission was composed of 14 experts<br />

drawn from Ivorian institutions, civil society,<br />

and <strong>the</strong> legal profession. It was chaired by<br />

a ‘Magistrat Hors Hiérarchie’ (high-ranking<br />

judge), Fatoumata Diakite. Under <strong>the</strong> enabling<br />

statute, all Ivorian authorities were obliged<br />

to provide any information requested by <strong>the</strong><br />

members of <strong>the</strong> Commission. 569<br />

The National Commission interviewed<br />

78 individuals as part of its fact-finding<br />

process. These included witnesses, victims<br />

and a number of public officials involved in<br />

various aspects of <strong>the</strong> dumping, including<br />

port and customs officials, <strong>the</strong> governor of<br />

<strong>the</strong> District of Abidjan, and <strong>the</strong> director of<br />

<strong>the</strong> company managing <strong>the</strong> dumpsite. In<br />

its final report, published on 21 November<br />

2006, <strong>the</strong> National Commission made a<br />

number of findings. These included systemic<br />

failures by Ivorian institutions in respect of<br />

<strong>the</strong> adequate discharge of <strong>the</strong>ir mandates,<br />

and ethical and administrative failings by<br />

individuals. As described in Chapter 8, <strong>the</strong><br />

National Commission found deficiencies in<br />

relation to organization and control among<br />

most of <strong>the</strong> Ivorian authorities concerned with<br />

<strong>the</strong> dumping and its aftermath, and a lack of<br />

understanding of <strong>the</strong>ir statutes and powers.<br />

In its report, <strong>the</strong> National Commission fur<strong>the</strong>r<br />

stated that:<br />

“ The attitude observed by <strong>the</strong> Commission<br />

among certain actors display hints of corruption<br />

and unrestrained pursuit of gains [with] a<br />

570<br />

disregard [for] human life. ”<br />

In addition to public officials, <strong>the</strong> report made<br />

findings in relation to private individuals and<br />

companies, including: Salomon Ugborogbo,<br />

<strong>the</strong> head of Compagnie Tommy, and<br />

executives and employees of <strong>the</strong> Trafigura<br />

Group, including from Puma, Trafigura’s<br />

subsidiary in Côte d’Ivoire, and West African<br />

International Business Services (WAIBS).<br />

The establishment of <strong>the</strong> National<br />

Commission and <strong>the</strong> publication of its<br />

findings were important steps taken by <strong>the</strong><br />

Ivorian government to expose <strong>the</strong> <strong>truth</strong> in<br />

relation to <strong>the</strong> <strong>toxic</strong> waste dumping. However,<br />

<strong>the</strong> National Commission’s powers were<br />

relatively limited: <strong>the</strong> statute establishing<br />

<strong>the</strong> National Commission did not prescribe<br />

how <strong>the</strong> government should take forward <strong>the</strong><br />

Commission’s findings; nor did it reference<br />

any follow-up mechanisms that could provide<br />

access to judicial recourse to ensure effective<br />

sanctions and remedies. For example, <strong>the</strong><br />

statute did not require that public officials or<br />

private individuals found to be accountable be<br />

removed from public office or prosecuted. As<br />

a result, whe<strong>the</strong>r or not this was done appears<br />

to have been discretionary. As described<br />

earlier in Chapter 8, although <strong>the</strong> Prime<br />

Minister suspended officials named by <strong>the</strong><br />

National Commission from public office, <strong>the</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong>n President reinstated <strong>the</strong> same officials<br />

by decree, just days after <strong>the</strong> publication of<br />

<strong>the</strong> National Commission’s report.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!