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

the toxic truth Nor was there any provision made for implementing the recommendations made by the National Commission. The Commission, recognizing this limitation, called for the establishment of a mechanism to take forward its recommendations but no such mechanism was ever established. The criminal case in Côte d’Ivoire In September 2006, Ivorian state prosecutors initiated criminal investigations into individuals alleged to have played a role in the dumping of the toxic waste and in the aftermath. The charges brought by the prosecutor and criminal investigations During September the authorities arrested and charged a number of individuals in connection with offences relating to the toxic waste dumping. These included: » Claude Dauphin and Jean-Pierre Valentini of Trafigura and N’zi Kablan of Puma (Trafigura’s subsidiary); » Salomon Ugborogbo, the head of Compagnie Tommy; » the Director of WAIBS and three other WAIBS employees; » the Commander of the Port Captaincy; » three customs agents; » the General Director of Maritime and Port Affairs; » two port agents; » two garage owners/mechanics. The charges brought against these individuals included offences such as poisoning and breaches of public health and environment laws, as well as breaches of the national law domesticating the Basel Convention relating to the movement of hazardous waste (see box, right). 576 Claude Dauphin and Jean-Pierre Valentin, Trafigura executives, in custody in Abidjan, 16 November 2006. © aNP/aFP findings of The nATionAl commission of enquiry The key factual findings relating to individuals and companies made in the report of the National Commission of Enquiry on the toxic waste in the district of Abidjan include: » Salomon Ugborogbo, from Compagnie Tommy, was found to be the “principal actor” in the dumping of the waste; the Commission determined that the permits and licences granted to him were “troubling and led to suspicions of fraudulent collusion.” 571 » Trafigura, through the behaviour of two employees, was found to have breached the Basel and MARPOL conventions. In making this finding, the Commission determined that: “Neither Mr Paul Short nor Mr Marrero could ignore the Tommy company’s technical incapacity.” The Commission relied on the letter from Salomon Ugborogbo to Jorge Marrero dated 18 August 2006, which stated the intention “to discharge” rather than “to treat” the waste at Akouédo. 572 » Trafigura executives, Jean-Pierre Valentini and Claude Dauphin, were found to have been aware of the fact that Côte d’Ivoire did not possess the required facilities to process the waste 573 The Commission relied on testimony provided by the executives when they were questioned by police in Abidjan after the dumping. » The head of Puma Energy, N’zi Kablan, was found to have played an “active part in the transfer of illicit toxic waste”. The Commission found that N’zi Kablan had been informed of the nature of the waste and had acted as an intermediary for Ugborogbo’s letter to Marrero. 574 » WAIBS was found to be “partly responsible” because it should have verified the technical capacity of Compagnie Tommy. 575 129 Chapter 11

130 Amnesty internAtionAl And greenpeAce netherlAnds Chapter 11 ivoriAn lAw The Law relating to the protection of Public Health and the Environment against the effects of toxic and nuclear industrial waste and harmful substances (Loi No. 88651 du 07 juillet 1988 portant protection de la Santé Publique et de l’Environnement contre les effets des déchets industriels toxiques et nucléaires et des substances nocives) 577 Article 1 of this law prohibits: “all acts relating to the … import, transit, transport, deposit … of toxic and nuclear industrial waste and hazardous substances”. Article 3 further provides that, when the offence is committed in the context of corporate activity, criminal liability is incumbent on any person “assigned or not, who by their function, has the responsibility for managing, monitoring or controlling this activity”. The act goes on to say that: “When the offence is committed in the course of a business activity, the criminal responsibility rests with the individual, who through his or her functions, is responsible for the management, supervision or control of that activity.” The Environmental Code (Framework law No. 96-766 of 3 October 1996) Article 99 prohibits illegal import of waste. Article 101 of the Code states that the penalty for whoever engages or provides for the “import, transit, storage, burying or spillage on the national territory of dangerous waste” or “executes an agreement to authorize such activities” is a prison sentence of 10 to 20 years and a fine. The court can also order the seizure and elimination of such waste at the cost of the owner. 578 The Act also states: “Whoever shall proceed to or arrange for the purchase, sale, import, transit, storage, landfill or dumping on the national territory of hazardous wastes or sign an agreement for the authorization of such activities shall be punished…” The Ivorian Criminal Code Article 342(4) of the Ivorian Criminal Code makes poisoning a criminal offence. The Code also sets out a definition of an accessory to a crime. Several of those involved in the import and dumping of the waste in Abidjan were charged with poisoning. Salomon Ugborogbo, the head of Compagnie Tommy, was charged with offences relating to poisoning and with offences under public health and environmental law. 579 Claude Dauphin, Chairman and co-founder of Trafigura’s Dutch parent company, and Jean-Pierre Valentini, director of the West Africa Trafigura Group, were arrested when they flew into Abidjan in the aftermath of the dumping. 580 They, along with N’zi Kablan of Puma, were detained in Abidjan’s MACA prison. N’zi Kablan was charged with poisoning while Claude Dauphin and Jean-Pierre Valentini were charged with being accessories to poisoning. All three Trafigura employees were charged with offences under the Law relating to the protection of Public Health and the Environment against the effects of toxic and nuclear industrial waste and harmful substances (Public Health Law), and breaches of the Environmental Code. When first arrested, they were also charged with domesticated offences under the Basel Convention. 581 The prosecutor was able to bring charges against the executives and employees of the various companies, but not against the corporate entities themselves. Under Ivorian law, legal entities cannot be held criminally liable for these specific offences. 582 This presents legal challenges for any prosecutor; in seeking to hold individuals criminally liable within a corporation, the prosecutor must “pierce the corporate veil” – look behind the legal entity at the roles played by specific individuals in order to allocate responsibility. This can be very challenging in practice, particularly when there is a lack of transparency with respect to corporate decision-making processes or when the crime itself is the cumulative result of a number of decisions (or failed decisions) and, therefore, blame cannot be allocated to one specific individual. In these instances, employees are often able to hide behind the shield of the corporation, and multinational companies

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

Chapter 11<br />

ivoriAn lAw<br />

The Law relating to <strong>the</strong> protection of Public Health and<br />

<strong>the</strong> Environment against <strong>the</strong> effects of <strong>toxic</strong> and nuclear<br />

industrial waste and harmful substances (Loi No. 88651<br />

du 07 juillet 1988 portant protection de la Santé Publique<br />

et de l’Environnement contre les effets des déchets<br />

industriels toxiques et nucléaires et des substances<br />

nocives) 577<br />

Article 1 of this law prohibits: “all acts relating to <strong>the</strong> …<br />

import, transit, transport, deposit … of <strong>toxic</strong> and nuclear<br />

industrial waste and hazardous substances”. Article 3<br />

fur<strong>the</strong>r provides that, when <strong>the</strong> offence is committed<br />

in <strong>the</strong> context of corporate activity, criminal liability is<br />

incumbent on any person “assigned or not, who by <strong>the</strong>ir<br />

function, has <strong>the</strong> responsibility for managing, monitoring<br />

or controlling this activity”.<br />

The act goes on to say that: “When <strong>the</strong> offence is committed<br />

in <strong>the</strong> course of a business activity, <strong>the</strong> criminal responsibility<br />

rests with <strong>the</strong> individual, who through his or her<br />

functions, is responsible for <strong>the</strong> management, supervision<br />

or control of that activity.”<br />

The Environmental Code<br />

(Framework law No. 96-766 of 3 October 1996)<br />

Article 99 prohibits illegal import of waste. Article 101<br />

of <strong>the</strong> Code states that <strong>the</strong> penalty for whoever engages<br />

or provides for <strong>the</strong> “import, transit, storage, burying or<br />

spillage on <strong>the</strong> national territory of dangerous waste” or<br />

“executes an agreement to authorize such activities” is<br />

a prison sentence of 10 to 20 years and a fine. The court<br />

can also order <strong>the</strong> seizure and elimination of such waste<br />

at <strong>the</strong> cost of <strong>the</strong> owner. 578 The Act also states: “Whoever<br />

shall proceed to or arrange for <strong>the</strong> purchase, sale, import,<br />

transit, storage, landfill or dumping on <strong>the</strong> national territory<br />

of hazardous wastes or sign an agreement for <strong>the</strong><br />

authorization of such activities shall be punished…”<br />

The Ivorian Criminal Code<br />

Article 342(4) of <strong>the</strong> Ivorian Criminal Code makes<br />

poisoning a criminal offence. The Code also sets out a<br />

definition of an accessory to a crime. Several of those<br />

involved in <strong>the</strong> import and dumping of <strong>the</strong> waste in Abidjan<br />

were charged with poisoning.<br />

Salomon Ugborogbo, <strong>the</strong> head of Compagnie<br />

Tommy, was charged with offences relating<br />

to poisoning and with offences under<br />

public health and environmental law. 579<br />

Claude Dauphin, Chairman and co-founder<br />

of Trafigura’s Dutch parent company, and<br />

Jean-Pierre Valentini, director of <strong>the</strong> West<br />

Africa Trafigura Group, were arrested when<br />

<strong>the</strong>y flew into Abidjan in <strong>the</strong> aftermath of <strong>the</strong><br />

dumping. 580 They, along with N’zi Kablan of<br />

Puma, were detained in Abidjan’s MACA prison.<br />

N’zi Kablan was charged with poisoning while<br />

Claude Dauphin and Jean-Pierre Valentini<br />

were charged with being accessories to<br />

poisoning. All three Trafigura employees<br />

were charged with offences under <strong>the</strong> Law<br />

relating to <strong>the</strong> protection of Public Health<br />

and <strong>the</strong> Environment against <strong>the</strong> effects<br />

of <strong>toxic</strong> and nuclear industrial waste and<br />

harmful substances (Public Health Law),<br />

and breaches of <strong>the</strong> Environmental Code.<br />

When first arrested, <strong>the</strong>y were also charged<br />

with domesticated offences under <strong>the</strong> Basel<br />

Convention. 581<br />

The prosecutor was able to bring charges<br />

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

<strong>the</strong> various companies, but not against <strong>the</strong><br />

corporate entities <strong>the</strong>mselves. Under Ivorian<br />

law, legal entities cannot be held criminally<br />

liable for <strong>the</strong>se specific offences. 582 This<br />

presents legal challenges for any prosecutor;<br />

in seeking to hold individuals criminally<br />

liable within a corporation, <strong>the</strong> prosecutor<br />

must “pierce <strong>the</strong> corporate veil” – look<br />

behind <strong>the</strong> legal entity at <strong>the</strong> roles played<br />

by specific individuals in order to allocate<br />

responsibility. This can be very challenging<br />

in practice, particularly when <strong>the</strong>re is a lack<br />

of transparency with respect to corporate<br />

decision-making processes or when <strong>the</strong> crime<br />

itself is <strong>the</strong> cumulative result of a number of<br />

decisions (or failed decisions) and, <strong>the</strong>refore,<br />

blame cannot be allocated to one specific<br />

individual. In <strong>the</strong>se instances, employees are<br />

often able to hide behind <strong>the</strong> shield of <strong>the</strong><br />

corporation, and multinational companies

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!