the toxic truth - Greenpeace

the toxic truth
The Probo Koala sails
to Estonia – but where
is the waste going?
Although the Probo Koala’s next port of call was
Paldiski in Estonia, this was not where Trafigura
was intending to deliver the waste. 127 Under
international and European law on movement
of waste, there is a requirement for the Port
State (in this case, the Netherlands) to know
where waste is being taken for disposal and
(in some cases) to ensure that the destination
state is notified. 128 Additionally, the export of
certain types of waste from the EU to African,
Caribbean and Pacific states is prohibited under
EU law. 129 Trafigura had said the waste would be
disposed of at the next available opportunity,
but there was no information about where this
would be.
Both the Hulshof Committee and the UN
Special Rapporteur on toxic waste and human
rights later noted that the lack of clarity about
where the waste was to be delivered should
have triggered further enquiries. 130
The Probo Koala arrived in Paldiski, Estonia,
on 9 July 2006. 134 The ship was inspected
by Estonian Port State Control. 135 However,
this inspection was limited to measuring the
volume of material in the tanks; the Estonian
authorities did nothing to prevent the waste on
board the Probo Koala from leaving Estonia.
The ship was next bound for Africa.
From Europe to Africa
On 2 August 2006, while the Probo Koala
was en route to Nigeria, an agent from Falcon
Navigation wrote to Trafigura’s London-based
executive, Naeem Ahmed, informing him that
a Nigerian company, Daddo, had quoted a
cost of US$7,000 (€ 5,500) to dispose of the
waste. 136 This was a fraction of the €500,000
(US$630,000) that Trafigura would have had
to pay in the Netherlands.
Naeem Ahmed instructed Falcon Navigation to
book this immediately. 137
The Probo Koala arrived in Lagos, Nigeria,
on 4 August 2006. 138 According to Trafigura,
the ship did not berth in Lagos until 9
August 2006 because there was a delay in
was dumping aT sea
Considered?
At just after 10pm on 3 July 2006 an anonymous fax
arrived at the Port of Amsterdam, which appeared to
suggest that the waste would be dumped at sea. 131 The
Dutch authorities took notice of this fax. They contacted
the Estonian authorities and advised them of the incident
in Amsterdam, and of the fact that the Probo Koala
was carrying 450m 3 of slops that were “expensive to
eliminate”. The Dutch authorities asked the Estonian
authorities to check that the waste was still on board
the Probo Koala, which they did. However, it appears no
further action was taken in Estonia, although the Probo
Koala’s next port of call was in Africa.
On 5 July, an email communication between Trafigura
executives also suggests that the waste be dumped at
sea after leaving Europe:
“ James, please note that discharge of the slops can
not be done in the Baltic (special zone) and certainly
not between Dover or the Baltic either. We will have to
commence to discharge after we pass Dover on the way to
132
lome. ”
As this is not waste arising from normal operations of
a ship, its disposal in this way would have been in contravention
of the 1972 Convention on the Prevention of
Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter,
commonly called the London Convention. 133 This is an
agreement to control pollution of the sea by dumping and
it covers the deliberate disposal at sea of wastes or other
matter from vessels, aircraft, and platforms.
Amnesty International and Greenpeace have asked
Trafigura to comment on this email. The company did not
respond. Amnesty International and Greenpeace also
asked the Dutch and Estonian authorities to comment on
their concerns about dumping at sea. At the time of printing,
no response had been received from the authorities
in eithr state.
41
Chapter 3