the toxic truth - Greenpeace

More documents

Recommendations

Info

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
42 Amnesty internAtionAl And greenpeAce netherlAnds Chapter 3 Tankers and general cargo ships awaiting orders off the coast of Lagos, 2009 © Vancampen obtaining a berth. 139 However, the findings of an international enquiry set up by the Ivorian authorities after the dumping suggest that there may have been other reasons for the delay: “ According to information communicated to the commission following a mission undertaken by an official representative, the nigerian authorities obtained information about the ship and its cargo from their intelligence services. On this basis, and due to a lack of official response from the captain, they forbade the Probo Koala, which was in their territorial 140 waters, from entering the port. ” Events in Nigeria remain unclear. Ultimately, the Probo Koala was able to berth and remained at Lagos for several days. Internal emails show that Trafigura tried to dispose of the waste in Nigeria but ultimately could not do so. The content of the emails is reproduced below, and Amnesty International and Greenpeace have asked Trafigura to comment on these communications. The company did not respond. Around midday on 10 August 2006, an agent for Trafigura wrote to Comoditex, a shipping services company in Lagos: “We need to deslop the vessel. Pls advise where the objection lies.” 141 Comoditex emailed back, copying in Trafigura executives in London, to say that no deslopping operations should be arranged in Nigeria without prior consultation. 142 In a follow-up email, Comoditex warned Trafigura that it should not try to deslop in Lagos due to the risks of the waste being mishandled and the risk of cargo theft. The email stated: “ lagos do [sic] not have proper de-slopping facilities as shown by the fact that a barge was supplied and they wanted the Master to pump the slop overboard into an open tank, which he refused to do. The receiver of the slop may also try to sell it in the local market which has 143 potential implications on us. ” And in another email, Comoditex concluded that: “ due to the nature of the slop onboard… would prefer for the slop to be discharged in a different port other than lagos if possible . ” 144
Page 1 and 2: the toxic truth About A compAny cAl
Page 3 and 4: 2 Amnesty internAtionAl And greenpe
Page 11 and 12: 10 Amnesty internAtionAl And greenp
Page 41: 40 Amnesty internAtionAl And greenp
Page 67 and 68: gon d 66 Amnesty internAtionAl And
Page 93 and 94:
92 Amnesty internAtionAl And greenp
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
100 Amnesty internAtionAl And green
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
show all

the toxic truth - Greenpeace

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?