the toxic truth - Greenpeace

the toxic truth
Accountability
This chapter has described the role of
Trafigura in the creation, movement, export
and dumping of toxic waste. Despite the role
played by Trafigura, the company has faced
only limited investigations and sanctions for
its involvement in the criminal and negligent
acts described. Initially two senior Trafigura
executives, Claude Dauphin and Jean-Pierre
Valentini, were arrested in Côte d’Ivoire
straight after the dumping, and charged with
a range of offences. However, on 13 February
2007 the state of Côte d’Ivoire and Trafigura
reached a settlement, under which Trafigura
agreed to pay the state the sum of CFA95
billion (approximately US$195 million). As
a term of the Ivorian Settlement, and in
exchange for compensation, the government
agreed that it: “waives once and for all its
right to prosecute, claim, or mount any action
or proceedings in the present or in the future”
against the Trafigura Parties. 426 The two
executives were released on bail and the
charges were ultimately dropped.
In 2009 some 30,000 victims of the dumping
of toxic waste brought a civil action against
Trafigura in the United Kingdom (UK). This
case was settled out-of court. Trafigura paid
£30 million (US$45 million) to the claimants
with no admission of liability.
In 2010 a Dutch court convicted Trafigura of
exporting hazardous waste to Côte d’Ivoire.
The guilty verdict against Trafigura was upheld
on Appeal. 427
However, the Dutch Public Prosecutor decided
not to prosecute the company in relation to
events subsequent to the removal of the
waste from Dutch jurisdiction.
The limits of accountability, and the way
in which the multi-jurisdictional nature of
this case created obstacles to corporate
accountability, is addressed in Section III of
this report.
Trafigura was asked to respond to the
allegations made in this report. In its letter of
response, re-produced in full as Annex II, the
company stated that:
“ we believe the report contains significant
inaccuracies and misrepresentations.
The report oversimplifies difficult legal
issues, analyses them based on ill-founded
assumptions and draws selective conclusions
which do not adequately reflect the complexity
of the situation or the legal processes. Courts
in five jurisdictions have reviewed different
aspects of the incident and decisions and
settlements have been made. It is simply wrong
to suggest that the issues have not had the right
judicial scrutiny. ”
Trafigura did not name any specific
inaccuracies or misrepresentations.
95
Chapter 7