Côte d’Ivoire Toxic Waste Scandal Triggers Legal Action in 3 Countries

In August 2006, over 400 tons of toxic waste was dumped in residential areas of the port city of Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire. A devastating environmental crisis followed, leading to 15 deaths, thousands of illnesses, and a breakdown of the local economy. This crisis has emphasized the urgent need for more effective enforcement of hazardous waste laws in seaports around the world.

The crisis was triggered by a Dutch trading company, Trafigura Beheer BV, which had leased the “Probo Koala” tanker to transport petrochemical products. On 2 July 2006, the tanker arrived in Amsterdam , where Trafigura intended to unload the ship’s “regular slops” before proceeding to Estonia. “Regular slops” consist of wash water from a ship’s holds, and typically include small traces of oil, gas, caustic soda, and other chemicals.

Amsterdam port workers pumped part of the waste out of the tanker into a lighter. Upon processing in a treatment facility onshore, a foul smell was noticed. In view of the extreme off-spec analysis of the slops, Trafigura was informed that the previously agreed disposal price of $15,000 would rise to $600,000. Trafigura refused to pay this amount, and the tanker left the port, after having taken on board again the unloaded waste. After failing to unload the waste in Nigeria, Trafigura chartered a company in Côte d’Ivoire, named “Tommy,” to dispose of the toxic waste for $20,000.

On the night of 19 August 2006, Tommy dumped over 400 tons of toxic waste from the Probo Koala at 16 open-air sites in residential areas of Abidjan. Several of these sites were close to water sources. Two weeks later, people began to complain of ill health and seek medical help. Fifteen people died from the exposure, and thousands suffered from diarrhea, vomiting, breathing problems, and nosebleeds. An investigation revealed that the waste was toxic and contained the poisonous gas hydrogen sulfide.

In addition to widespread illness, the illegal dumping placed enormous strain on local government capacity. Approximately 100,000 people in Côte d’Ivoire sought medical treatment, overrunning local hospitals. Businesses closed, workers were laid off, and many fishing, vegetable, and small livestock activities were halted. Protests erupted in the city over suspicions of possible government corruption in the scandal.

On 13 February 2007, Trafigura settled with the Ivorian Government for the equivalent of US$198 million. As part of the agreement, the Government released three jailed Trafigura executives, dropped all charges against the company and its executives, and will not pursue further financial claims against the company. Greenpeace has criticized the settlement, because the deal was struck before the results of criminal investigations were published, and because of the unlikelihood that the victims will directly receive any of the settlement money.

The settlement does not preclude further claims against Trafigura outside Côte d’Ivoire. The British law firm Leigh Day & Co. is currently pursuing a class action lawsuit in the British High Court in London against Trafigura on behalf of the victims. The Government of the Netherlands is currently investigating to determine whether to pursue claims. On the basis of criminal investigations, on 15 February (orders for) the arrest of the director of the Amsterdam treatment facility and the ship’s captain followed.

An independent investigation requested by the City of Amsterdam indicated that it was against the law that waste has been pumped back into the vessel. At the same time, cooperation and coordination between authorities was stated to be insufficient.

This crisis has exposed weaknesses and gaps in the international regime established to enforce hazardous waste laws at seaports.

At the 8th Conference of the Parties (COP8) to the Basel Convention on the control of the transboundary movement of hazardous waste, held in Nairobi from 27 November to 1 December 2006, delegates examined the steps necessary to prevent similar events in the future. Several options exist to improve enforcement of hazardous waste laws in ports, including: building capacity to ensure adequate monitoring and control of shipments; improving information exchange between maritime, environmental, and port authorities; and strengthening regional cooperation in the management and disposal of hazardous wastes.

Delegates also discussed the need to clarify ambiguities in international instruments relating to hazardous wastes. In particular, the Conference passed resolution VIII/9, calling for clarification of the overlapping obligations in the Basel Convention and the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL Convention). This will facilitate port authorities’ compliance with all laws.

The crisis has also raised awareness of the enormous problem of illegal waste exports arising in Europe. EU law prohibits export of hazardous waste from EU members to developing countries, but this law is not yet fully enforced. The Executive Planning Committee of INECE decided to undertake efforts to initiate activities to stimulate awareness, capacity, and cooperation to counteract illegal waste shipments worldwide. INECE will co-operate and co-ordinate with other parties to this end. The nonprofit Basel Action Network (BAN) recommends reinstating the IMPEL-TFS Seaports project, in order to promote greater enforcement at EU ports and greater cooperation between African port states and the EU. BAN also recommends that the EU require a mandatory minimum level of enforcement by member states, such as spot checks at ports.

As the crisis in Côte d’Ivoire illustrates too well, the dumping of hazardous waste can devastate a country’s environmental health and economy. While many international, regional, and national instruments are already in place to address these concerns, it is vital that we now take steps to strengthen compliance with and enforcement of these laws, beginning in the ports through which so much waste is shipped.

For more information, please visit the websites of the Secretariat of the Basel Convention, http://www.basel.int, and the Basel Action Network, http://www.ban.org.

Israel’s “ Clean Coast” Program Successfully Tailors Solution to Marine Litter Problem
By Alkalay Ronen, Pasternak Galia, and Zask Alon, Marine Pollution Prevention Inspectors; and Amir Ran, Director, Marine and Coastal Environment Division (MCED), Ministry of Environmental Protection, Israel

Marine litter is a growing environmental problem worldwide. All coastal countries suffer from the litter deposited upon their coastlines. Marine litter originates from two sources: sea-borne, from ships and fishing boats, and land-based, such as industrial waste and litter. A 2004-cleanup report in Israel discovered that over 60% of all debris collected during clean-up operations originated from recreational activities.

In June 2005, the Israeli Ministry of Environmental Protection (MoEP) launched the “Clean Coast” program, applying the “Environmental Problem Solving” concept. The program that was devised to include four modules: continuous cleaning; education activities; enforcement actions; advertising and public relations. Based on a quantifiable index, the results showed a significant improvement of the coastal cleanliness. While at the starting date, June 2005, only 27% of the beaches were defined as “clean” or “very clean,” on December 2006, 80% of the coastal length was “clean” and above.

185 km of Israeli coastline suffers from accumulation of marine litter. Located in the easterly part of the Mediterranean , current and wind regimes are responsible for the deposition of significant quantities of waste from the eastern Mediterranean basin on the Israeli coast, especially during winter and summer storms. Approximately 130 km, from the total coastline length are Non-declared bathing beaches, which are open to the public for leisure activities.

Overall responsibility in Israel for keeping the coast clean lies within municipal authorities. However, reality showed that this responsibility was not translated into action. Many activities launched at the past were short-term and non-systematic, while litter keeps arriving steadily at beaches leaving the coast dirty at all times.

Environmental Problem Solving (EPS), a concept based on a methodology suggested by Professor Malcolm Sparrow of Harvard University, provided a solid base for tailoring a targeted solution for the problem. The concept focuses environmental enforcement agencies (among others) on managing risk concentrations, measured by desired environmental outcomes, using all necessary tools to achieve the marked goal.

In a nutshell, in order to implement this approach, one has to identify the problem carefully, analyze it, find a proper and workable “success index” and tailor an action plan to solve it.

“Clean Coast” Program

After long and tedious table planning and budget allocation, MoEP launched a 3-year program in 2005 entitled “ Clean Coast ” in cooperation with the Nature and Parks Authority (NPA) and other stakeholders. The new approach combined components and participation of several bodies and activities. In accordance with the EPS concept, the “Clean Coast” program implemented simultaneously:

• Adoption of an objective measurement tool to assess coastal cleanliness.
• Routine cleanup of unauthorized beaches by local authorities.
• Educational activities in the country’s schools and youth movements.
• Enforcement against polluters of the coasts.
• Information and public relations activities.

The required budget needed was $800,000 per annum. The budget was roughly allocated as follows: cleaning (60%), educational activities (20%) advertising and enforcement (20%).

Clean Coast Index

In order to assess cleanliness levels, a Clean Coast Index (CCI) was developed using very simple calculation. The CCI is based on the quantity of plastic debris, per square meter of coastal zone.

From June 2005, the CCI was measured every two weeks by MoEP and NPA inspectors as well as by “Coastal Watch” volunteers. The success parameter for the program was determined as a coast being in a state of “clean” or “very clean” 70% of the time.

Routine Cleanup

The program offered to subsidize up to 70% of estimated clean-up costs for local coastal municipalities. They were obliged to hire their own contractors and were held responsible for their work. An agreement was signed with each authority, based on the characteristics of its coastal strip and the cleaning frequency desired.

Enforcement

Warning letters were issued to authorities whose coasts were found dirty according to the CCI. In extreme cases, Clean-up Decrees were issued, in accordance with Cleanliness Maintenance Law, 1984. Enforcement activities were instituted against people who littered the beach despite the explanatory efforts. Fines were issued according to the Law.

Educational Activities

Seventeen local education programs were approved and financed by the “Clean Coast” program. Activities regarding the importance of beach cleanliness are conducted in education centers of NPA, which host groups all year round. Educational programs and kits are being developed for distribution in the country’s formal educational system, to continue and deliver the message long after the program’s budget comes to an end.

Public Awareness Activities

During summer weekends, MOE and NPA inspectors as well as “Coast-Watch” volunteers have performed awareness activities, approaching vacationers at the coast, explaining the goal of the program. That included distribution of garbage bags, with the slogan “Clean Coast” on it.

Information and outreach activities

The "Clean Coast" program was accompanied by a comprehensive information campaign. TV broadcasts, radio shows and Internet sites, along with 500 billboards and an airborne slogan that flew along the main beaches on the weekends. An interactive map was developed using GIS software, and was published in the Ministry's website, providing updated information on the CCI, as well as information (Coast ID card) for each beach.

Summary and Conclusions

The main objective of the “Clean Coast” program was achieved. By the end of the second year, between 70-85% of the beaches were rated “clean” and above, using the CCI index. As the program shows, the litter problem can only be solved by introduction of a holistic mechanism, backed up by a measurement index, applied over the long-term.

Some argue that a country should not embark on a solution to the marine litter problem until the sources of the litter have been analyzed and identified. We strongly believe that “Action First” by countries is the key. A strategy pursued for a long enough time will create a self-perpetuating mechanism that will generate success, not only for the residents of a country but for neighboring countries as well. A combined international action of such kind may be the beginning of a turnover in reducing marine and coastal litter.

For more information about the “Clean Coast” program, please visit the MoEP website. See also, M.K. Sparrow, The Regulatory Craft: Controlling Risks, Solving Problems and Managing Copliance (Brookings Institute, 2000).

Tanzania Conducts Large-Scale Inspections to Enforce Ban on Plastic Bags
Excerpted from IPP Media, 7 March 2007.

In early March 2007, Tanzania’s National Environmental Management Council (NEMC) embarked on a special operation to inspect the implementation of the ban on plastic bags, disregarded in some urban centers. The council said the aim was to see whether the bags are still manufactured and used despite the ban imposed by the government in October last year.

A team of NEMC officials made impromptu inspections in some factories and shops in Dar es Salaam, and at least three shops were found selling the bags.

The government banned the manufacture, importation, sale, purchase and use of plastic bags of less than 30 microns (about 0.03millimeters) in thickness. NEMC acting director general Bonaventure Baya told reporters in the city before the operation went into gear that they had learnt that some people, companies and institutions still make, import, distribute, sell and buy plastic bags of the types banned.

But he admitted that in some places people have stopped using the bags and gone for other options, mainly used newspapers and magazines as well as paper bags that are believed to be more disposable and therefore friendlier to the environment. He said the use of thin plastic bags is effectively a criminal offence and any one caught involved in any activities set to make the ban fail would be brought to justice.

Conviction calls for a fine ranging from 50,000/- to 50m/- or a jail term ranging from three to seven months or both fine and imprisonment.

At a popular supermarket in Kariakoo, the NEMC team found the banned plastic bags widely in use. All the bags were white and not black as was previously the case but their thickness was the same less than 0.03 millimeters outlawed.

“We have given traders seven days to get rid of and stop selling the banned bags. Anyone acting to the contrary will face the strong arm of the law,” warned Baya.