Massive Legal Win for Kebaowek First Nation And Allies Against Proposed
Nuclear Waste Dump in Canada
-
Federal Court of Appeal Upholds Victory for Kebaowek First Nation
and Allies in “Species at Risk” Case Against Chalk River Nuclear Waste
Project Kebaow...
Featured Articles
Latest Post
2:51 AM
pollution load from plastic bags
Written By Krishna on Wednesday, May 30, 2012 | 2:51 AM
While steps must be taken to ban use of plastic bags, ToxicsWatch Alliance holds that the mechanism developed by Bhruhat Bangalore Municipal Palike whereby it is using plastic waste to lay roads is anti-environment because in effect, it is an act of landfilling plastic wastes.
The toxic contaminants from thes wastes can leech and contaminate the underground water and degrade the soil health.
On May 7, the Supreme Court said it would consider whether to completely ban the use of plastic in the interests of animals and the environment.
An apex court bench headed by Justice GS Singhvi said this during the hearing of a PIL (public interest litigation), drawing attention of the court to the plight of animals, which were allegedly swallowing plastic with their food. The court suggested that either the use of plastic be banned or the manufacturers should pick up the used plastic and re-cycle it.
After use plastic bags pollution load increases. It is dumped in everwhere. Sometims it gets sent to dumpsites. It litters the environment, reaches waterways, drains, forests, mountains, hill stations, parks, beaches, streets and in teh stomach of animals. If plastic bags are burnt it causes emissions of toxic gases.
Animals ingest plastic bags, in search of food. They die very painful death. Even after the death of these animals the ingested plastic bag remains intact despite the decomposition of the animal. It makes the lanscape ugly. It is non-biodegradable. The decomposition may take some 400 years.
The plea sought directions to all the state governments to ensure that wastes in plastic bags were segregated after collecting from door-to-door basis, thereby putting a check on animals swallowing such materials.
All the drains in the country are getting choked due to plastic wastes. Supreme Court supported the demand for a mechanism to put a ban on the use of plastics else the next generation will face its consequences which be greater than the atomic bomb.
The health of human beings is directly impacted by animal products such as milk and meat which are contaminated by plastic residues.
The court has issued notices to the central and state governments and the plastic manufacturers in view of the prayer for complete ban on the use of plastic bags in the country due to the deleterious effects of such polluting materials on humans, animals and environment.
Some plastic products contain a variety of additives, some of which can be toxic. For example, plasticizers like adipates and phthalates are often added to brittle plastics like polyvinyl chloride to make them pliable enough for use in food packaging, toys, and many other items. Traces of these compounds can leach out of the product. Owing to concerns over the effects of such leachates, the European Union has restricted the use of DEHP (di-2-ethylhexyl phthalate)and other phthalates in some applications. Some compounds leaching from polystyrene food containers have been proposed to interfere with hormone functions and are suspected human carcinogens.
The monomers used in the manufacture of the parent polymers may be toxic. In some cases, small amounts of those chemicals can remain trapped in the product unless suitable processing is employed. The World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has recognized that vinyl chloride, the precursor to PVC, as a human carcinogen.]
Some polymers may also decompose into the monomers or other toxic substances when heated. In 2011, it was reported that "almost all plastic products" sampled released chemicals with estrogenic activity, although the researchers identified plastics which did not leach chemicals with estrogenic activity.
The primary building block of polycarbonates, bisphenol A (BPA), is an estrogen-like endocrine disruptor that may leach into food.[20] Research in Environmental Health Perspectives finds that BPA leached from the lining of tin cans, dental sealants and polycarbonate bottles can increase body weight of lab animals' offspring. A more recent animal study suggests that even low-level exposure to BPA results in insulin resistance, which can lead to inflammation and heart disease.
As of January 2010, the LA Times newspaper reports that the United States FDA is spending $30 million to investigate indications of BPA being linked to cancer.
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) adipate, present in plastic wrap based on PVC, is also of concern, as are the volatile organic compounds present in new car smell.
The European Union has a permanent ban on the use of phthalates in toys. In 2009, the United States government banned certain types of phthalates commonly used in plastic.
Plastics are durable and degrade very slowly; the chemical bonds that make plastic so durable make it equally resistant to natural processes of degradation. Since the 1950s, one billion tons of plastic have been discarded and may persist for hundreds or even thousands of years.Perhaps the biggest environmental threat from plastic comes from nurdles, which are the raw material from which all plastics are made. They are tiny pre-plastic pellets that kill large numbers of fish and birds that mistake them for food.
Prior to the ban on the use of CFCs in extrusion of polystyrene (and general use, except in life-critical fire suppression systems; see Montreal Protocol), the production of polystyrene contributed to the depletion of the ozone layer; however, non-CFCs are currently used in the extrusion process.
Plastic can be converted as a fuel since they are usually hydrocarbon-based and can be broken down into liquid hydrocarbon. One kilogram of waste plastic produces a liter of hydrocarbon. But burning plastic releases toxic fumes. Burning the plastic polyvinyl chloride (PVC) may create dioxin.
The toxic contaminants from thes wastes can leech and contaminate the underground water and degrade the soil health.
On May 7, the Supreme Court said it would consider whether to completely ban the use of plastic in the interests of animals and the environment.
An apex court bench headed by Justice GS Singhvi said this during the hearing of a PIL (public interest litigation), drawing attention of the court to the plight of animals, which were allegedly swallowing plastic with their food. The court suggested that either the use of plastic be banned or the manufacturers should pick up the used plastic and re-cycle it.
After use plastic bags pollution load increases. It is dumped in everwhere. Sometims it gets sent to dumpsites. It litters the environment, reaches waterways, drains, forests, mountains, hill stations, parks, beaches, streets and in teh stomach of animals. If plastic bags are burnt it causes emissions of toxic gases.
Animals ingest plastic bags, in search of food. They die very painful death. Even after the death of these animals the ingested plastic bag remains intact despite the decomposition of the animal. It makes the lanscape ugly. It is non-biodegradable. The decomposition may take some 400 years.
The plea sought directions to all the state governments to ensure that wastes in plastic bags were segregated after collecting from door-to-door basis, thereby putting a check on animals swallowing such materials.
All the drains in the country are getting choked due to plastic wastes. Supreme Court supported the demand for a mechanism to put a ban on the use of plastics else the next generation will face its consequences which be greater than the atomic bomb.
The health of human beings is directly impacted by animal products such as milk and meat which are contaminated by plastic residues.
The court has issued notices to the central and state governments and the plastic manufacturers in view of the prayer for complete ban on the use of plastic bags in the country due to the deleterious effects of such polluting materials on humans, animals and environment.
Some plastic products contain a variety of additives, some of which can be toxic. For example, plasticizers like adipates and phthalates are often added to brittle plastics like polyvinyl chloride to make them pliable enough for use in food packaging, toys, and many other items. Traces of these compounds can leach out of the product. Owing to concerns over the effects of such leachates, the European Union has restricted the use of DEHP (di-2-ethylhexyl phthalate)and other phthalates in some applications. Some compounds leaching from polystyrene food containers have been proposed to interfere with hormone functions and are suspected human carcinogens.
The monomers used in the manufacture of the parent polymers may be toxic. In some cases, small amounts of those chemicals can remain trapped in the product unless suitable processing is employed. The World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has recognized that vinyl chloride, the precursor to PVC, as a human carcinogen.]
Some polymers may also decompose into the monomers or other toxic substances when heated. In 2011, it was reported that "almost all plastic products" sampled released chemicals with estrogenic activity, although the researchers identified plastics which did not leach chemicals with estrogenic activity.
The primary building block of polycarbonates, bisphenol A (BPA), is an estrogen-like endocrine disruptor that may leach into food.[20] Research in Environmental Health Perspectives finds that BPA leached from the lining of tin cans, dental sealants and polycarbonate bottles can increase body weight of lab animals' offspring. A more recent animal study suggests that even low-level exposure to BPA results in insulin resistance, which can lead to inflammation and heart disease.
As of January 2010, the LA Times newspaper reports that the United States FDA is spending $30 million to investigate indications of BPA being linked to cancer.
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) adipate, present in plastic wrap based on PVC, is also of concern, as are the volatile organic compounds present in new car smell.
The European Union has a permanent ban on the use of phthalates in toys. In 2009, the United States government banned certain types of phthalates commonly used in plastic.
Plastics are durable and degrade very slowly; the chemical bonds that make plastic so durable make it equally resistant to natural processes of degradation. Since the 1950s, one billion tons of plastic have been discarded and may persist for hundreds or even thousands of years.Perhaps the biggest environmental threat from plastic comes from nurdles, which are the raw material from which all plastics are made. They are tiny pre-plastic pellets that kill large numbers of fish and birds that mistake them for food.
Prior to the ban on the use of CFCs in extrusion of polystyrene (and general use, except in life-critical fire suppression systems; see Montreal Protocol), the production of polystyrene contributed to the depletion of the ozone layer; however, non-CFCs are currently used in the extrusion process.
Plastic can be converted as a fuel since they are usually hydrocarbon-based and can be broken down into liquid hydrocarbon. One kilogram of waste plastic produces a liter of hydrocarbon. But burning plastic releases toxic fumes. Burning the plastic polyvinyl chloride (PVC) may create dioxin.
1:55 AM
Britain's waste: Now it's coming back to haunt us
Note: The 113 containers were only the tip of the iceberg. There were 3,753 containers arrived at Jakarta's port last January claimed as metal scraps. From that batch, only 751 container recognized and claimed by registered importers on the Import Notification data. The status of this case as of 28 February 2012 is based on data provided the Custom in Tanjung Priok port revealed that about 344 containers imported by 18 Importers. About 1271 containers prepared to be checked. So far, only 458 containers already checked and 630 containers remain untouched. According to the Mininistry of Environment, from the 458 containers, 36 containers are clean, 292 contaminated by toxics substances (heavy metals, arsenic, etc), 136 are waiting for lab analysis.
After the first examination, from 751 containers, it was found that 113 containers suspected to be contaminated by toxics substances imported by one company, PT. HHS from UK and the NL. The containers from UK, 89 containers, already returned to UK but the 24 containers sent from the NL still sit at Tanjung Priok Port due to a complicated process of repatriation. The 24 containers were shipped by a California-based company and transit in Rotterdam.
She further said, "Another 118 containers, imported by 4 companies (PT PKM, PT TWS, PT TIS dan PT GG) from 6-8 countries, are currently under the process. Despite the pressures given by the steel and metals association, our network, Indonesian Toxics-Free Network, managed to push our government to return this toxics metal scraps to sender. Indonesian government already shown its leadership at COP10 Basel Convention through a Country Led Initiative jointly with Switzerland which push the ratification of Basel Ban Amendment. This is just a small step to climb the hill.
Yuyun Ismawati
Indonesia Toxics-Free Network
Britain's waste: Now it's coming back to haunt us
A £300m criminal trade that smuggled rubbish out of the UK is so toxic that the trash is being sent home. Cahal Milmo saw it finish its journey from Jakarta to FelixstoweCahal Milmo Saturday 26 May 2012 Amid the stacks of shipping containers towering over Britain's busiest port, an unusual suspected-crime scene unfolded this week.
Investigators wearing gas masks gingerly opened a row of 20m-long steel boxes and – after testing for noxious fumes – began inspecting the rusty entrails of 1,800 tonnes of scrap metal to see if it was sent illegally to pollute the environment 7,000 miles away.
Nearly 90 containers, each weighing more than 30 tonnes, have arrived back in the bustling Suffolk dockyard of Felixstowe in the past fortnight. Their journey began last November when they left scrapyards in southern England for Indonesia labelled as "recyclable" material with a value of $500,000 (£318,000).The shipments were part of a lucrative trade – about 10 million tonnes of waste metal flow out of Europe each year. But when the Indonesian authorities inspected the contents of the British containers, they did not like what they found. The cargo was declared hazardous, resealed and British authorities were ordered to arrange for its immediate return.
Four UK companies are now being investigated by the Environment Agency (EA) to see if they sent contaminated and potentially toxic waste to the Indonesian capital, Jakarta, in contravention of laws designed to combat a global epidemic of cross-border dumping.It is part of a wider picture in which millions of tonnes of material are flowing from the developed world to Asia and Africa, allowing criminals to profit by flouting international rules and passing off illegally-exported waste as part of a legitimate global trade in recyclable commodities worth £160bn a year.
The criminal trade, estimated to be worth at least £300m worldwide, ranges from hundreds of thousands of broken computers and televisions – so-called "e-waste" – sent to west Africa to be stripped of their heavy metals in unsafe conditions, to domestic waste smuggled out of Britain under the guise of recyclable paper or plastic.
Used car tyres form an increasingly lucrative illicit market.Andy Higham, the former detective who heads the 34-strong EA national crime team set up in 2008, said: "The financial benefits from environmental crime are similar to those from smuggling Class-A drugs but the actual penalties are very much lower. That is why it is attractive to criminals. Our job is to prove that they will be detected and will pay a heavy price.
"The team investigating the containers returned from Indonesia – the inquiry is appropriately named Operation Anvil – will pick through their contents to try and find evidence the waste metal, claimed by its exporters to have been legitimately-exportable scrap metal, was mixed with hazardous contaminants allegedly found by the Indonesian authorities.It is not an enviable task. The air was thick with the cloying smell of rust and damp as The Independent this week witnessed the opening of some of the first dozen containers shipped back from Jakarta for an initial inspection.
As investigators wearing respirators slowly opened each box with a hydraulic jack to prevent tonnes of metal crashing on to them, a chemical specialist inserted a probe to test for ammonia or other gases before the doors were fully extended.Inside one container was the oxidised, mangled product of a breakers yard – 5cm-thick chunks of steel plate, car parts, girders and unidentifiable bits of heavy plant – mixed with lengths of rubber hose, wood, broken circuit boards, plastic film and other detritus which could release toxins if smelted down in an unmodified furnace.
According to photographs taken by customs officials in Jakarta and sent back to Britain, suspect hazardous substances were found in some of the containers, meaning Operation Anvil will have to conduct further tests to assess which, if any, of Britain's strict waste export regulations have been broken.
Jeff Warburton, a senior environmental crime officer, who like other members of the crime squad is a former police detective, said: "The legislation is quite clear – there should not be any contaminants in this material. It is the very early stages of this investigation but we do take these things extremely seriously. It is absolutely right and proper that, given what the Indonesian authorities say they found, we conduct a thorough inquiry.
"Looking along the line of containers, each of which may eventually have to be emptied to collate evidence, Mr Warburton, a former detective inspector with Greater Manchester Police, added: "It is expensive and it is time consuming but it is something that needs to be done."If material is exported that puts toxins and poisonous fumes into the air of a country where the furnaces are not equipped to filter out that material then that poses an obvious risk to the environment and the people. It is our job to stop contaminated waste being exported or, if it has left the country and been sent back, trace those responsible."
The suspect scrap shipments are part of a cash-rich – and perfectly legal – trade in waste metal for melting and recycling which has grown massively in recent years to feed commodity-hungry markets such as China. According to industry estimates, recycled goods provide 40 per cent of global raw material requirements.At the same time, organised crime has spotted an opportunity to make quick money by loading cargo containers with mislabelled or illegal waste to be dumped abroad. With some 700,000 containers passing through British ports each year, it is impossible to check more than a fraction of cargos for illegal shipments.
Mr Warburton said: "It is the same pattern we see time and again. There is a legitimate business in which profits are to be made. Criminality sees that profit and seeks to exploit it by breaking the law."Human rights campaigners and conservation groups have highlighted the damaging effects of the illegal trade. They point to Ghana and Nigeria where children pick through mountains of electronic waste rich in heavy metals and burn plastic casings off copper wire for less than a dollar a day, generating a rich cocktail of air and water-borne carcinogens.
In Jakarta, the authorities have reacted with alarm, pointing to the British shipments, which were mixed with 30 containers of suspect scrap metal sent from the Netherlands, as the latest in a growing influx of waste from the developed world which is shortening the lifespan of Indonesia's own landfills and causing health problems.Masnellyarti Hilman, a senior government official dealing with hazardous waste, said: "Due to our lack of awareness, they sometimes send the waste illegally and others have falsely claimed that the waste was basic materials."The scrap metal shipments are reminiscent of events in 2009 when 2,000 tonnes of municipal waste from across Britain, including used adult nappies, bags of rotting meat and used underwear were shipped to Brazil, allegedly under the guise of recyclable plastic.
The discovery of the shipments in three Brazilian ports sparked a diplomatic incident, with the country threatening a complaint to the World Trade Organisation. The then president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, accused Britain of using his country as "the world's rubbish bin".
A long and complex investigation by the Environment Agency, which traced the waste to locations from Wiltshire to Lincolnshire, is only now coming to a conclusion.Two directors of an east London waste paper company last month pleaded guilty at the Old Bailey to exporting waste illegally, while two Brazilian nationals, who are alleged to have arranged the shipment, are due to go on trial in October.These "reactive" investigations sit alongside the agency's preferred method of crime fighting, using intelligence to target suspected illegal exporters and other types of environmental criminals before they can do real damage.
As well as preventing the export of 51 containers of suspected illegal waste last year, this month the agency won an order requiring a crime boss jailed for four years earlier this year to pay back more than £900,000 earned from running a massive illegal waste site in Berkshire.Mr Higham said: "Environmental crime is an extremely serious issue and we are beginning to get that message out. We know material is being stopped but the invisible side of the equation is what we have not stopped. I am not so arrogant as to say we are completely on top of this. But we are out there and we have the expertise and knowledge to catch those breaking the law.
"On the scrapheap: Valuable rubbishE-wasteFour million tonnes of waste computers and appliances are generated in the West each year. Working machines can be legitimately exported but millions of broken items, containing valuable but dangerous heavy metals, are exported illegally to Africa and Asia.Scrap metalThere is a massive market in waste steel and metals.
Annual exports from the EU grew by more than a third in the past decade to more than 10 million tonnes. Regulations require scrap metal to be free from contaminants but there is evidence countries accept dirty shipments.TyresUsed tyres can no longer be sent to landfill in the UK. But some operators are charging fitters to dispose of tyres and then illegally exporting them to other countries such as Vietnam.PlasticOne of the biggest legitimate waste markets is in recyclable plastic.
Last year, Britain exported 14 million tonnes of recyclable materials. Criminals exploit this demand by mislabelling domestic rubbish as packaging.PaperEuropean exports of waste paper rose from 1.2 million to 7.8 million tonnes between 1995 and 2005. Illegal exporters pass off contaminated waste as clean paper.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/britains-waste-now-its-coming-back-to-haunt-us-7789292.html
After the first examination, from 751 containers, it was found that 113 containers suspected to be contaminated by toxics substances imported by one company, PT. HHS from UK and the NL. The containers from UK, 89 containers, already returned to UK but the 24 containers sent from the NL still sit at Tanjung Priok Port due to a complicated process of repatriation. The 24 containers were shipped by a California-based company and transit in Rotterdam.
She further said, "Another 118 containers, imported by 4 companies (PT PKM, PT TWS, PT TIS dan PT GG) from 6-8 countries, are currently under the process. Despite the pressures given by the steel and metals association, our network, Indonesian Toxics-Free Network, managed to push our government to return this toxics metal scraps to sender. Indonesian government already shown its leadership at COP10 Basel Convention through a Country Led Initiative jointly with Switzerland which push the ratification of Basel Ban Amendment. This is just a small step to climb the hill.
Yuyun Ismawati
Indonesia Toxics-Free Network
Britain's waste: Now it's coming back to haunt us
A £300m criminal trade that smuggled rubbish out of the UK is so toxic that the trash is being sent home. Cahal Milmo saw it finish its journey from Jakarta to FelixstoweCahal Milmo Saturday 26 May 2012 Amid the stacks of shipping containers towering over Britain's busiest port, an unusual suspected-crime scene unfolded this week.
Investigators wearing gas masks gingerly opened a row of 20m-long steel boxes and – after testing for noxious fumes – began inspecting the rusty entrails of 1,800 tonnes of scrap metal to see if it was sent illegally to pollute the environment 7,000 miles away.
Nearly 90 containers, each weighing more than 30 tonnes, have arrived back in the bustling Suffolk dockyard of Felixstowe in the past fortnight. Their journey began last November when they left scrapyards in southern England for Indonesia labelled as "recyclable" material with a value of $500,000 (£318,000).The shipments were part of a lucrative trade – about 10 million tonnes of waste metal flow out of Europe each year. But when the Indonesian authorities inspected the contents of the British containers, they did not like what they found. The cargo was declared hazardous, resealed and British authorities were ordered to arrange for its immediate return.
Four UK companies are now being investigated by the Environment Agency (EA) to see if they sent contaminated and potentially toxic waste to the Indonesian capital, Jakarta, in contravention of laws designed to combat a global epidemic of cross-border dumping.It is part of a wider picture in which millions of tonnes of material are flowing from the developed world to Asia and Africa, allowing criminals to profit by flouting international rules and passing off illegally-exported waste as part of a legitimate global trade in recyclable commodities worth £160bn a year.
The criminal trade, estimated to be worth at least £300m worldwide, ranges from hundreds of thousands of broken computers and televisions – so-called "e-waste" – sent to west Africa to be stripped of their heavy metals in unsafe conditions, to domestic waste smuggled out of Britain under the guise of recyclable paper or plastic.
Used car tyres form an increasingly lucrative illicit market.Andy Higham, the former detective who heads the 34-strong EA national crime team set up in 2008, said: "The financial benefits from environmental crime are similar to those from smuggling Class-A drugs but the actual penalties are very much lower. That is why it is attractive to criminals. Our job is to prove that they will be detected and will pay a heavy price.
"The team investigating the containers returned from Indonesia – the inquiry is appropriately named Operation Anvil – will pick through their contents to try and find evidence the waste metal, claimed by its exporters to have been legitimately-exportable scrap metal, was mixed with hazardous contaminants allegedly found by the Indonesian authorities.It is not an enviable task. The air was thick with the cloying smell of rust and damp as The Independent this week witnessed the opening of some of the first dozen containers shipped back from Jakarta for an initial inspection.
As investigators wearing respirators slowly opened each box with a hydraulic jack to prevent tonnes of metal crashing on to them, a chemical specialist inserted a probe to test for ammonia or other gases before the doors were fully extended.Inside one container was the oxidised, mangled product of a breakers yard – 5cm-thick chunks of steel plate, car parts, girders and unidentifiable bits of heavy plant – mixed with lengths of rubber hose, wood, broken circuit boards, plastic film and other detritus which could release toxins if smelted down in an unmodified furnace.
According to photographs taken by customs officials in Jakarta and sent back to Britain, suspect hazardous substances were found in some of the containers, meaning Operation Anvil will have to conduct further tests to assess which, if any, of Britain's strict waste export regulations have been broken.
Jeff Warburton, a senior environmental crime officer, who like other members of the crime squad is a former police detective, said: "The legislation is quite clear – there should not be any contaminants in this material. It is the very early stages of this investigation but we do take these things extremely seriously. It is absolutely right and proper that, given what the Indonesian authorities say they found, we conduct a thorough inquiry.
"Looking along the line of containers, each of which may eventually have to be emptied to collate evidence, Mr Warburton, a former detective inspector with Greater Manchester Police, added: "It is expensive and it is time consuming but it is something that needs to be done."If material is exported that puts toxins and poisonous fumes into the air of a country where the furnaces are not equipped to filter out that material then that poses an obvious risk to the environment and the people. It is our job to stop contaminated waste being exported or, if it has left the country and been sent back, trace those responsible."
The suspect scrap shipments are part of a cash-rich – and perfectly legal – trade in waste metal for melting and recycling which has grown massively in recent years to feed commodity-hungry markets such as China. According to industry estimates, recycled goods provide 40 per cent of global raw material requirements.At the same time, organised crime has spotted an opportunity to make quick money by loading cargo containers with mislabelled or illegal waste to be dumped abroad. With some 700,000 containers passing through British ports each year, it is impossible to check more than a fraction of cargos for illegal shipments.
Mr Warburton said: "It is the same pattern we see time and again. There is a legitimate business in which profits are to be made. Criminality sees that profit and seeks to exploit it by breaking the law."Human rights campaigners and conservation groups have highlighted the damaging effects of the illegal trade. They point to Ghana and Nigeria where children pick through mountains of electronic waste rich in heavy metals and burn plastic casings off copper wire for less than a dollar a day, generating a rich cocktail of air and water-borne carcinogens.
In Jakarta, the authorities have reacted with alarm, pointing to the British shipments, which were mixed with 30 containers of suspect scrap metal sent from the Netherlands, as the latest in a growing influx of waste from the developed world which is shortening the lifespan of Indonesia's own landfills and causing health problems.Masnellyarti Hilman, a senior government official dealing with hazardous waste, said: "Due to our lack of awareness, they sometimes send the waste illegally and others have falsely claimed that the waste was basic materials."The scrap metal shipments are reminiscent of events in 2009 when 2,000 tonnes of municipal waste from across Britain, including used adult nappies, bags of rotting meat and used underwear were shipped to Brazil, allegedly under the guise of recyclable plastic.
The discovery of the shipments in three Brazilian ports sparked a diplomatic incident, with the country threatening a complaint to the World Trade Organisation. The then president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, accused Britain of using his country as "the world's rubbish bin".
A long and complex investigation by the Environment Agency, which traced the waste to locations from Wiltshire to Lincolnshire, is only now coming to a conclusion.Two directors of an east London waste paper company last month pleaded guilty at the Old Bailey to exporting waste illegally, while two Brazilian nationals, who are alleged to have arranged the shipment, are due to go on trial in October.These "reactive" investigations sit alongside the agency's preferred method of crime fighting, using intelligence to target suspected illegal exporters and other types of environmental criminals before they can do real damage.
As well as preventing the export of 51 containers of suspected illegal waste last year, this month the agency won an order requiring a crime boss jailed for four years earlier this year to pay back more than £900,000 earned from running a massive illegal waste site in Berkshire.Mr Higham said: "Environmental crime is an extremely serious issue and we are beginning to get that message out. We know material is being stopped but the invisible side of the equation is what we have not stopped. I am not so arrogant as to say we are completely on top of this. But we are out there and we have the expertise and knowledge to catch those breaking the law.
"On the scrapheap: Valuable rubbishE-wasteFour million tonnes of waste computers and appliances are generated in the West each year. Working machines can be legitimately exported but millions of broken items, containing valuable but dangerous heavy metals, are exported illegally to Africa and Asia.Scrap metalThere is a massive market in waste steel and metals.
Annual exports from the EU grew by more than a third in the past decade to more than 10 million tonnes. Regulations require scrap metal to be free from contaminants but there is evidence countries accept dirty shipments.TyresUsed tyres can no longer be sent to landfill in the UK. But some operators are charging fitters to dispose of tyres and then illegally exporting them to other countries such as Vietnam.PlasticOne of the biggest legitimate waste markets is in recyclable plastic.
Last year, Britain exported 14 million tonnes of recyclable materials. Criminals exploit this demand by mislabelling domestic rubbish as packaging.PaperEuropean exports of waste paper rose from 1.2 million to 7.8 million tonnes between 1995 and 2005. Illegal exporters pass off contaminated waste as clean paper.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/britains-waste-now-its-coming-back-to-haunt-us-7789292.html
2:37 AM
सामाजिक संगठनो का विष मुक्त भविष्य के लिए वैश्विक आम वक्तव्य
Written By Krishna on Monday, May 28, 2012 | 2:37 AM
सामाजिक संगठनो का विष मुक्त भविष्य के लिए वैश्विक आम वक्तव्य
हम, टोक्सीक्सवाच अलायंस, एक नागरिक समाज संगठन, विष मुक्त भविष्य के लिए वैश्विक अभियान में शामिल है जिससे जहरीले और खतरनाक रसायनों के जोखिम से अब कोई अपने स्वस्थ शरीर और पर्यावरण के अपने अधिकार से वंचित न हो और स्वस्थ और टिकाऊ आजीविका का आनंद ले सके. स्वस्थ आजीविका के तहत सुरक्षित समुदायों, कार्यस्थलों और वातावरण का विषाक्त खतरों से मुक्त होना है वर्तमान और भविष्य की पीढ़ियों का अधिकार है. कि लोगों को, के लिए और यह टिकाऊ भविष्य में हम दुनिया और हमारे बच्चों के लिए चाहते है.
हम मानते है कि पिछली और भविष्य की पीढ़ियों के बीच बराबरी के लिए जिम्मेवार है और खतरनाक रसायनों से बच्चो के लिए खतरा से सुरक्षा और सुरक्षित वातावरण सभी बच्चों का अधिकार है.
हम मानते हैं कि है कि विश्व आर्थिक प्रणाली में उपभोग, उत्पादन, संसाधनों के दोहन और निपटान पर हावी अवहणीय शैली में मौलिक परिवर्तन की जरूरत है. हम आगे समझते हैं कि जिस तरह से डिजाइन, उपयोग और निपटान सहित 'रसायनों का प्रबंधन समाज में किया जाता है उसमे मौलिक परिवर्तन की जरूरत है'.i हम समझते है कि वर्तमान में कीटनाशकों का उत्पादन और उपयोग में और औद्योगिक रसायनों के बड़े बहुमत का अभी भी पर्याप्त रूप से मानव स्वास्थ्य और पर्यावरण पर उनके प्रभाव के लिए परीक्षण नहीं किया गया है. विष विज्ञान के चिंताओं के क्षेत्र में हारमोन प्रणाली का विघटन, अनुवांशिकीय बदलाव (epigenetics), निरंतर विष खुराक का जोखिम और कई रसायनों के मिश्रण के प्रभाव चुनौती के रूप में उभरे है.
इसके अलावा, हम समझते हैं कि विषाक्त उपभोक्ता उत्पादों और कचरे के अलावा कैंसर, हृदय रोग, प्रजनन और विकासात्मक विकारों, अस्थमा, आत्मकेंद्रित, मधुमेह, अपक्षयी रोग और मानसिक स्वास्थ्य बीमारियों जैसे रोगों का हवा, पानी, मिट्टी, और भोजन के प्रदुषण से रिश्ता है. ii
हम जोर देकर कहते है कि लोगों के स्वस्थ आजीविका और टिकाऊ और वहणीय भविष्य पर कार्यस्थल, स्कूल, कृषि क्षेत्रों में और घर में जहरीले रसायनों से संलिप्तता से जोखिम पैदा गया है जिससे अपरिवर्तनीय क्षति जैसे कैंसर, जन्म दोष, जन्मजात दोष, बिगड़ा शिशु विकास, बाधित शारीरिक प्रतिरक्षा प्रणाली, न्यूरोटॉक्सिसीटी और चयापचय हानि हो रहा है. हम चिंतित है कि रासायनिक जैवसंचयन लंबे समय तक मानव शरीर में रहते हैं और माँ से बच्चे को गर्भाशय और स्तन के दूध के माध्यम से पहुच सकते है, और आगे रक्त मस्तिष्क बाधा पार कर बच्चे के केंद्रीय तंत्रिका तंत्र के विकास को प्रभावित करते है.
हम २००९ में जारी अंतर्राष्ट्रीय रसायन प्रबंधन (SAICM) से जुड़े सामाजिक संगठनो के वक्तव्य और सतत विकास पर विश्व शिखर सम्मेलन के २०२० के लक्ष्य का अनुमोदन करते है और स्थापित करते है कि 'एक प्रदूषण मुक्त दुनिया में रहना एक बुनियादी मानव अधिकार है और जीवन का मौलिक अधिकार जहरीले रसायनों के प्रभाव खतरनाक अपशिष्ट, और दूषित पीने के पानी और भोजन से जोखिम में है. iii
हम स्वीकार करते हैं कि मजबूत रासायनिक प्रबंधन में सुधार 'गरीबी और बीमारी के उन्मूलन सहित सतत विकास को प्राप्त करने के लिए आवश्यक है और मानव स्वास्थ्य और पर्यावरण में सुधार और सभी स्तरों का विकास और जीवन स्तर के रखरखाव और बढोतरी' iv सहस्राब्दि विकास लक्ष्यों के साथ संगत है.
हम जोर देकर कहते है कि नियामक द्वारा रसायनों से सुरक्षा के लिए सार्थक और सक्रिय भागीदारी सहित नागरिक समाज के सभी क्षेत्रों, विशेष रूप से महिलाओं, कर्मचारियों और स्वदेशी लोगों को मुफ्त पूर्व सूचित सहमति जरुरी है और हम सही रासायनिक सुरक्षा से संबंधित निर्णय लेने, के लिए रसायनों के जीवन चक्र के दौरान मानव स्वास्थ्य और पर्यावरण के लिए जो जोखिम है उसके बारे में ज्ञान की तत्काल जरूरत को' v पहचानते है.
हम स्वीकार करते हैं कि 3.000.000.000.000 अमरीकी डॉलर से अधिक की वार्षिक बिक्री वाले रासायनिक उद्योग के वैश्विक अर्थव्यवस्था में महत्वपूर्ण भूमिका है. हम चिंतित है कि दुनिया के रासायनिक उत्पादन के तेजी से बढ़ता शेयर विकासशील देशो में स्थान्तरित हो रहा है जहा रसायनों के प्रबंधन और नियमन कि सीमित क्षमता है और मानव स्वास्थ्य और पर्यावरण के लिए जोखिम को कम करने वाले अनुपालन तंत्र नहीं है.
हम गौर करते है कि लगभग सभी देश उपभोक्ता उत्पादों में निहित खतरनाक पदार्थों और नैनो सामग्री सहित कृत्रिम कीटनाशकों और औद्योगिक रसायन के उपयोग में वृद्धि कर रहे हैं. फिर भी, अधिकतर देशों में और विशेष रूप से विकासशील और संक्रमण वाले अर्थव्यवस्था में पर्याप्त बुनियादी ढांचे या संसाधन नहीं है जिससे की कीटनाशकों, औद्योगिक रसायन और उनके कचरे का मजबूत प्रबंधन सुनिश्चित हो सके. विशेष रूप से इलेक्ट्रॉनिक कचरे की बढ़ती मात्रा, खनन और पेट्रोलियम और गैस निष्कर्षण से बढ़ते ठोस और तरल कचरे, अप्रचलित कीटनाशकों और उनके कंटेनर, और खतरनाक औद्योगिक कचरा, हमारे अतीत की विषाक्त विरासत है.
और हम समझते हैं रसायनों पर निष्क्रियता की कीमत पूरी तरह निर्धारित नहीं है लेकिन है बहुत ज्यादा. हम विश्व स्वास्थ्य संगठन के कमतर अनुमान का संज्ञान जिसके मुताबिक प्रति वर्ष 12 लाख लोगों की मृत्यु और रोग की वैश्विक बोझ का कम से कम 1.7 प्रतिशत के लिए औद्योगिक और कृषि में प्रयोग होने वाले रसायन जिम्मेवार है. vi
इन लोगों की मृत्यु और रोग की खासी कीमत व्यक्तियों, समुदायों और देशो (विशेष रूप से गरीब और सबसे कमजोर) को झेलना पड़ता है इसे रासायनिक उत्पादकों द्वारा वहन नहीं किया जा रहा है या न ही उत्पादन आपूर्ति श्रृंखला के निचले पर साझा किया जा रहा है. इसके बजाय, वे विकासशील और संक्रमण के देशों पर एक अस्वीकार्य बोझ थोप रहे है.
जवाब में हम:
जहरीले रसायनों से प्रभावित श्रमिकों, महिलाओं और बच्चों के संघर्ष स्वदेशी लोगों, किसान किसानों, उपभोक्ताओं और समुदायों के मांग और संघर्ष का जो की उनके स्वस्थ वातावरण, श्रमिक सुरक्षा, उचित मुआवजा, चिकित्सा उपचार, पर्यावरण सम्बन्धी न्याय और जानने के अधिकार के प्रयोग से जुडा है का समर्थन करते है.
हम अपने संगठनों को संकल्प देते है कि हम अपने शरीर में विषैले रसायनों की बढ़ती ज्वार को रोकने के लिए, जो हमारे बच्चों, उनकी अगली पीढ़ी और उनके बाद कि पीढ़ी तक पहुचती है और उनके स्वास्थ्य और वहन करने कि क्षमता को जोखिम में डालते है.
सिद्धांत है कि हमारे भविष्य विष मुक्त मिशन पिन के लिए समिति: एहतियात, सही पता करने के लिए, कोई डेटा नहीं - नहीं, बाजार और खतरनाक पदार्थों के प्रतिस्थापन उन्मूलन, प्रदूषक देता है और विस्तारित निर्माता जिम्मेदारी है.
मान्यता है कि एक टिकाऊ भविष्य को प्राप्त करने के लिए, रासायनिक उद्योग की एक गहरा परिवर्तन मौलिक है और जहां श्रमिकों की सुरक्षा, स्वदेशी लोगों, सामुदायिक स्वास्थ्य और पर्यावरण के लाभ के लिए नहीं बलिदान कर रहे हैं.
तनाव कि एक स्थायी और जिम्मेदार रासायनिक उद्योग सभी प्रदूषण को नष्ट करने का लक्ष्य है और उनके जीवन चक्र भर में अपने उत्पादों की सही कीमत का भुगतान करना होगा. लागत internalization के तंत्र और राजकोषीय सुधारों, जो सही मायने में पारिस्थितिक मूल्यों को प्रतिबिंबित इस में सहायता और ध्वनि रसायन प्रबंधन नीति, मूल्यांकन, निगरानी और प्रथाओं के विकास के लिए आवश्यक संसाधन उपलब्ध कराने में मदद कर सकते हैं.
हरी डिजाइन और हरे रंग रसायन शास्त्र का समर्थन, स्पष्ट मापदंड और समर्थन नीतियों है कि एक स्थायी रासायनिक उद्योग में निवेश को प्रोत्साहित करने के लिए unsustainable रसायनों के उत्पादन बाहर चरण मदद करने के लिए पूरी तरह से एक जीवन चक्र दृष्टिकोण का उपयोग कर सभी नई प्रौद्योगिकियों से पहले अपने बाजार में प्रवेश करने के लिए आकलन है, और अनुचित स्वास्थ्य, पर्यावरण और आर्थिक बोझ से विकासशील और संक्रमण देशों की रक्षा.
मान्यता है कि एक टिकाऊ भविष्य को प्राप्त करने के लिए जिसमें हर जैव विविधता आधारित पारिस्थितिक कृषि के लिए सुरक्षित, पौष्टिक भोजन, कृषि का एक गहरा परिवर्तन के लिए उपयोग किया है मौलिक है.
उपभोक्ताओं के लिए विश्व स्तर पर अनियमित विषाक्त उत्पाद सामग्री से उत्पन्न खतरों को देखते हुए, हम समर्थन और पालने के लिए एहतियाती पालने के कार्यान्वयन को बढ़ावा देने, जीवन चक्र उत्पाद के रूप में के रूप में अच्छी तरह से डिजाइन तीसरे पक्ष के प्रमाणीकरण के साथ अधिमानतः हरी खरीद नीतियों, दृष्टिकोण, ताकि जहरीले रसायनों उपभोक्ता उत्पादों और आगामी कचरे में उनके रास्ता नहीं मिल रहा, और हम उत्पादों में और कार्यस्थल में खतरनाक पदार्थों के अनिवार्य लेबलिंग के लिए कहते हैं, सभी लोगों और पर्यावरण की सुरक्षा सुनिश्चित करने.
आपूर्ति श्रृंखला भर में और जनता के साथ पूरा रासायनिक और सामग्री घटक पारदर्शिता और जानकारी का उपयोग समर्थन.
खतरनाक, अत्यधिक खतरनाक कीटनाशकों, लगातार bioaccumulative विषाक्त पदार्थों (PBTs), बहुत लगातार और बहुत bioaccumulative पदार्थ (vPvBs), genotoxins carcinogens,, रसायन प्रजनन, प्रतिरक्षा और नर्वस सिस्टम, endocrine को प्रभावित करने सहित असहनीय रसायनों के एक वैश्विक चरण बाहर प्राप्त करने के काम disruptors, पदार्थ है कि लंबी दूरी के परिवहन से गुजरना, पारा, कैडमियम और सीसा और खतरनाक nanomaterials के रूप में विषाक्त धातुओं. एक वैश्विक चरण बाहर आवश्यक है क्रम में करने के लिए एक देश को बेच दिया है या छोड़ दिया जा रहा है कि रसायनों की ध्वनि प्रबंधन को लागू करने की क्षमता नहीं है उन देशों में दूसरे में विशेष रूप से, से प्रतिबंध लगा दिया और प्रतिबंधित रसायनों से बचने.
अपने आप को प्रतिबद्ध है और सरकारों, गैर सरकारी संगठनों, व्यापार, निजी क्षेत्र के संस्थानों, शिक्षा, अंतरराष्ट्रीय संगठनों, मीडिया और दूसरों सहित सभी हितधारकों पर कॉल करने के लिए एक साथ काम करने के लिए तत्काल सुधार और मूल्यांकन रसायन, विनियमन और प्रबंधन अंतरराष्ट्रीय, क्षेत्रीय और के रूप में घरेलू इतना अनुरूप सभी के लिए एक विषाक्त मुक्त भविष्य को प्राप्त है. हम उच्चतम राजनीतिक स्तर और आग्रह करता हूं कि सरकारों और हितधारकों को मौलिक SAICM और बहुपक्षीय और रासायनिक अपशिष्ट समझौतों के कार्यान्वयन के लिए वित्तीय सहायता में वृद्धि पर SAICM सुपुर्दगी के लिए कहते हैं.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Epigenetics डीएनए अनुक्रम में परिवर्तन के अलावा अन्य तंत्र की वजह से जीन अभिव्यक्ति में परिवर्तन आनुवंशिक अध्ययन है. एक epigenetic विशेषता टिकाऊपन से विरासत में मिला डीएनए अनुक्रम में परिवर्तन के बिना एक गुणसूत्र में परिवर्तन से उत्पन्न phenotype है. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/04/090401181447.htm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[मैं] पैरा 7 अंतर्राष्ट्रीय रसायन प्रबंधन पर दुबई घोषणा, अंतर्राष्ट्रीय रसायन प्रबंधन दुबई, 2006 http://www.saicm.org सामरिक दृष्टिकोण
[द्वितीय] डब्ल्यूएचओ मीडिया सभी रोग के लगभग एक चौथाई पर्यावरण जोखिम की वजह से 16 जून 2006 रिलीज | http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2006/pr32/en/index.html पर उपलब्ध जिनेवा
[III] प्रेस विज्ञप्ति, 27 अप्रैल 2001 प्रदूषण मुक्त विश्व में रहते हैं एक बुनियादी मानव अधिकार http://www.grida.no/news/press/2150.aspx पर उपलब्ध है
[Iv] पैरा 1 दुबई घोषणा
[V] पैरा 21 दुबई घोषणा
[Vi] ए. , Pruess - Ustun सी. विकर्स, पी. Haefliger, और आर Bertollini के नोंस और रसायन के कारण रोग के बोझ पर अननोंस: एक व्यवस्थित की समीक्षा, पर्यावरणीय स्वास्थ्य , 10: 9, 2011.
दुबई में 6 फरवरी, 2006 पर रसायन मैनेजमैंट (ICCM.) पर अंतर्राष्ट्रीय सम्मेलन, संयुक्त अरब अमीरात,
English Version
NGO/CSO Global Common Statement for a Toxics-Free Future
We, ToxicsWatch Allaince, a New Delhi based civil society organization, join in the global campaign for a toxics-free future where exposure to toxic and hazardous chemicals is no longer a source of harm and where people have the right to enjoy healthy and sustainable green Livelihoods That Their bodies do not harm or the environment. Green Livelihoods encompass the right to safe and secure communities and Workplaces That Are free from toxic threats to people, surrounding environments and to future generations. This is the sustainable future we want for the world and our children.
We further affirm our obligation to intergenerational equity and the protection of all children’s right to a safe environment, recognising their unique vulnerability to hazardous chemicals.
We recognize that fundamental changes are needed in the unsustainable patterns of consumption, production, resource extraction and disposal that dominate the world economic system. We further, recognize that ‘fundamental changes are needed in the way that societies manage chemicals,’ [i],including their design, use and ‘end of life.’ We note that the large majority of the pesticides and industrial chemicals currently in production and use have still not been adequately tested for their impact on human health and the environment, particularly in the area of emerging concerns that challenge the central dogma of toxicology such as endocrine disruption, epigenetics[1], ongoing low dose exposures, and the impacts of chemicals mixtures.
Furthermore, we recognize that diseases such as cancer, heart disease, reproductive and developmental disorders, asthma, autism, diabetes, degenerative diseases and mental health illnesses have been shown to have links to the pollution of air, water, soil and food, [ii] as well as toxic consumer products and wastes.
We stress that peoples’ right to green livelihood and a sustainable future are being affected by exposure to toxic chemicals in the workplace, schools, agricultural areas and in the home, and that this may cause serious and irreversible damage such as cancer, birth defects, impaired development, negative impacts in the immune system, neurotoxicity and metabolic impairment. We stress with concern that persistent and bioaccumulative chemicals remain in the human body long after exposure and can be passed from mother to baby, in utero and via breast milk, and further cross the blood brain barrier to affect a child’s central nervous system and its development.
We uphold the 2009 SAICM NGO Global Statement and the World Summit on Sustainable Development’s 2020 goal and affirm that ‘living in a pollution-free world is a basic human right’ and that the ‘fundamental right to life is threatened by exposures to toxic chemicals, hazardous wastes, and contaminated drinking water and food.’ [iii]
We acknowledge that the sound management of chemicals including much needed chemical reform is ‘essential to achieving sustainable development, including the eradication of poverty and disease, the improvement of human health and the environment and the elevation and maintenance of the standard of living in countries at all levels of development,’[iv] consistent with the Millennium Development Goals.
We stress that meaningful and active participation including the right to free, prior and informed consent by all sectors of civil society, particularly women, workers and indigenous peoples, is essential in regulatory decision-making related to chemical safety, and recognise the urgent need for ‘information and knowledge on chemicals throughout their life cycle, including the risks that they pose to human health and the environment;’[v]
We acknowledge that the chemical industry plays a significant role in the global economy with annual sales of over 3,000,000,000,000 U.S. dollars. We note with concern that a steadily increasing share of the world’s chemical production is shifting to developing and transition countries with limited capacity to manage and regulate these operations and without the compliance mechanisms to mitigate risks to human health and the environment.
We note that almost all countries are increasing their use of synthetic pesticides and industrial chemicals, including hazardous substances and nanomaterials contained in consumer products. Yet, the majority of countries especially developing and or those with economies in transition do not have adequate infrastructure or resources to ensure the sound management of pesticides, industrial chemicals and their subsequent wastes. This is particularly so for the escalating quantities of electronic wastes; the ever increasing solid and liquid wastes from mining and petroleum and gas extraction; obsolete pesticides and their containers; and the vast hazardous industrial waste stockpiles – the toxic legacy of our past.
And we recognise the cost of inaction on chemicals is not fully quantified but substantial. We take note of the World Health Organization’s conservative estimate that industrial and agricultural chemicals and acute chemical poisonings are responsible for 1.2 million deaths per year and at least 1.7 percent of the global burden of disease.[vi] The significant costs that these deaths and disease place on individuals, communities and nations (particularly their poor and most vulnerable) are not borne by the chemical producers or shared down the production supply chains. Instead, they impose an unacceptable burden on developing and transition countries.
In response, we:
Support the demands and struggles of workers, women and children, indigenous peoples, peasant farmers, consumers and communities affected by toxic chemicals in their exercise of their rights for a healthy environment, worker protection, right to know, fair compensation, medical treatment and environmental justice.
Commit our organizations to curb the rising tide of toxic chemicals building up in our bodies, and those of our children, which threaten the health and sustainability of the next generation and beyond.
Commit to the principles that underpin our toxics-free future mission: precaution, right to know, no data – no market, substitution and elimination of hazardous substances, polluter pays and extended producer responsibility.
Recognize that to achieve a sustainable future, a profound transformation of the chemical industry is fundamental and where the protection of workers, indigenous peoples, community health and the environment are not sacrificed to profit.
Stress that a sustainable and responsible chemical industry must have the goal of eliminating all pollution and pay the true cost of its products throughout their life cycles. Cost internalization mechanisms and fiscal reforms, which truly reflect ecological values can assist in this and help provide the resources needed for the development of sound chemicals management policy, assessment, monitoring and practices.
Support clear criteria and policies that encourage investments in a sustainable chemical industry to help phase out the production of unsustainable chemicals; to support green design and green chemistry; to fully assess using a life cycle approach all new technologies prior to their entering the market, and to protect developing and transition countries from unfair health, environmental and economic burdens.
Recognize that to achieve a sustainable future in which everyone can have access to safe, nutritious food, a profound transformation of agriculture to biodiversity-based ecological agriculture is fundamental.
Noting the threats posed to consumers globally from unregulated toxic product ingredients, we support and promote the implementation of precautionary, cradle to cradle, life cycle approaches to product design as well as green procurement policies, preferably with third party certification, so that toxic chemicals do not find their way into consumer products and the ensuing wastes; and we call for mandatory labeling of hazardous substances in products and in the workplace, ensuring the protection of all people and the environment.
Support full chemical and material ingredient transparency and information access throughout supply chains and with the public.
Work to achieve a global phase-out of hazardous, unmanageable chemicals including highly hazardous pesticides, persistent bioaccumulative toxins (PBTs), very persistent and very bioaccumulative substances (vPvBs), genotoxins, carcinogens, chemicals affecting reproduction, the immune and nervous systems, endocrine disruptors, substances that undergo long-range transport, toxic metals such as mercury, cadmium and lead and hazardous nanomaterials. A global phase out is essential in order to avoid banned and restricted chemicals from one country being sold or dumped in another, particularly in those countries that do not have the capacity to enforce sound management of chemicals.
Commit ourselves and call upon all stakeholders including governments, non governmental organisations, businesses, private sector institutions, academia, intergovernmental organisations, media and others to work together to urgently reform and harmonise chemicals assessment, regulation and management internationally, regionally and domestically so as to achieve a toxic free future for all. We call for a recommitment to SAICM at the highest political level and urge governments and stakeholders to fundamentally increase financial support to the implementation of SAICM and the multilateral chemical and waste agreements.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Epigenetics is the study of heritable alterations in gene expression caused by mechanisms other than changes in DNA sequence. An epigenetic trait is a stably inherited phenotype resulting from changes in a chromosome without alterations in the DNA sequence. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/04/090401181447.htm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[i] Para 7 Dubai Declaration on International Chemicals Management, Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management Dubai, 2006 http://www.saicm.org
[ii] WHO Media Release ‘Almost a quarter of all disease caused by environmental exposure’ 16 JUNE 2006 | GENEVA Available at http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2006/pr32/en/index.html
[iii] Press Release, 27 Apr 2001 ‘Living In A Pollution-free World A Basic Human Right’ Available at http://www.grida.no/news/press/2150.aspx
[Iv] Para 1 Dubai Declaration
[V] The 21 Dubai Declaration
[vi] A. Pruess-Ustun, C. Vickers, P. Haefliger, and R. Bertollini, “Knowns and Unknowns on the Burden of Disease due to Chemicals: A Systematic Review”, Environmental Health, 10: 9, 2011.
हम, टोक्सीक्सवाच अलायंस, एक नागरिक समाज संगठन, विष मुक्त भविष्य के लिए वैश्विक अभियान में शामिल है जिससे जहरीले और खतरनाक रसायनों के जोखिम से अब कोई अपने स्वस्थ शरीर और पर्यावरण के अपने अधिकार से वंचित न हो और स्वस्थ और टिकाऊ आजीविका का आनंद ले सके. स्वस्थ आजीविका के तहत सुरक्षित समुदायों, कार्यस्थलों और वातावरण का विषाक्त खतरों से मुक्त होना है वर्तमान और भविष्य की पीढ़ियों का अधिकार है. कि लोगों को, के लिए और यह टिकाऊ भविष्य में हम दुनिया और हमारे बच्चों के लिए चाहते है.
हम मानते है कि पिछली और भविष्य की पीढ़ियों के बीच बराबरी के लिए जिम्मेवार है और खतरनाक रसायनों से बच्चो के लिए खतरा से सुरक्षा और सुरक्षित वातावरण सभी बच्चों का अधिकार है.
हम मानते हैं कि है कि विश्व आर्थिक प्रणाली में उपभोग, उत्पादन, संसाधनों के दोहन और निपटान पर हावी अवहणीय शैली में मौलिक परिवर्तन की जरूरत है. हम आगे समझते हैं कि जिस तरह से डिजाइन, उपयोग और निपटान सहित 'रसायनों का प्रबंधन समाज में किया जाता है उसमे मौलिक परिवर्तन की जरूरत है'.i हम समझते है कि वर्तमान में कीटनाशकों का उत्पादन और उपयोग में और औद्योगिक रसायनों के बड़े बहुमत का अभी भी पर्याप्त रूप से मानव स्वास्थ्य और पर्यावरण पर उनके प्रभाव के लिए परीक्षण नहीं किया गया है. विष विज्ञान के चिंताओं के क्षेत्र में हारमोन प्रणाली का विघटन, अनुवांशिकीय बदलाव (epigenetics), निरंतर विष खुराक का जोखिम और कई रसायनों के मिश्रण के प्रभाव चुनौती के रूप में उभरे है.
इसके अलावा, हम समझते हैं कि विषाक्त उपभोक्ता उत्पादों और कचरे के अलावा कैंसर, हृदय रोग, प्रजनन और विकासात्मक विकारों, अस्थमा, आत्मकेंद्रित, मधुमेह, अपक्षयी रोग और मानसिक स्वास्थ्य बीमारियों जैसे रोगों का हवा, पानी, मिट्टी, और भोजन के प्रदुषण से रिश्ता है. ii
हम जोर देकर कहते है कि लोगों के स्वस्थ आजीविका और टिकाऊ और वहणीय भविष्य पर कार्यस्थल, स्कूल, कृषि क्षेत्रों में और घर में जहरीले रसायनों से संलिप्तता से जोखिम पैदा गया है जिससे अपरिवर्तनीय क्षति जैसे कैंसर, जन्म दोष, जन्मजात दोष, बिगड़ा शिशु विकास, बाधित शारीरिक प्रतिरक्षा प्रणाली, न्यूरोटॉक्सिसीटी और चयापचय हानि हो रहा है. हम चिंतित है कि रासायनिक जैवसंचयन लंबे समय तक मानव शरीर में रहते हैं और माँ से बच्चे को गर्भाशय और स्तन के दूध के माध्यम से पहुच सकते है, और आगे रक्त मस्तिष्क बाधा पार कर बच्चे के केंद्रीय तंत्रिका तंत्र के विकास को प्रभावित करते है.
हम २००९ में जारी अंतर्राष्ट्रीय रसायन प्रबंधन (SAICM) से जुड़े सामाजिक संगठनो के वक्तव्य और सतत विकास पर विश्व शिखर सम्मेलन के २०२० के लक्ष्य का अनुमोदन करते है और स्थापित करते है कि 'एक प्रदूषण मुक्त दुनिया में रहना एक बुनियादी मानव अधिकार है और जीवन का मौलिक अधिकार जहरीले रसायनों के प्रभाव खतरनाक अपशिष्ट, और दूषित पीने के पानी और भोजन से जोखिम में है. iii
हम स्वीकार करते हैं कि मजबूत रासायनिक प्रबंधन में सुधार 'गरीबी और बीमारी के उन्मूलन सहित सतत विकास को प्राप्त करने के लिए आवश्यक है और मानव स्वास्थ्य और पर्यावरण में सुधार और सभी स्तरों का विकास और जीवन स्तर के रखरखाव और बढोतरी' iv सहस्राब्दि विकास लक्ष्यों के साथ संगत है.
हम जोर देकर कहते है कि नियामक द्वारा रसायनों से सुरक्षा के लिए सार्थक और सक्रिय भागीदारी सहित नागरिक समाज के सभी क्षेत्रों, विशेष रूप से महिलाओं, कर्मचारियों और स्वदेशी लोगों को मुफ्त पूर्व सूचित सहमति जरुरी है और हम सही रासायनिक सुरक्षा से संबंधित निर्णय लेने, के लिए रसायनों के जीवन चक्र के दौरान मानव स्वास्थ्य और पर्यावरण के लिए जो जोखिम है उसके बारे में ज्ञान की तत्काल जरूरत को' v पहचानते है.
हम स्वीकार करते हैं कि 3.000.000.000.000 अमरीकी डॉलर से अधिक की वार्षिक बिक्री वाले रासायनिक उद्योग के वैश्विक अर्थव्यवस्था में महत्वपूर्ण भूमिका है. हम चिंतित है कि दुनिया के रासायनिक उत्पादन के तेजी से बढ़ता शेयर विकासशील देशो में स्थान्तरित हो रहा है जहा रसायनों के प्रबंधन और नियमन कि सीमित क्षमता है और मानव स्वास्थ्य और पर्यावरण के लिए जोखिम को कम करने वाले अनुपालन तंत्र नहीं है.
हम गौर करते है कि लगभग सभी देश उपभोक्ता उत्पादों में निहित खतरनाक पदार्थों और नैनो सामग्री सहित कृत्रिम कीटनाशकों और औद्योगिक रसायन के उपयोग में वृद्धि कर रहे हैं. फिर भी, अधिकतर देशों में और विशेष रूप से विकासशील और संक्रमण वाले अर्थव्यवस्था में पर्याप्त बुनियादी ढांचे या संसाधन नहीं है जिससे की कीटनाशकों, औद्योगिक रसायन और उनके कचरे का मजबूत प्रबंधन सुनिश्चित हो सके. विशेष रूप से इलेक्ट्रॉनिक कचरे की बढ़ती मात्रा, खनन और पेट्रोलियम और गैस निष्कर्षण से बढ़ते ठोस और तरल कचरे, अप्रचलित कीटनाशकों और उनके कंटेनर, और खतरनाक औद्योगिक कचरा, हमारे अतीत की विषाक्त विरासत है.
और हम समझते हैं रसायनों पर निष्क्रियता की कीमत पूरी तरह निर्धारित नहीं है लेकिन है बहुत ज्यादा. हम विश्व स्वास्थ्य संगठन के कमतर अनुमान का संज्ञान जिसके मुताबिक प्रति वर्ष 12 लाख लोगों की मृत्यु और रोग की वैश्विक बोझ का कम से कम 1.7 प्रतिशत के लिए औद्योगिक और कृषि में प्रयोग होने वाले रसायन जिम्मेवार है. vi
इन लोगों की मृत्यु और रोग की खासी कीमत व्यक्तियों, समुदायों और देशो (विशेष रूप से गरीब और सबसे कमजोर) को झेलना पड़ता है इसे रासायनिक उत्पादकों द्वारा वहन नहीं किया जा रहा है या न ही उत्पादन आपूर्ति श्रृंखला के निचले पर साझा किया जा रहा है. इसके बजाय, वे विकासशील और संक्रमण के देशों पर एक अस्वीकार्य बोझ थोप रहे है.
जवाब में हम:
जहरीले रसायनों से प्रभावित श्रमिकों, महिलाओं और बच्चों के संघर्ष स्वदेशी लोगों, किसान किसानों, उपभोक्ताओं और समुदायों के मांग और संघर्ष का जो की उनके स्वस्थ वातावरण, श्रमिक सुरक्षा, उचित मुआवजा, चिकित्सा उपचार, पर्यावरण सम्बन्धी न्याय और जानने के अधिकार के प्रयोग से जुडा है का समर्थन करते है.
हम अपने संगठनों को संकल्प देते है कि हम अपने शरीर में विषैले रसायनों की बढ़ती ज्वार को रोकने के लिए, जो हमारे बच्चों, उनकी अगली पीढ़ी और उनके बाद कि पीढ़ी तक पहुचती है और उनके स्वास्थ्य और वहन करने कि क्षमता को जोखिम में डालते है.
सिद्धांत है कि हमारे भविष्य विष मुक्त मिशन पिन के लिए समिति: एहतियात, सही पता करने के लिए, कोई डेटा नहीं - नहीं, बाजार और खतरनाक पदार्थों के प्रतिस्थापन उन्मूलन, प्रदूषक देता है और विस्तारित निर्माता जिम्मेदारी है.
मान्यता है कि एक टिकाऊ भविष्य को प्राप्त करने के लिए, रासायनिक उद्योग की एक गहरा परिवर्तन मौलिक है और जहां श्रमिकों की सुरक्षा, स्वदेशी लोगों, सामुदायिक स्वास्थ्य और पर्यावरण के लाभ के लिए नहीं बलिदान कर रहे हैं.
तनाव कि एक स्थायी और जिम्मेदार रासायनिक उद्योग सभी प्रदूषण को नष्ट करने का लक्ष्य है और उनके जीवन चक्र भर में अपने उत्पादों की सही कीमत का भुगतान करना होगा. लागत internalization के तंत्र और राजकोषीय सुधारों, जो सही मायने में पारिस्थितिक मूल्यों को प्रतिबिंबित इस में सहायता और ध्वनि रसायन प्रबंधन नीति, मूल्यांकन, निगरानी और प्रथाओं के विकास के लिए आवश्यक संसाधन उपलब्ध कराने में मदद कर सकते हैं.
हरी डिजाइन और हरे रंग रसायन शास्त्र का समर्थन, स्पष्ट मापदंड और समर्थन नीतियों है कि एक स्थायी रासायनिक उद्योग में निवेश को प्रोत्साहित करने के लिए unsustainable रसायनों के उत्पादन बाहर चरण मदद करने के लिए पूरी तरह से एक जीवन चक्र दृष्टिकोण का उपयोग कर सभी नई प्रौद्योगिकियों से पहले अपने बाजार में प्रवेश करने के लिए आकलन है, और अनुचित स्वास्थ्य, पर्यावरण और आर्थिक बोझ से विकासशील और संक्रमण देशों की रक्षा.
मान्यता है कि एक टिकाऊ भविष्य को प्राप्त करने के लिए जिसमें हर जैव विविधता आधारित पारिस्थितिक कृषि के लिए सुरक्षित, पौष्टिक भोजन, कृषि का एक गहरा परिवर्तन के लिए उपयोग किया है मौलिक है.
उपभोक्ताओं के लिए विश्व स्तर पर अनियमित विषाक्त उत्पाद सामग्री से उत्पन्न खतरों को देखते हुए, हम समर्थन और पालने के लिए एहतियाती पालने के कार्यान्वयन को बढ़ावा देने, जीवन चक्र उत्पाद के रूप में के रूप में अच्छी तरह से डिजाइन तीसरे पक्ष के प्रमाणीकरण के साथ अधिमानतः हरी खरीद नीतियों, दृष्टिकोण, ताकि जहरीले रसायनों उपभोक्ता उत्पादों और आगामी कचरे में उनके रास्ता नहीं मिल रहा, और हम उत्पादों में और कार्यस्थल में खतरनाक पदार्थों के अनिवार्य लेबलिंग के लिए कहते हैं, सभी लोगों और पर्यावरण की सुरक्षा सुनिश्चित करने.
आपूर्ति श्रृंखला भर में और जनता के साथ पूरा रासायनिक और सामग्री घटक पारदर्शिता और जानकारी का उपयोग समर्थन.
खतरनाक, अत्यधिक खतरनाक कीटनाशकों, लगातार bioaccumulative विषाक्त पदार्थों (PBTs), बहुत लगातार और बहुत bioaccumulative पदार्थ (vPvBs), genotoxins carcinogens,, रसायन प्रजनन, प्रतिरक्षा और नर्वस सिस्टम, endocrine को प्रभावित करने सहित असहनीय रसायनों के एक वैश्विक चरण बाहर प्राप्त करने के काम disruptors, पदार्थ है कि लंबी दूरी के परिवहन से गुजरना, पारा, कैडमियम और सीसा और खतरनाक nanomaterials के रूप में विषाक्त धातुओं. एक वैश्विक चरण बाहर आवश्यक है क्रम में करने के लिए एक देश को बेच दिया है या छोड़ दिया जा रहा है कि रसायनों की ध्वनि प्रबंधन को लागू करने की क्षमता नहीं है उन देशों में दूसरे में विशेष रूप से, से प्रतिबंध लगा दिया और प्रतिबंधित रसायनों से बचने.
अपने आप को प्रतिबद्ध है और सरकारों, गैर सरकारी संगठनों, व्यापार, निजी क्षेत्र के संस्थानों, शिक्षा, अंतरराष्ट्रीय संगठनों, मीडिया और दूसरों सहित सभी हितधारकों पर कॉल करने के लिए एक साथ काम करने के लिए तत्काल सुधार और मूल्यांकन रसायन, विनियमन और प्रबंधन अंतरराष्ट्रीय, क्षेत्रीय और के रूप में घरेलू इतना अनुरूप सभी के लिए एक विषाक्त मुक्त भविष्य को प्राप्त है. हम उच्चतम राजनीतिक स्तर और आग्रह करता हूं कि सरकारों और हितधारकों को मौलिक SAICM और बहुपक्षीय और रासायनिक अपशिष्ट समझौतों के कार्यान्वयन के लिए वित्तीय सहायता में वृद्धि पर SAICM सुपुर्दगी के लिए कहते हैं.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Epigenetics डीएनए अनुक्रम में परिवर्तन के अलावा अन्य तंत्र की वजह से जीन अभिव्यक्ति में परिवर्तन आनुवंशिक अध्ययन है. एक epigenetic विशेषता टिकाऊपन से विरासत में मिला डीएनए अनुक्रम में परिवर्तन के बिना एक गुणसूत्र में परिवर्तन से उत्पन्न phenotype है. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/04/090401181447.htm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[मैं] पैरा 7 अंतर्राष्ट्रीय रसायन प्रबंधन पर दुबई घोषणा, अंतर्राष्ट्रीय रसायन प्रबंधन दुबई, 2006 http://www.saicm.org सामरिक दृष्टिकोण
[द्वितीय] डब्ल्यूएचओ मीडिया सभी रोग के लगभग एक चौथाई पर्यावरण जोखिम की वजह से 16 जून 2006 रिलीज | http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2006/pr32/en/index.html पर उपलब्ध जिनेवा
[III] प्रेस विज्ञप्ति, 27 अप्रैल 2001 प्रदूषण मुक्त विश्व में रहते हैं एक बुनियादी मानव अधिकार http://www.grida.no/news/press/2150.aspx पर उपलब्ध है
[Iv] पैरा 1 दुबई घोषणा
[V] पैरा 21 दुबई घोषणा
[Vi] ए. , Pruess - Ustun सी. विकर्स, पी. Haefliger, और आर Bertollini के नोंस और रसायन के कारण रोग के बोझ पर अननोंस: एक व्यवस्थित की समीक्षा, पर्यावरणीय स्वास्थ्य , 10: 9, 2011.
दुबई में 6 फरवरी, 2006 पर रसायन मैनेजमैंट (ICCM.) पर अंतर्राष्ट्रीय सम्मेलन, संयुक्त अरब अमीरात,
English Version
NGO/CSO Global Common Statement for a Toxics-Free Future
We, ToxicsWatch Allaince, a New Delhi based civil society organization, join in the global campaign for a toxics-free future where exposure to toxic and hazardous chemicals is no longer a source of harm and where people have the right to enjoy healthy and sustainable green Livelihoods That Their bodies do not harm or the environment. Green Livelihoods encompass the right to safe and secure communities and Workplaces That Are free from toxic threats to people, surrounding environments and to future generations. This is the sustainable future we want for the world and our children.
We further affirm our obligation to intergenerational equity and the protection of all children’s right to a safe environment, recognising their unique vulnerability to hazardous chemicals.
We recognize that fundamental changes are needed in the unsustainable patterns of consumption, production, resource extraction and disposal that dominate the world economic system. We further, recognize that ‘fundamental changes are needed in the way that societies manage chemicals,’ [i],including their design, use and ‘end of life.’ We note that the large majority of the pesticides and industrial chemicals currently in production and use have still not been adequately tested for their impact on human health and the environment, particularly in the area of emerging concerns that challenge the central dogma of toxicology such as endocrine disruption, epigenetics[1], ongoing low dose exposures, and the impacts of chemicals mixtures.
Furthermore, we recognize that diseases such as cancer, heart disease, reproductive and developmental disorders, asthma, autism, diabetes, degenerative diseases and mental health illnesses have been shown to have links to the pollution of air, water, soil and food, [ii] as well as toxic consumer products and wastes.
We stress that peoples’ right to green livelihood and a sustainable future are being affected by exposure to toxic chemicals in the workplace, schools, agricultural areas and in the home, and that this may cause serious and irreversible damage such as cancer, birth defects, impaired development, negative impacts in the immune system, neurotoxicity and metabolic impairment. We stress with concern that persistent and bioaccumulative chemicals remain in the human body long after exposure and can be passed from mother to baby, in utero and via breast milk, and further cross the blood brain barrier to affect a child’s central nervous system and its development.
We uphold the 2009 SAICM NGO Global Statement and the World Summit on Sustainable Development’s 2020 goal and affirm that ‘living in a pollution-free world is a basic human right’ and that the ‘fundamental right to life is threatened by exposures to toxic chemicals, hazardous wastes, and contaminated drinking water and food.’ [iii]
We acknowledge that the sound management of chemicals including much needed chemical reform is ‘essential to achieving sustainable development, including the eradication of poverty and disease, the improvement of human health and the environment and the elevation and maintenance of the standard of living in countries at all levels of development,’[iv] consistent with the Millennium Development Goals.
We stress that meaningful and active participation including the right to free, prior and informed consent by all sectors of civil society, particularly women, workers and indigenous peoples, is essential in regulatory decision-making related to chemical safety, and recognise the urgent need for ‘information and knowledge on chemicals throughout their life cycle, including the risks that they pose to human health and the environment;’[v]
We acknowledge that the chemical industry plays a significant role in the global economy with annual sales of over 3,000,000,000,000 U.S. dollars. We note with concern that a steadily increasing share of the world’s chemical production is shifting to developing and transition countries with limited capacity to manage and regulate these operations and without the compliance mechanisms to mitigate risks to human health and the environment.
We note that almost all countries are increasing their use of synthetic pesticides and industrial chemicals, including hazardous substances and nanomaterials contained in consumer products. Yet, the majority of countries especially developing and or those with economies in transition do not have adequate infrastructure or resources to ensure the sound management of pesticides, industrial chemicals and their subsequent wastes. This is particularly so for the escalating quantities of electronic wastes; the ever increasing solid and liquid wastes from mining and petroleum and gas extraction; obsolete pesticides and their containers; and the vast hazardous industrial waste stockpiles – the toxic legacy of our past.
And we recognise the cost of inaction on chemicals is not fully quantified but substantial. We take note of the World Health Organization’s conservative estimate that industrial and agricultural chemicals and acute chemical poisonings are responsible for 1.2 million deaths per year and at least 1.7 percent of the global burden of disease.[vi] The significant costs that these deaths and disease place on individuals, communities and nations (particularly their poor and most vulnerable) are not borne by the chemical producers or shared down the production supply chains. Instead, they impose an unacceptable burden on developing and transition countries.
In response, we:
Support the demands and struggles of workers, women and children, indigenous peoples, peasant farmers, consumers and communities affected by toxic chemicals in their exercise of their rights for a healthy environment, worker protection, right to know, fair compensation, medical treatment and environmental justice.
Commit our organizations to curb the rising tide of toxic chemicals building up in our bodies, and those of our children, which threaten the health and sustainability of the next generation and beyond.
Commit to the principles that underpin our toxics-free future mission: precaution, right to know, no data – no market, substitution and elimination of hazardous substances, polluter pays and extended producer responsibility.
Recognize that to achieve a sustainable future, a profound transformation of the chemical industry is fundamental and where the protection of workers, indigenous peoples, community health and the environment are not sacrificed to profit.
Stress that a sustainable and responsible chemical industry must have the goal of eliminating all pollution and pay the true cost of its products throughout their life cycles. Cost internalization mechanisms and fiscal reforms, which truly reflect ecological values can assist in this and help provide the resources needed for the development of sound chemicals management policy, assessment, monitoring and practices.
Support clear criteria and policies that encourage investments in a sustainable chemical industry to help phase out the production of unsustainable chemicals; to support green design and green chemistry; to fully assess using a life cycle approach all new technologies prior to their entering the market, and to protect developing and transition countries from unfair health, environmental and economic burdens.
Recognize that to achieve a sustainable future in which everyone can have access to safe, nutritious food, a profound transformation of agriculture to biodiversity-based ecological agriculture is fundamental.
Noting the threats posed to consumers globally from unregulated toxic product ingredients, we support and promote the implementation of precautionary, cradle to cradle, life cycle approaches to product design as well as green procurement policies, preferably with third party certification, so that toxic chemicals do not find their way into consumer products and the ensuing wastes; and we call for mandatory labeling of hazardous substances in products and in the workplace, ensuring the protection of all people and the environment.
Support full chemical and material ingredient transparency and information access throughout supply chains and with the public.
Work to achieve a global phase-out of hazardous, unmanageable chemicals including highly hazardous pesticides, persistent bioaccumulative toxins (PBTs), very persistent and very bioaccumulative substances (vPvBs), genotoxins, carcinogens, chemicals affecting reproduction, the immune and nervous systems, endocrine disruptors, substances that undergo long-range transport, toxic metals such as mercury, cadmium and lead and hazardous nanomaterials. A global phase out is essential in order to avoid banned and restricted chemicals from one country being sold or dumped in another, particularly in those countries that do not have the capacity to enforce sound management of chemicals.
Commit ourselves and call upon all stakeholders including governments, non governmental organisations, businesses, private sector institutions, academia, intergovernmental organisations, media and others to work together to urgently reform and harmonise chemicals assessment, regulation and management internationally, regionally and domestically so as to achieve a toxic free future for all. We call for a recommitment to SAICM at the highest political level and urge governments and stakeholders to fundamentally increase financial support to the implementation of SAICM and the multilateral chemical and waste agreements.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Epigenetics is the study of heritable alterations in gene expression caused by mechanisms other than changes in DNA sequence. An epigenetic trait is a stably inherited phenotype resulting from changes in a chromosome without alterations in the DNA sequence. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/04/090401181447.htm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[i] Para 7 Dubai Declaration on International Chemicals Management, Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management Dubai, 2006 http://www.saicm.org
[ii] WHO Media Release ‘Almost a quarter of all disease caused by environmental exposure’ 16 JUNE 2006 | GENEVA Available at http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2006/pr32/en/index.html
[iii] Press Release, 27 Apr 2001 ‘Living In A Pollution-free World A Basic Human Right’ Available at http://www.grida.no/news/press/2150.aspx
[Iv] Para 1 Dubai Declaration
[V] The 21 Dubai Declaration
[vi] A. Pruess-Ustun, C. Vickers, P. Haefliger, and R. Bertollini, “Knowns and Unknowns on the Burden of Disease due to Chemicals: A Systematic Review”, Environmental Health, 10: 9, 2011.
10:26 PM
Ban hazardous waste trade and entry of dead ships; comply with Basel Convention & re-examine new hazardous waste rules
Written By Krishna on Friday, May 25, 2012 | 10:26 PM
To
Shri Saurabh Chandra
Secretary
Union Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Government of India
New Delhi
Shri Pradeep K Sinha
Secretary
Union Minister of Shipping
Government of India
New Delhi
Dr.T Chatterjee, Secretary
Union Ministry of Environment & Forests
Government of India
New Delhi
Subject- Ban hazardous waste trade and entry of dead ships; comply with Basel Convention, re-examine subordinate legislations for hazardous waste management & trade
Sir,
This is with reference to the subordinate legislations for Hazardous Waste Management and Trade under Environment Protection Act, 1986, reply of Union Minister of Environment and Forests on May 21, 2012, reply of Union Minister of Shipping dated May 7, 2012 in the Parliament and Supreme Court’s order dated October 14, 2003 and February 29, 2012.
I submit that the Union Minister of Environment and Forests said, "Import of such (hazardous) wastes for disposal is not permitted. Import is permitted only for recycling or recovery or reuse with the permission of the Ministry of Environment and Forests and/or Directorate General of Foreign Trade", Union Commerce Ministry.
I submit that the Minister’s reply that defines hazardous waste as recyclable material appears to be an exercise in sophistry. Her reply and other relevant documents revealing the true nature of the goings on are attached.
I submit that the Union Government has been indicted by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Subordinate Legislation in its report “Non-implementation of oft-repeated recommendations of Committee on Subordinate Legislation, Lok Sabha by various Ministries” dated December 16, 2011. It appears that even Union Ministry of Environment & Forests, Union Ministry of Commerce & Industry and Union Ministry of Shipping are following the same path in the matter of subordinate legislations for Hazardous Waste Management and Trade under Environment Protection Act, 1986.
I submit that it is clear from the existing Hazardous Waste Rules (including the amendments till date) that it promotes trade in hazardous waste unmindful of the National Environment Policy that acknowledges how "Environmental factors are estimated as being responsible in some cases for nearly 20 percent of the burden of disease in India".
I wish to draw your attention towards the first three paragraphs of Supreme Court’s landmark order dated October 14, 2003. It reads: ‘Hazardous Wastes are highly toxic in nature. The industrialization has had the effect of generation of huge quantities of hazardous wastes. These and other side effects of development gave birth to principles of sustainable development so as to sustain industrial growth. The hazardous waste required adequate and proper control and handling. Efforts are required to be made to minimise it. In developing nations, there are additional problems including that of dumping of hazardous waste on their lands by some of the nations where cost of destruction of such waste is felt very heavy. These and other allied problems gave birth to Basel Convention. The key objectives of the Basel Convention are: “to minimize the generation of hazardous wastes in terms of quantity and hazardousness; to dispose of them as close to the source of generation as possible; to reduce the transboundary movement of hazardous wastes.”
2. Due to alarming situation created by dumping of hazardous waste, its generation and serious and irreversible damage, as a result thereof, to the environment, flora and fauna, health of animals and human beings, the petitioner approached this Court under Article 32 complaining of violation of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.
3. The petitioner has, inter alia, relied upon the Basel Convention. The Basel Convention was signed by India on 15th March, 1990 and ratified on 24th June, 1992.’
I submit that in a order dated February 29, 2012, Supreme Court held that the application which “has been filed by Dr. Claude Alvares, member of the Supreme Court Monitoring Committee, praying for an injunction to restrain Union of India from finalising of a Notification on hazardous wastes dated 28th September, 2007, has been rendered infructuous on account of the publication of the Hazardous Wastes (Management, Handling & Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2008. It appears that the prayer of Dr.Claude Alvares, a member of the SCMC did not get relief due to limitations of jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has used word ‘infructuous’ for SCMC’s application. In effect, Supreme Court was accepted the Rules as a fait accompli. Its dictionary meaning is ‘unfruitful’ and ‘fruitless’. I submit that these Rules will lead to the growth of bad and sour fruits that the present and future generation of Indians will be compelled to eat when hazardous waste and chemicals enter our food chain.
I also wish to draw your attention to the address of Shri M.N. Krishnamani, President, Supreme Court Bar Association on Law Day wherein he stated that “Most of the legal matters become infructuous after long period of pendency.” I submit that it is not a legal matter alone. The new Hazardous Waste Rules are a matter of forcing the present and future generation to accept the fate of living with contaminated blood in our veins and arteries.
I take this opportunity to appeal to both the ministries of Environment and Commerce to re-examine the Notification on hazardous wastes dated 28th September, 2007, which has been published as Hazardous Wastes(Management, Handling & Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2008, subsequent four amendments in the Rules, proposed fifth amendment in the Rules and the ‘Procedure for grant of approval for utilization of hazardous wastes as a supplementary resource or for energy recovery, or after processing under Rule 11 of Hazardous Wastes Management Rules, 2008’. The original Notification is attached.
I submit that you have the opportunity to change this situation. As senior officers whatever you do, others after you will try to do the same; whatever standards you setup, they try to set up the same standard.
I submit that both the current members of SCMC who were also the members of Supreme Court’s High Powered Committee on Hazardous Wastes Management headed by Prof M G K Menon namely,Dr.Claude Alvares and Dr.D.B. Boralkar should be invited by you to hear their testimonies. Prof. Menon should also be invited besides Shri Sanjay Parikh, lawyer Supreme Court who has been pursuing the case selflessly since 1995. They can reveal the plot being set by hazardous waste traders.
I submit that in our country all the municipal waste to energy plants have failed. The proposal of the hazardous waste to energy projects through the procedure for grant of approval for utilization of hazardous wastes as a supplementary resource or for energy recovery, or after processing under Rule 11 of Hazardous Wastes Management Rules, 2008 has not been examined as far as their adverse environmental health impact is concerned. This is unfolding under illegitimate acts of subordinate legislation.
I submit that the intent of the Commerce and Environment Ministry stood exposed when it proposed an amendment to the Hazardous Wastes (Management & Handling) Rules; after amendment it was to read "Hazardous Materials (Management, Handling and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2007. The proposed rules was to have the effect of exempting transit countries from obtaining prior informed consent for all shipments of hazardous waste to India. The proposal also stated that as long as a material contains less than 60 per cent contamination by a hazardous constituent, then it is safe for our ecology. Waste asbestos embedded in the structure of the scrap material is not banned. This sleight of hand at redefinition attracted widespread criticism from environment and public health groups. Startled by the proposed Rules environment and public health researchers and activists had charged that it has been done at the behest of hazardous waste traders. Even the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) had expressed its concerns in November 2007. The SCMC on Hazardous Wastes had also objected. As a consequence the word "wastes" was not replaced with "materials" but "Transboundary Movement" remains. In effect, the original Rules were mutilated and the process of mutilating it further is underway.
I submit that through a jugglery of words in the subordinate legislations on hazardous wastes, Union Ministries of Commerce and Environment have paved the way for officially opening floodgates for the dumping of world's hazardous waste in the name of recycling. This has unleashed unprecedented havoc on India's environment and health of its citizens. These subordinate legislations on hazardous wastes seeks to undo established, science-based definitions of waste and consider waste that is being recycled somehow less hazardous than the waste being landfilled in order to curry favor with hazardous scrapping industries.
I submit that through a not-so-subtle mangling of international definitions for "waste", "disposal" and "safe recycling" both these ministries have designed a veritable global waste funnel that will ensure that the world's waste will surge to our shores. It indeed quite sad in the name of recycling, hazardous waste trade is being legalized.
I submit that the Hazardous Wastes (Management, Handling and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2008 has completely altered definitions which is contrary to the international rules of the Basel Convention, which India is obliged to uphold.
I submit that it is illegal for both the ministries to pretend to implement the Basel Convention but utilise definitions that outwit the intent of the treaty.
I submit following examples of departures from the Basel Convention and international law:
• India has decided that transit states do not have to receive prior informed consent for all shipments of hazardous waste.
• India has decided that dumping in rivers, oceans, and lakes, or burning waste somehow does not constitute disposal and therefore that which is dumped in aquatic environments, or burned, is not waste.
• The international definition of "environmentally sound management" has been ignored in favor of a new definition of "safe for recycling" that states that as long as a material contains less than 60% contamination by a hazardous constituent, then it’s safe!
• India has exempted bio-medical wastes and municipal wastes from this law yet these are meant to be covered under Basel.
• India appears to allow dioxin imports for disposal but not for recycling
• Waste asbestos imports are banned unless they are contaminating other substances (e.g. old ships).
• Fails to implement the Ban Amendment forbidding all imports of hazardous waste from developed countries.
• Fails to recognize it is illegal to trade in waste with non-Parties of the Basel Convention such as the United States.
• While since 1982 over 5924 dead and hazardous wastes laden ships have been dumped in Indian waters, the Hazardous Wastes Management (Handling & Transboundary Movement Rules, 2008) provides that the Rules will not apply to “wastes arising out of the operation from ships beyond five kilometers of the relevant baseline as covered under the provisions of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 and rules made there under”. Subordinate legislations under Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 also merit re-consideration.
I submit that on May 7, 2012, Shri P. Viswanathan, Member of Parliament had asked the Union Minister of Shipping about the ban on entry of more than 25 years old ships which is not registered with Indian Registrar of Shipping (IRS) in Indian waters. The Hon’ble Minister replied, “There is no ban on the entry of vessels which are not classed with Indian Register of Shipping (IRS), provided the vessel is classed with any one of the twelve other member societies of International Association of Classification Societies (IACS)”. I wish to submit that of ships which are more than 25 years old are dead ships as they have reached their end of life. These hazardous wastes laden ships are being transferred to Indian waters in the name of ship dismantling at Gujarat’s Alang beach, a fragile coastal ecosystem. There is a need to initiate steps to ban entry of such ships especially in the coastal environment as has been done for Sachana ship breaking yards in Jamnagar, Gujarat
I submit that these subordinate legislations are contrary to our constitution because the State is under obligation to protect people's right to health and environment. Instead of an environmental law being protective of human health and the environment, these subordinate legislations are trade centric for hazardous waste.
I submit that its significance must be seen in the context of India-Japan Free Trade Agreement and India-EU Free Trade Agreements besides Economic Partnership Agreements with other developed countries who wish to externalize their pollution load following Lawrence Summers Principle of transferring harm to developing countries. The role of Special Economic Zones (SEZ) in facilitating it must be examined.
In such a backdrop, I wish to dispute the reply of the Union Environment Minister. If this reply of Union Minister of Environment and Forests is read with the *attached* 'Statement of Hazardous Goods Lying at Ports' given to the Parliament by Union Minister of Shipping, the true nature of the goings on stands exposed. How is it that waste oil which is officially admitted as waste oil referred to as hazardous good?
I submit that the Ministry appears to have done its homework to justify hazardous waste trade in various disguises. Under Rule 23 of Hazardous Wastes (Management, Handling and Transboundary Movement) Third Amendment Rules, 2008 refers to the “Responsibilities of Authorities” which is specified in its Schedule VII that provides the List of Authorities and Corresponding Duties” wherein it is mentioned that Directorate-General of Foreign Trade constituted under the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 has a duty to “Grant License for import of hazardous wastes”.
It is noteworthy that since 1989 till 2012, there have been several amendments to the Rules. Interestingly, the new 7 page Draft Hazardous Wastes (Management, Handling and Transboundary Movement) Fifth Amendment Rules, 2011 engineers these Rules and inserts a new definition of waste. It reads: "“(zea) “waste” means materials, that are not products or by-products, for which the generator has no further use in terms of his/her own purposes or for production, transformation or consumption, and of which he/she wants to dispose." Its Explanation1 reads: "Wastes may be generated during the extraction of raw materials, the processing of raw materials into intermediates and final products, the consumption of final products, and through other human activities. Residuals recycled or reused at the place of generation as a part of process are excluded." Its Explanation 2 reads: "By-product means a material that is not solely or separately produced by the production process but gets produced in the process and is used as such." I hold that the amendments are being done under undue influence of the global hazardous waste traders. The new Draft Rule is attached.
I submit that the subordinate legislation with regard to Hazardous Wastes (Management, Handling and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2008 are contrary to the orders issued by the Supreme Court. The order dated 14th October, 2003 endorsed UN’s Basel Convention. The new notification is in contempt of the Court and violates the spirit of the Basel treaty by allowing traders to deal with hazardous wastes who are endangering public and ecological health. It is indeed strange that while the Environment Ministry admits that there is huge deficit of capacity to deal with hazardous wastes generated in the country, the new Hazardous Waste Rules, Amendments and Procedures permit traders to import hazardous wastes.
I wish to inform you that the Supreme Court Monitoring Committee (SCMC) on Hazardous Wastes members opines that "Truly, we take three steps forward and then five steps backward." The attached court’s order that constituted the SCMC saying “We constitute a Monitoring Committee comprising of the aforesaid members as also Dr.Claude Alvares, NGO and Dr.D.B. Boralkar. This Committee shall oversee that the direction of this Court are implemented timely. It would also oversee that the aspects to which the Ministry has agreed are implemented in letter and spirit and without any laxity or delay in the matter. It would be open to the Monitoring Committee to co-opt a representative of the State Government or State Pollution Control Boards or any other person or authority as the Committee may deem fit and proper. The Monitoring Committee shall file quarterly reports in this Court.” I submit that Union Ministry of Environment & Forests has ignored the recommendations of both the court appointed members.
I submit that as per a 54 page Report of the Committee to Evolve Road Map on Management of Wastes in India, Union Ministry of Environment & Forests there are about 36,000 hazardous waste generating industries in India which generate 6.2 million tonnes out of which land fillable hazardous waste is about 2.7 million tonnes (44%), incinerable hazardous waste is about 0.4 million tonnes (7 %) and recyclable hazardous waste is about 3.1 million tonnes (49 %). Indiscriminate and unscientific disposal of wastes in the past has resulted in several sites in the country to become environmentally degraded. Isn't our own hazardous waste sufficient?
I submit that "141 hazardous waste dumpsites that have been primarily identified in 14 States/UTs out of which 88 critically polluted locations are currently identified" which in effect means that there is no capacity to deal with these wastes. If they are unable to deal with the domestically generated waste in a scientific and environmentally sound manner and are compelled to dump them, how can Environment Ministry's reply to the Parliament that implies that India has the capacity to deal with the imported hazardous waste for any purpose be deemed convincing.
I submit that it has come to light from the Minister's statement that a co-ordination committee comprising of representatives from the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Commerce and Industries, the Ministry of Shipping, Central Pollution Control Board and select State Pollution Control Boards has been constituted that claims to be "working to sensitize the Customs authorities regarding enforcement of these Rules in order to check illegal import of hazardous waste into the country." It appears that through linguistic manipulation waste is been re-defined as non-waste. What has become evident is that Indian regulations offer least resistance to dumping of hazardous wastes. In fact it welcomes hazardous wastes trade in the name of "recycling or recovery or reuse" of hazardous wastes. How can Customs authorities be expected to be sensitive when Ministries of Commerce and Industries, Shipping and Environment & Forests themselves are not sensitive.
I submit that as a consequence hazardous waste importers are bringing in lakhs of tonnes of hazardous waste into India without facing any legal hurdle. Earlier, Environment Ministry’s Hazardous Waste Rules prohibited import of waste oil, ash and residues from incineration of municipal solid waste, plastic, and unsorted waste scrap. But the same was allowed under the Open General License of the export-import policy of the Commerce Ministry. This led to import of ash and residues from incineration of municipal solid waste has increased by about 130 times during 2006-2009. The import of plastic waste increased by seven times during this period. Countries such as Netherlands, Germany and the United Kingdom have realized that Indian regulations are hazardous waste friendly. There was a 48 per cent increase in hazardous waste trade import during 2006-2009.
I submit that acknowledging such a situation, the then Union Environment and Forest Minister had written a letter to Union Commerce Minister in April 2010 urging alignment of Hazardous Waste Rules and Export-Import policy to reduce “scope of confusion” at implementation level. “I suggest that a joint group of the two ministries be set up to resolve the issue”, the minister said and had further added that some export-oriented units especially those in the Special Economic Zones (SEZ) were importing hazardous waste without seeking approval from either the Ministries. They were also operating without a mandatory “consent to operate” under environmental laws aimed at protecting the environment. The minister had said, “An impression also seems to have gained ground that such units are exempt from the provisions of environment regulations can import hazardous wastes without any permission. These impressions need to be corrected”. What has happened since then is that instead of aligning and factoring in environmental concerns in the hazardous waste trade, blind profiteering has taken precedence over public health concerns. The Hazardous Wastes Rules do not apply to SEZ. The concerned ministries disclose the names of SEZs which are importing hazardous wastes.
In view of the above, your immediate intervention alone can facilitate creation of legitimate legislative competence to regulate management and trade in hazardous wastes.
I will be happy to share relevant documents and reference materials in this regard.
Thanking You
Yours faithfully
Gopal Krishna
Convener
ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA)
New Delhi-16,
Phone: +91-11-26517814, Fax: +91-11-26517814
Mb- 9818089660
E-mail- krishna1715@gmail.com,
Web: toxicswatch.blogpsot.com
Cc
Shri Anand Sharma, Union Minister of Commerce & Industry
Shri G K Vasan, Union Minister of Shipping
Smt Jayanthi Natrajan, Union Minister of Environment & Forests
Shri Jyotiraditya Madhavrao Scindia, Union Minister of State, Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Chairman & Members, Parliamentary Standing Committee on Science, Technology, Environment & Forests
Smt. Vijay Laxmi Joshi, Additional Secretary, Union Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Ms Meera Mehrishi, Additional Secretary, HSMD, Union Minister of Environment & Forests
Shri Madhusudan Prasad, Additional Secretary, Union Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Shri Rajeev Kher, Additional Secretary, Union Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Ms Anita Agnihotri, Additional Secretary, Union Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Shri Mukesh Bhatnagar, Additional DGFT, Union Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Ms Aditi Das Rout, Director, Union Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Dr. Saroj, Director, HSMD, Union Minister of Environment & Forests
Dr. Manoranjan Hota, Director, HSMD, Union Minister of Environment & Forests
Dr Claude Alvares, Member, Supreme Court Monitoring Committee on Hazardous Wastes
Dr D B Boralkar, Member, Supreme Court Monitoring Committee on Hazardous Wastes
Shri Sanjay Parikh, Lawyer, Supreme Court
Shri Saurabh Chandra
Secretary
Union Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Government of India
New Delhi
Shri Pradeep K Sinha
Secretary
Union Minister of Shipping
Government of India
New Delhi
Dr.T Chatterjee, Secretary
Union Ministry of Environment & Forests
Government of India
New Delhi
Subject- Ban hazardous waste trade and entry of dead ships; comply with Basel Convention, re-examine subordinate legislations for hazardous waste management & trade
Sir,
This is with reference to the subordinate legislations for Hazardous Waste Management and Trade under Environment Protection Act, 1986, reply of Union Minister of Environment and Forests on May 21, 2012, reply of Union Minister of Shipping dated May 7, 2012 in the Parliament and Supreme Court’s order dated October 14, 2003 and February 29, 2012.
I submit that the Union Minister of Environment and Forests said, "Import of such (hazardous) wastes for disposal is not permitted. Import is permitted only for recycling or recovery or reuse with the permission of the Ministry of Environment and Forests and/or Directorate General of Foreign Trade", Union Commerce Ministry.
I submit that the Minister’s reply that defines hazardous waste as recyclable material appears to be an exercise in sophistry. Her reply and other relevant documents revealing the true nature of the goings on are attached.
I submit that the Union Government has been indicted by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Subordinate Legislation in its report “Non-implementation of oft-repeated recommendations of Committee on Subordinate Legislation, Lok Sabha by various Ministries” dated December 16, 2011. It appears that even Union Ministry of Environment & Forests, Union Ministry of Commerce & Industry and Union Ministry of Shipping are following the same path in the matter of subordinate legislations for Hazardous Waste Management and Trade under Environment Protection Act, 1986.
I submit that it is clear from the existing Hazardous Waste Rules (including the amendments till date) that it promotes trade in hazardous waste unmindful of the National Environment Policy that acknowledges how "Environmental factors are estimated as being responsible in some cases for nearly 20 percent of the burden of disease in India".
I wish to draw your attention towards the first three paragraphs of Supreme Court’s landmark order dated October 14, 2003. It reads: ‘Hazardous Wastes are highly toxic in nature. The industrialization has had the effect of generation of huge quantities of hazardous wastes. These and other side effects of development gave birth to principles of sustainable development so as to sustain industrial growth. The hazardous waste required adequate and proper control and handling. Efforts are required to be made to minimise it. In developing nations, there are additional problems including that of dumping of hazardous waste on their lands by some of the nations where cost of destruction of such waste is felt very heavy. These and other allied problems gave birth to Basel Convention. The key objectives of the Basel Convention are: “to minimize the generation of hazardous wastes in terms of quantity and hazardousness; to dispose of them as close to the source of generation as possible; to reduce the transboundary movement of hazardous wastes.”
2. Due to alarming situation created by dumping of hazardous waste, its generation and serious and irreversible damage, as a result thereof, to the environment, flora and fauna, health of animals and human beings, the petitioner approached this Court under Article 32 complaining of violation of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.
3. The petitioner has, inter alia, relied upon the Basel Convention. The Basel Convention was signed by India on 15th March, 1990 and ratified on 24th June, 1992.’
I submit that in a order dated February 29, 2012, Supreme Court held that the application which “has been filed by Dr. Claude Alvares, member of the Supreme Court Monitoring Committee, praying for an injunction to restrain Union of India from finalising of a Notification on hazardous wastes dated 28th September, 2007, has been rendered infructuous on account of the publication of the Hazardous Wastes (Management, Handling & Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2008. It appears that the prayer of Dr.Claude Alvares, a member of the SCMC did not get relief due to limitations of jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has used word ‘infructuous’ for SCMC’s application. In effect, Supreme Court was accepted the Rules as a fait accompli. Its dictionary meaning is ‘unfruitful’ and ‘fruitless’. I submit that these Rules will lead to the growth of bad and sour fruits that the present and future generation of Indians will be compelled to eat when hazardous waste and chemicals enter our food chain.
I also wish to draw your attention to the address of Shri M.N. Krishnamani, President, Supreme Court Bar Association on Law Day wherein he stated that “Most of the legal matters become infructuous after long period of pendency.” I submit that it is not a legal matter alone. The new Hazardous Waste Rules are a matter of forcing the present and future generation to accept the fate of living with contaminated blood in our veins and arteries.
I take this opportunity to appeal to both the ministries of Environment and Commerce to re-examine the Notification on hazardous wastes dated 28th September, 2007, which has been published as Hazardous Wastes(Management, Handling & Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2008, subsequent four amendments in the Rules, proposed fifth amendment in the Rules and the ‘Procedure for grant of approval for utilization of hazardous wastes as a supplementary resource or for energy recovery, or after processing under Rule 11 of Hazardous Wastes Management Rules, 2008’. The original Notification is attached.
I submit that you have the opportunity to change this situation. As senior officers whatever you do, others after you will try to do the same; whatever standards you setup, they try to set up the same standard.
I submit that both the current members of SCMC who were also the members of Supreme Court’s High Powered Committee on Hazardous Wastes Management headed by Prof M G K Menon namely,Dr.Claude Alvares and Dr.D.B. Boralkar should be invited by you to hear their testimonies. Prof. Menon should also be invited besides Shri Sanjay Parikh, lawyer Supreme Court who has been pursuing the case selflessly since 1995. They can reveal the plot being set by hazardous waste traders.
I submit that in our country all the municipal waste to energy plants have failed. The proposal of the hazardous waste to energy projects through the procedure for grant of approval for utilization of hazardous wastes as a supplementary resource or for energy recovery, or after processing under Rule 11 of Hazardous Wastes Management Rules, 2008 has not been examined as far as their adverse environmental health impact is concerned. This is unfolding under illegitimate acts of subordinate legislation.
I submit that the intent of the Commerce and Environment Ministry stood exposed when it proposed an amendment to the Hazardous Wastes (Management & Handling) Rules; after amendment it was to read "Hazardous Materials (Management, Handling and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2007. The proposed rules was to have the effect of exempting transit countries from obtaining prior informed consent for all shipments of hazardous waste to India. The proposal also stated that as long as a material contains less than 60 per cent contamination by a hazardous constituent, then it is safe for our ecology. Waste asbestos embedded in the structure of the scrap material is not banned. This sleight of hand at redefinition attracted widespread criticism from environment and public health groups. Startled by the proposed Rules environment and public health researchers and activists had charged that it has been done at the behest of hazardous waste traders. Even the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) had expressed its concerns in November 2007. The SCMC on Hazardous Wastes had also objected. As a consequence the word "wastes" was not replaced with "materials" but "Transboundary Movement" remains. In effect, the original Rules were mutilated and the process of mutilating it further is underway.
I submit that through a jugglery of words in the subordinate legislations on hazardous wastes, Union Ministries of Commerce and Environment have paved the way for officially opening floodgates for the dumping of world's hazardous waste in the name of recycling. This has unleashed unprecedented havoc on India's environment and health of its citizens. These subordinate legislations on hazardous wastes seeks to undo established, science-based definitions of waste and consider waste that is being recycled somehow less hazardous than the waste being landfilled in order to curry favor with hazardous scrapping industries.
I submit that through a not-so-subtle mangling of international definitions for "waste", "disposal" and "safe recycling" both these ministries have designed a veritable global waste funnel that will ensure that the world's waste will surge to our shores. It indeed quite sad in the name of recycling, hazardous waste trade is being legalized.
I submit that the Hazardous Wastes (Management, Handling and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2008 has completely altered definitions which is contrary to the international rules of the Basel Convention, which India is obliged to uphold.
I submit that it is illegal for both the ministries to pretend to implement the Basel Convention but utilise definitions that outwit the intent of the treaty.
I submit following examples of departures from the Basel Convention and international law:
• India has decided that transit states do not have to receive prior informed consent for all shipments of hazardous waste.
• India has decided that dumping in rivers, oceans, and lakes, or burning waste somehow does not constitute disposal and therefore that which is dumped in aquatic environments, or burned, is not waste.
• The international definition of "environmentally sound management" has been ignored in favor of a new definition of "safe for recycling" that states that as long as a material contains less than 60% contamination by a hazardous constituent, then it’s safe!
• India has exempted bio-medical wastes and municipal wastes from this law yet these are meant to be covered under Basel.
• India appears to allow dioxin imports for disposal but not for recycling
• Waste asbestos imports are banned unless they are contaminating other substances (e.g. old ships).
• Fails to implement the Ban Amendment forbidding all imports of hazardous waste from developed countries.
• Fails to recognize it is illegal to trade in waste with non-Parties of the Basel Convention such as the United States.
• While since 1982 over 5924 dead and hazardous wastes laden ships have been dumped in Indian waters, the Hazardous Wastes Management (Handling & Transboundary Movement Rules, 2008) provides that the Rules will not apply to “wastes arising out of the operation from ships beyond five kilometers of the relevant baseline as covered under the provisions of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 and rules made there under”. Subordinate legislations under Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 also merit re-consideration.
I submit that on May 7, 2012, Shri P. Viswanathan, Member of Parliament had asked the Union Minister of Shipping about the ban on entry of more than 25 years old ships which is not registered with Indian Registrar of Shipping (IRS) in Indian waters. The Hon’ble Minister replied, “There is no ban on the entry of vessels which are not classed with Indian Register of Shipping (IRS), provided the vessel is classed with any one of the twelve other member societies of International Association of Classification Societies (IACS)”. I wish to submit that of ships which are more than 25 years old are dead ships as they have reached their end of life. These hazardous wastes laden ships are being transferred to Indian waters in the name of ship dismantling at Gujarat’s Alang beach, a fragile coastal ecosystem. There is a need to initiate steps to ban entry of such ships especially in the coastal environment as has been done for Sachana ship breaking yards in Jamnagar, Gujarat
I submit that these subordinate legislations are contrary to our constitution because the State is under obligation to protect people's right to health and environment. Instead of an environmental law being protective of human health and the environment, these subordinate legislations are trade centric for hazardous waste.
I submit that its significance must be seen in the context of India-Japan Free Trade Agreement and India-EU Free Trade Agreements besides Economic Partnership Agreements with other developed countries who wish to externalize their pollution load following Lawrence Summers Principle of transferring harm to developing countries. The role of Special Economic Zones (SEZ) in facilitating it must be examined.
In such a backdrop, I wish to dispute the reply of the Union Environment Minister. If this reply of Union Minister of Environment and Forests is read with the *attached* 'Statement of Hazardous Goods Lying at Ports' given to the Parliament by Union Minister of Shipping, the true nature of the goings on stands exposed. How is it that waste oil which is officially admitted as waste oil referred to as hazardous good?
I submit that the Ministry appears to have done its homework to justify hazardous waste trade in various disguises. Under Rule 23 of Hazardous Wastes (Management, Handling and Transboundary Movement) Third Amendment Rules, 2008 refers to the “Responsibilities of Authorities” which is specified in its Schedule VII that provides the List of Authorities and Corresponding Duties” wherein it is mentioned that Directorate-General of Foreign Trade constituted under the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 has a duty to “Grant License for import of hazardous wastes”.
It is noteworthy that since 1989 till 2012, there have been several amendments to the Rules. Interestingly, the new 7 page Draft Hazardous Wastes (Management, Handling and Transboundary Movement) Fifth Amendment Rules, 2011 engineers these Rules and inserts a new definition of waste. It reads: "“(zea) “waste” means materials, that are not products or by-products, for which the generator has no further use in terms of his/her own purposes or for production, transformation or consumption, and of which he/she wants to dispose." Its Explanation1 reads: "Wastes may be generated during the extraction of raw materials, the processing of raw materials into intermediates and final products, the consumption of final products, and through other human activities. Residuals recycled or reused at the place of generation as a part of process are excluded." Its Explanation 2 reads: "By-product means a material that is not solely or separately produced by the production process but gets produced in the process and is used as such." I hold that the amendments are being done under undue influence of the global hazardous waste traders. The new Draft Rule is attached.
I submit that the subordinate legislation with regard to Hazardous Wastes (Management, Handling and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2008 are contrary to the orders issued by the Supreme Court. The order dated 14th October, 2003 endorsed UN’s Basel Convention. The new notification is in contempt of the Court and violates the spirit of the Basel treaty by allowing traders to deal with hazardous wastes who are endangering public and ecological health. It is indeed strange that while the Environment Ministry admits that there is huge deficit of capacity to deal with hazardous wastes generated in the country, the new Hazardous Waste Rules, Amendments and Procedures permit traders to import hazardous wastes.
I wish to inform you that the Supreme Court Monitoring Committee (SCMC) on Hazardous Wastes members opines that "Truly, we take three steps forward and then five steps backward." The attached court’s order that constituted the SCMC saying “We constitute a Monitoring Committee comprising of the aforesaid members as also Dr.Claude Alvares, NGO and Dr.D.B. Boralkar. This Committee shall oversee that the direction of this Court are implemented timely. It would also oversee that the aspects to which the Ministry has agreed are implemented in letter and spirit and without any laxity or delay in the matter. It would be open to the Monitoring Committee to co-opt a representative of the State Government or State Pollution Control Boards or any other person or authority as the Committee may deem fit and proper. The Monitoring Committee shall file quarterly reports in this Court.” I submit that Union Ministry of Environment & Forests has ignored the recommendations of both the court appointed members.
I submit that as per a 54 page Report of the Committee to Evolve Road Map on Management of Wastes in India, Union Ministry of Environment & Forests there are about 36,000 hazardous waste generating industries in India which generate 6.2 million tonnes out of which land fillable hazardous waste is about 2.7 million tonnes (44%), incinerable hazardous waste is about 0.4 million tonnes (7 %) and recyclable hazardous waste is about 3.1 million tonnes (49 %). Indiscriminate and unscientific disposal of wastes in the past has resulted in several sites in the country to become environmentally degraded. Isn't our own hazardous waste sufficient?
I submit that "141 hazardous waste dumpsites that have been primarily identified in 14 States/UTs out of which 88 critically polluted locations are currently identified" which in effect means that there is no capacity to deal with these wastes. If they are unable to deal with the domestically generated waste in a scientific and environmentally sound manner and are compelled to dump them, how can Environment Ministry's reply to the Parliament that implies that India has the capacity to deal with the imported hazardous waste for any purpose be deemed convincing.
I submit that it has come to light from the Minister's statement that a co-ordination committee comprising of representatives from the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Commerce and Industries, the Ministry of Shipping, Central Pollution Control Board and select State Pollution Control Boards has been constituted that claims to be "working to sensitize the Customs authorities regarding enforcement of these Rules in order to check illegal import of hazardous waste into the country." It appears that through linguistic manipulation waste is been re-defined as non-waste. What has become evident is that Indian regulations offer least resistance to dumping of hazardous wastes. In fact it welcomes hazardous wastes trade in the name of "recycling or recovery or reuse" of hazardous wastes. How can Customs authorities be expected to be sensitive when Ministries of Commerce and Industries, Shipping and Environment & Forests themselves are not sensitive.
I submit that as a consequence hazardous waste importers are bringing in lakhs of tonnes of hazardous waste into India without facing any legal hurdle. Earlier, Environment Ministry’s Hazardous Waste Rules prohibited import of waste oil, ash and residues from incineration of municipal solid waste, plastic, and unsorted waste scrap. But the same was allowed under the Open General License of the export-import policy of the Commerce Ministry. This led to import of ash and residues from incineration of municipal solid waste has increased by about 130 times during 2006-2009. The import of plastic waste increased by seven times during this period. Countries such as Netherlands, Germany and the United Kingdom have realized that Indian regulations are hazardous waste friendly. There was a 48 per cent increase in hazardous waste trade import during 2006-2009.
I submit that acknowledging such a situation, the then Union Environment and Forest Minister had written a letter to Union Commerce Minister in April 2010 urging alignment of Hazardous Waste Rules and Export-Import policy to reduce “scope of confusion” at implementation level. “I suggest that a joint group of the two ministries be set up to resolve the issue”, the minister said and had further added that some export-oriented units especially those in the Special Economic Zones (SEZ) were importing hazardous waste without seeking approval from either the Ministries. They were also operating without a mandatory “consent to operate” under environmental laws aimed at protecting the environment. The minister had said, “An impression also seems to have gained ground that such units are exempt from the provisions of environment regulations can import hazardous wastes without any permission. These impressions need to be corrected”. What has happened since then is that instead of aligning and factoring in environmental concerns in the hazardous waste trade, blind profiteering has taken precedence over public health concerns. The Hazardous Wastes Rules do not apply to SEZ. The concerned ministries disclose the names of SEZs which are importing hazardous wastes.
In view of the above, your immediate intervention alone can facilitate creation of legitimate legislative competence to regulate management and trade in hazardous wastes.
I will be happy to share relevant documents and reference materials in this regard.
Thanking You
Yours faithfully
Gopal Krishna
Convener
ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA)
New Delhi-16,
Phone: +91-11-26517814, Fax: +91-11-26517814
Mb- 9818089660
E-mail- krishna1715@gmail.com,
Web: toxicswatch.blogpsot.com
Cc
Shri Anand Sharma, Union Minister of Commerce & Industry
Shri G K Vasan, Union Minister of Shipping
Smt Jayanthi Natrajan, Union Minister of Environment & Forests
Shri Jyotiraditya Madhavrao Scindia, Union Minister of State, Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Chairman & Members, Parliamentary Standing Committee on Science, Technology, Environment & Forests
Smt. Vijay Laxmi Joshi, Additional Secretary, Union Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Ms Meera Mehrishi, Additional Secretary, HSMD, Union Minister of Environment & Forests
Shri Madhusudan Prasad, Additional Secretary, Union Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Shri Rajeev Kher, Additional Secretary, Union Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Ms Anita Agnihotri, Additional Secretary, Union Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Shri Mukesh Bhatnagar, Additional DGFT, Union Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Ms Aditi Das Rout, Director, Union Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Dr. Saroj, Director, HSMD, Union Minister of Environment & Forests
Dr. Manoranjan Hota, Director, HSMD, Union Minister of Environment & Forests
Dr Claude Alvares, Member, Supreme Court Monitoring Committee on Hazardous Wastes
Dr D B Boralkar, Member, Supreme Court Monitoring Committee on Hazardous Wastes
Shri Sanjay Parikh, Lawyer, Supreme Court
9:11 PM
Boom in Ship Breaking Industry & Denial of Basic Labour Rights in Gaddani, Karachi
KARACHI: National Trade Union Federation (NTUF) Pakistan on Thursday
organised a seminar entitled “Boom in Ship Breaking Industry & Denial of
Basic Labour Rights” at a local hotel to highlight the injustice being done
against ship breaking yards' workers.
Pointing out the injustice with workers, the speakers said that
shipbreaking yard owners in Gaddani had been earning hefty profits each
month but thousands of workers who made it possible because of their skills
were yet forced to work and live like slaves.
On behalf of the workers, they demanded a 50% increase in wages,
registration of all workers with social security and permission to form
union and bargain collectively. Labour leaders said that billions of rupees
were earned in profit in this thriving business but workers were deprived
of all basic human and labourer rights as envisaged in the labour laws as
well as the constitution.
They said majority of them work in very vulnerable conditions without any
safety check with low wages and no medical facility, proper residential
quarter or drinking water. Workers are being treated just like animals and
not even a single one of them has been given an appointment letter.
Contractors (Jamadars) act like 'masters' who enjoy full support of local
police and administration while labour departments are least bother about
the well being and better working conditions of the workers, they added.
On the occasion, they unanimously demanded that the right to form union be
immediately restored, wages be increased by 50%, all workers be registered
with Social Security and Employees Old Age Benefits Institution, safety at
work place be ensured, medical hospital with all basic facilities be
established, canteen with hygienic food be provided at subsidised rates,
school and labour residential colony with water supply and sewerage system
be provided and all federal, provincial and international labour laws be
observed in letter and spirit.
Talking about the operations at breaking yard, they said that more than 60
big and small ships typically anchor at different Gaddani shipbreaking
yards for dismantlement and nearly 15,000 workers directly or indirectly,
were engaged in the process.
A minute of silence was also observed in respect of the martyrs of 22 May
carnage in Karachi and a resolution condemning the fascist/racist arm
gangs' sinister designs against the working class to divide them on ethnic
and lingual basis was passed. The seminar also strongly condemned the
demand of Muhajir province and declared that working class stood for
national and historical integrity and oneness of Sindh at all costs.
NTUF President Mohammed Rafiq Baloch presided over the seminar, while
Habibuddin Junaidi Chairman of All Pakistan Trade Union Organisation,
National Trade Union Federation Deputy General Secretary Nasir Mansoor,
Farid Awan General Secretary of Pakistan Workers Confederation Sindh,
Bashir Ahmed Mehmoodani President of Gadani Ship Breaking Democratic
Workers Union, Tahir Khan Yusufzai General Secretary Gadani Ship Breaking
Democratic Workers Union, Ghani Zaman Awan General Secretary Karachi Ship
Yard Labour Union, Shehla Rizwan of Home Based Women Workers Federation and
Shafi Ghori expressed their views.
Source: By Asad Farooq. 25 May 2012
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2012%5C05%5C25%5Cstory_25-5-2012_pg12_6
organised a seminar entitled “Boom in Ship Breaking Industry & Denial of
Basic Labour Rights” at a local hotel to highlight the injustice being done
against ship breaking yards' workers.
Pointing out the injustice with workers, the speakers said that
shipbreaking yard owners in Gaddani had been earning hefty profits each
month but thousands of workers who made it possible because of their skills
were yet forced to work and live like slaves.
On behalf of the workers, they demanded a 50% increase in wages,
registration of all workers with social security and permission to form
union and bargain collectively. Labour leaders said that billions of rupees
were earned in profit in this thriving business but workers were deprived
of all basic human and labourer rights as envisaged in the labour laws as
well as the constitution.
They said majority of them work in very vulnerable conditions without any
safety check with low wages and no medical facility, proper residential
quarter or drinking water. Workers are being treated just like animals and
not even a single one of them has been given an appointment letter.
Contractors (Jamadars) act like 'masters' who enjoy full support of local
police and administration while labour departments are least bother about
the well being and better working conditions of the workers, they added.
On the occasion, they unanimously demanded that the right to form union be
immediately restored, wages be increased by 50%, all workers be registered
with Social Security and Employees Old Age Benefits Institution, safety at
work place be ensured, medical hospital with all basic facilities be
established, canteen with hygienic food be provided at subsidised rates,
school and labour residential colony with water supply and sewerage system
be provided and all federal, provincial and international labour laws be
observed in letter and spirit.
Talking about the operations at breaking yard, they said that more than 60
big and small ships typically anchor at different Gaddani shipbreaking
yards for dismantlement and nearly 15,000 workers directly or indirectly,
were engaged in the process.
A minute of silence was also observed in respect of the martyrs of 22 May
carnage in Karachi and a resolution condemning the fascist/racist arm
gangs' sinister designs against the working class to divide them on ethnic
and lingual basis was passed. The seminar also strongly condemned the
demand of Muhajir province and declared that working class stood for
national and historical integrity and oneness of Sindh at all costs.
NTUF President Mohammed Rafiq Baloch presided over the seminar, while
Habibuddin Junaidi Chairman of All Pakistan Trade Union Organisation,
National Trade Union Federation Deputy General Secretary Nasir Mansoor,
Farid Awan General Secretary of Pakistan Workers Confederation Sindh,
Bashir Ahmed Mehmoodani President of Gadani Ship Breaking Democratic
Workers Union, Tahir Khan Yusufzai General Secretary Gadani Ship Breaking
Democratic Workers Union, Ghani Zaman Awan General Secretary Karachi Ship
Yard Labour Union, Shehla Rizwan of Home Based Women Workers Federation and
Shafi Ghori expressed their views.
Source: By Asad Farooq. 25 May 2012
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2012%5C05%5C25%5Cstory_25-5-2012_pg12_6
12:09 AM
Subordinate legislations for hazardous waste management & trade violate Basel Convention without legislative mandate
To
Shri P. Karunakaran,
Chairman
Parliamentary Standing Committee (PSC) on Subordinate Legislation
Parliament of India
New Delhi
Through Shri Sukhi Chand Chaudhary, Director, PSC on Subordinate Legislation
Subject- Subordinate legislations for hazardous waste management and trade under Environment Protection Act, 1986 violate Basel Convention without legislative mandate
Sir,
This is with reference to the subordinate legislations for Hazardous Waste Management and Trade under Environment Protection Act, 1986, the reply of Smt Jayanthi Natarajan, Union Minister of Environment and Forests in the Lok Sabha on May 21, 2012 and Supreme Court’s order dated October 14, 2003 and February 29, 2012.
Union Minister of Environment and Forests said, "Import of such (hazardous) wastes for disposal is not permitted. Import is permitted only for recycling or recovery or reuse with the permission of the Ministry of Environment and Forests and/or Directorate General of Foreign Trade", Union Commerce Ministry.
I submit that the Minister’s reply that defines hazardous waste as recyclable material appears to be an exercise in sophistry. Her reply and other relevant documents revealing the true nature the goings on are attached.
I submit that the trend revealed in PSC’s report on “Non-implementation of oft-repeated recommendations of Committee on Subordinate Legislation, Lok Sabha by various Ministries” dated December 16, 2011 is being pursued even by Union Ministry of Environment & Forests in the matter of subordinate legislations for Hazardous Waste Management and Trade under Environment Protection Act, 1986. This is being done at the behest of Union Ministry of Commerce and Industry.
I submit that it is clear from the existing Hazardous Waste Rules (including the amendments till date) that it promotes trade in hazardous waste unmindful of the National Environment Policy that acknowledges how "Environmental factors are estimated as being responsible in some cases for nearly 20 percent of the burden of disease in India".
I wish to draw your attention towards the first three paragraphs of Supreme Court’s landmark order dated October 14, 2003. It reads: ‘Hazardous Wastes are highly toxic in nature. The industrialization has had the effect of generation of huge quantities of hazardous wastes. These and other side effects of development gave birth to principles of sustainable development so as to sustain industrial growth. The hazardous waste required adequate and proper control and handling. Efforts are required to be made to minimise it. In developing nations, there are additional problems including that of dumping of hazardous waste on their lands by some of the nations where cost of destruction of such waste is felt very heavy. These and other allied problems gave birth to Basel Convention. The key objectives of the Basel Convention are: “to minimize the generation of hazardous wastes in terms of quantity and hazardousness; to dispose of them as close to the source of generation as possible; to reduce the transboundary movement of hazardous wastes.”
2. Due to alarming situation created by dumping of hazardous waste, its generation and serious and irreversible damage, as a result thereof, to the environment, flora and fauna, health of animals and human beings, the petitioner approached this Court under Article 32 complaining of violation of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.
3. The petitioner has, inter alia, relied upon the Basel Convention. The Basel Convention was signed by India on 15th March, 1990 and ratified on 24th June, 1992.’
I submit that in a order dated February 29, 2012, Supreme Court held that the application which “has been filed by Dr. Claude Alvares, member of the Supreme Court Monitoring Committee, praying for an injunction to restrain Union of India from finalising of a Notification on hazardous wastes dated 28th September, 2007, has been rendered infructuous on account of the publication of the Hazardous Wastes (Management, Handling & Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2008. It appears that the prayer of Dr.Claude Alvares, a member of the SCMC did not get relief due to limitations of jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.
I take this opportunity to pray to PSC on Subordinate Legislation “for an injunction to restrain Union of India” or any other possible relief through its examination of the Notification on hazardous wastes dated 28th September, 2007, which has been published as Hazardous Wastes (Management, Handling & Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2008, subsequent four amendments in the Rules, proposed fifth amendment in the Rules and the ‘Procedure for grant of approval for utilization of hazardous wastes as a supplementary resource or for energy recovery, or after processing under Rule 11 of Hazardous Wastes Management Rules, 2008’. The original Notification is attached.
I submit that both the current members of SCMC who were also the members of Supreme Court’s High Powered Committee on Hazardous Wastes Management headed by Prof M G K Menon namely,Dr.Claude Alvares and Dr.D.B. Boralkar should be invited by the PSC to hear their testimonies. Prof. Menon should also be invited besides Shri Sanjay Parikh, lawyer Supreme Court who has been pursuing the case selflessly since 1995. They can reveal the plot being set by hazardous waste traders.
I submit that in our country all the municipal waste to energy plants have failed. The proposal of the hazardous waste to energy projects through the procedure for grant of approval for utilization of hazardous wastes as a supplementary resource or for energy recovery, or after processing under Rule 11 of Hazardous Wastes Management Rules, 2008 has not been examined as far as their adverse environmental health impact is concerned. This is unfolding under illegitimate acts of subordinate legislation.
I submit that the intent of the Commerce and Environment Ministry stood exposed when it proposed an amendment to the Hazardous Wastes (Management & Handling) Rules; after amendment it was to read "Hazardous Materials (Management, Handling and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2007. The proposed rules was to have the effect of exempting transit countries from obtaining prior informed consent for all shipments of hazardous waste to India. The proposal also stated that as long as a material contains less than 60 per cent contamination by a hazardous constituent, then it is safe for our ecology. Waste asbestos embedded in the structure of the scrap material is not banned. This sleight of hand at redefinition attracted widespread criticism from environment and public health groups. Startled by the proposed Rules environment and public health researchers and activists had charged that it has been done at the behest of hazardous waste traders. Even the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) had expressed its concerns in November 2007. The SCMC on Hazardous Wastes had also objected. As a consequence the word "wastes" was not replaced with "materials" but "Transboundary Movement" remains. In effect, the original Rules were mutilated and the process of mutilating it further is underway.
I submit that through a jugglery of words in the subordinate legislations on hazardous wastes, Union Ministries of Commerce and Environment have paved the way for officially opening floodgates for the dumping of world's hazardous waste in the name of recycling. This has unleashed unprecedented havoc on India's environment and health of its citizens. These subordinate legislations on hazardous wastes seeks to undo established, science-based definitions of waste and consider waste that is being recycled somehow less hazardous than the waste being landfilled in order to curry favor with hazardous scrapping industries.
I submit that through a not-so-subtle mangling of international definitions for "waste", "disposal" and "safe recycling" both these ministries have designed a veritable global waste funnel that will ensure that the world's waste will surge to our shores. All this is being done in the name of recycling.
I submit that the Hazardous Wastes (Management, Handling and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2008 has completely altered definitions are contrary to the international rules of the Basel Convention, which India is obliged to uphold.
I submit that it is illegal for both these ministries pretend to implement the Basel Convention but utilise definitions that outwit the intent of the treaty.
I submit following examples of departures from the Basel Convention and international law:
• India has decided that transit states do not have to receive prior informed consent for all shipments of hazardous waste.
• India has decided that dumping in rivers, oceans, and lakes, or burning waste somehow does not constitute disposal and therefore that which is dumped in aquatic environments, or burned, is not waste.
• The international definition of "environmentally sound management" has been ignored in favor of a new definition of "safe for recycling" that states that as long as a material contains less than 60% contamination by a hazardous constituent, then it’s safe!
• India has exempted bio-medical wastes and municipal wastes from this law yet these are meant to be covered under Basel.
• India appears to allow dioxin imports for disposal but not for recycling.
• Waste asbestos imports are banned unless they are contaminating other substances (e.g. old ships).
• Fails to implement the Ban Amendment forbidding all imports of hazardous waste from developed countries.
• Fails to recognize it is illegal to trade in waste with non-Parties of the Basel Convention such as the United States.
• While since 1982 over 5924 dead and hazardous wastes laden ships have been dumped in Indian waters, the Hazardous Wastes Management (Handling & Transboundary Movement Rules, 2008) provides that the Rules will not apply to “wastes arising out of the operation from ships beyond five kilometers of the relevant baseline as covered under the provisions of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 and rules made there under”. Subordinate legislations under Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 also merit attention
I submit that it is contrary to our constitution because the State is under obligation to protect people's right to health and environment), instead of an environmental law being protective of human health and the environment, these subordinate legislations are trade centric for hazardous waste.
I submit that its significance must be seen in the context of India-Japan Free Trade Agreement and India-EU Free Trade Agreements besides Economic Partnership Agreements with other developed countries who wish to externalize their pollution load following Lawrence Summers Principle of transferring harm to developing countries.
In such a backdrop, I wish to dispute the reply of the Union Environment Minister. If this reply of Union Minister of Environment and Forests is read with the *attached* 'Statement of Hazardous Goods Lying at Ports' given to the Parliament by Union Minister of Shipping, the true nature of the goings on stands exposed. How is it that waste oil which is officially admitted as waste oil referred to as hazardous good?
I submit that the Ministry appears to have done its homework to justify hazardous waste trade in various disguises. Under Rule 23 of Hazardous Wastes (Management, Handling and Transboundary Movement) Third Amendment Rules, 2008 refers to the “Responsibilities of Authorities” which is specified in its Schedule VII that provides the List of Authorities and Corresponding Duties” wherein it is mentioned that Directorate-General of Foreign Trade constituted under the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 has a duty to “Grant License for import of hazardous wastes”.
It is noteworthy that since 1989 till 2012, there have been several amendments to the Rules. Interestingly, the new 7 page Draft Hazardous Wastes (Management, Handling and Transboundary Movement) Fifth Amendment Rules, 2011 engineers these Rules and inserts a new definition of waste. It reads: "“(zea) “waste” means materials, that are not products or by-products, for which the generator has no further use in terms of his/her own purposes or for production, transformation or consumption, and of which he/she wants to dispose." Its Explanation1 reads: "Wastes may be generated during the extraction of raw materials, the processing of raw materials into intermediates and final products, the consumption of final products, and through other human activities. Residuals recycled or reused at the place of generation as a part of process are excluded." Its Explanation 2 reads: "By-product means a material that is not solely or separately produced by the production process but gets produced in the process and is used as such." I hold that the amendments are being done under undue influence of the global hazardous waste traders. The new Draft Rule is attached.
I submit that the subordinate legislation with regard to Hazardous Wastes (Management, Handling and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2008 are contrary to the orders issued by the Supreme Court. The order dated 14th October, 2003 endorsed UN’s Basel Convention. The new notification is in contempt of the Court and violates the spirit of the Basel treaty by allowing traders to deal with hazardous wastes who are endangering public and ecological health. It is indeed strange that while the Environment Ministry admits that there is huge deficit of capacity to deal with hazardous wastes generated in the country, the new Hazardous Waste Rules, Amendments and Procedures permit traders to import hazardous wastes.
I wish to inform you that the Supreme Court Monitoring Committee (SCMC) on Hazardous Wastes members opines that "Truly, we take three steps forward and then five steps backward." The attached court’s order that constituted the SCMC saying “We constitute a Monitoring Committee comprising of the aforesaid members as also Dr.Claude Alvares, NGO and Dr.D.B. Boralkar. This Committee shall oversee that the direction of this Court are implemented timely. It would also oversee that the aspects to which the Ministry has agreed are implemented in letter and spirit and without any laxity or delay in the matter. It would be open to the Monitoring Committee to co-opt a representative of the State Government or State Pollution Control Boards or any other person or authority as the Committee may deem fit and proper. The Monitoring Committee shall file quarterly reports in this Court.” I submit that Union Ministry of Environment & Forests has ignored the recommendations of both the court appointed members.
I submit that as per a 54 page Report of the Committee to Evolve Road Map on Management of Wastes in India, Union Ministry of Environment & Forests there are about 36,000 hazardous waste generating industries in India which generate 6.2 million tonnes out of which land fillable hazardous waste is about 2.7 million tonnes (44%), incinerable hazardous waste is about 0.4 million tonnes (7 %) and recyclable hazardous waste is about 3.1 million tonnes (49 %). Indiscriminate and unscientific disposal of wastes in the past has resulted in several sites in the country to become environmentally degraded. Isn't our own hazardous waste sufficient?
I submit that "141 hazardous waste dumpsites that have been primarily identified in 14 States/UTs out of which 88 critically polluted locations are currently identified" which in effect means that there no capacity to deal with these wastes. If they are unable to deal with the domestically generated waste in a scientific and environmentally sound manner and are compel them to dump them, how can Environment Ministry's reply to the Parliament that implies that India has the capacity to deal with the imported hazardous waste for any purpose be deemed convincing.
I submit that it has come to light from the Minister's statement that a co-ordination committee comprising of representatives from the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Commerce and Industries, the Ministry of Shipping, Central Pollution Control Board and select State Pollution Control Boards has been constituted that claims to be "working to sensitize the Customs authorities regarding enforcement of these Rules in order to check illegal import of hazardous waste into the country." It appears that through linguistic manipulation waste is been re-defined as non-waste. What has become evident is that Indian regulations offer least resistance to dumping of hazardous wastes. In fact it welcomes hazardous wastes trade in the name of "recycling or recovery or reuse" of hazardous wastes.
I submit that as a consequence hazardous waste importers are bringing in lakhs of tonnes of hazardous waste into India without facing any legal hurdle. Earlier, Environment Ministry’s Hazardous Waste Rules prohibited import of waste oil, ash and residues from incineration of municipal solid waste, plastic, and unsorted waste scrap. But the same was allowed under the Open General License of the export-import policy of the Commerce Ministry. This led to import of ash and residues from incineration of municipal solid waste has increased by about 130 times during 2006-2009. The import of plastic waste increased by seven times during this period. Countries such as Netherlands, Germany and the United Kingdom have realized that Indian regulations are hazardous waste friendly. There was a 48 per cent increase in hazardous waste trade import during 2006-2009.
I submit that acknowledging such a situation, the then Union Environment and Forest Minister had written a letter to Union Commerce Minister in April 2010 urging alignment of Hazardous Waste Rules and Export-Import policy to reduce “scope of confusion” at implementation level. “I suggest that a joint group of the two ministries be set up to resolve the issue”, the minister said and had further added that some export-oriented units especially those in the Special Economic Zones (SEZ) were importing hazardous waste without seeking approval from either the Ministries. They were also operating without a mandatory “consent to operate” under environmental laws aimed at protecting the environment. The minister had said, “An impression also seems to have gained ground that such units are exempt from the provisions of environment regulations can import hazardous wastes without any permission. These impressions need to be corrected”. What has happened since then is that instead of aligning and factoring in environmental concerns in the hazardous waste trade, blind profiteering has taken precedence over public health concerns. The Hazardous Wastes Rules do not apply to SEZ. PSC should demand that the names of SEZs which are importing hazardous wastes must be disclosed.
In view of the above, your immediate intervention alone can facilitate creation of legitimate legislative competence to regulate management and trade in hazardous wastes.
I will be happy to share relevant documents and reference materials in this regard.
Thanking You
Yours faithfully
Gopal Krishna
Convener
ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA)
New Delhi
Mb- 9818089660
E-mail- krishna1715@gmail.com,
Web: toxicswatch.blogpsot.com
Cc
Shri P. Karunakaran, Chairman, PSC on Subordinate Legislation
Shri Sitaram Yechury, Chairman, PSC on Transport, Culture & Tourism
Hon’ble Members of PSC on Subordinate Legislation
Shri Ghanshyam Anuragi
Shri Praveen Singh Aron
Shri Kalyan Banerjee
Shri E. T. Mohammed Basheer
Shri Ramen Deka
Dr. Mahesh Joshi
Shri Virender Kashyap
Shri Jitender Singh Malik
Dr. Thokchom Meinya
Smt. Mausam Noor
Shri Gajendra Singh Rajukhedi
Dr. Bhola Singh
Shri Vijay Bahadu Singh
Shri A.K.S Vijayan
Prof. M G K Menon, former Chairman, High Powered Committee on Hazardous Wastes
Hon’ble Members of Supreme Court Monitoring Committee on Hazardous Wastes
Dr Claude Alvares
Dr D B Boralkar
Shri Sanjay Parikh, Lawyer, Supreme Court
Shri P. Karunakaran,
Chairman
Parliamentary Standing Committee (PSC) on Subordinate Legislation
Parliament of India
New Delhi
Through Shri Sukhi Chand Chaudhary, Director, PSC on Subordinate Legislation
Subject- Subordinate legislations for hazardous waste management and trade under Environment Protection Act, 1986 violate Basel Convention without legislative mandate
Sir,
This is with reference to the subordinate legislations for Hazardous Waste Management and Trade under Environment Protection Act, 1986, the reply of Smt Jayanthi Natarajan, Union Minister of Environment and Forests in the Lok Sabha on May 21, 2012 and Supreme Court’s order dated October 14, 2003 and February 29, 2012.
Union Minister of Environment and Forests said, "Import of such (hazardous) wastes for disposal is not permitted. Import is permitted only for recycling or recovery or reuse with the permission of the Ministry of Environment and Forests and/or Directorate General of Foreign Trade", Union Commerce Ministry.
I submit that the Minister’s reply that defines hazardous waste as recyclable material appears to be an exercise in sophistry. Her reply and other relevant documents revealing the true nature the goings on are attached.
I submit that the trend revealed in PSC’s report on “Non-implementation of oft-repeated recommendations of Committee on Subordinate Legislation, Lok Sabha by various Ministries” dated December 16, 2011 is being pursued even by Union Ministry of Environment & Forests in the matter of subordinate legislations for Hazardous Waste Management and Trade under Environment Protection Act, 1986. This is being done at the behest of Union Ministry of Commerce and Industry.
I submit that it is clear from the existing Hazardous Waste Rules (including the amendments till date) that it promotes trade in hazardous waste unmindful of the National Environment Policy that acknowledges how "Environmental factors are estimated as being responsible in some cases for nearly 20 percent of the burden of disease in India".
I wish to draw your attention towards the first three paragraphs of Supreme Court’s landmark order dated October 14, 2003. It reads: ‘Hazardous Wastes are highly toxic in nature. The industrialization has had the effect of generation of huge quantities of hazardous wastes. These and other side effects of development gave birth to principles of sustainable development so as to sustain industrial growth. The hazardous waste required adequate and proper control and handling. Efforts are required to be made to minimise it. In developing nations, there are additional problems including that of dumping of hazardous waste on their lands by some of the nations where cost of destruction of such waste is felt very heavy. These and other allied problems gave birth to Basel Convention. The key objectives of the Basel Convention are: “to minimize the generation of hazardous wastes in terms of quantity and hazardousness; to dispose of them as close to the source of generation as possible; to reduce the transboundary movement of hazardous wastes.”
2. Due to alarming situation created by dumping of hazardous waste, its generation and serious and irreversible damage, as a result thereof, to the environment, flora and fauna, health of animals and human beings, the petitioner approached this Court under Article 32 complaining of violation of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.
3. The petitioner has, inter alia, relied upon the Basel Convention. The Basel Convention was signed by India on 15th March, 1990 and ratified on 24th June, 1992.’
I submit that in a order dated February 29, 2012, Supreme Court held that the application which “has been filed by Dr. Claude Alvares, member of the Supreme Court Monitoring Committee, praying for an injunction to restrain Union of India from finalising of a Notification on hazardous wastes dated 28th September, 2007, has been rendered infructuous on account of the publication of the Hazardous Wastes (Management, Handling & Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2008. It appears that the prayer of Dr.Claude Alvares, a member of the SCMC did not get relief due to limitations of jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.
I take this opportunity to pray to PSC on Subordinate Legislation “for an injunction to restrain Union of India” or any other possible relief through its examination of the Notification on hazardous wastes dated 28th September, 2007, which has been published as Hazardous Wastes (Management, Handling & Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2008, subsequent four amendments in the Rules, proposed fifth amendment in the Rules and the ‘Procedure for grant of approval for utilization of hazardous wastes as a supplementary resource or for energy recovery, or after processing under Rule 11 of Hazardous Wastes Management Rules, 2008’. The original Notification is attached.
I submit that both the current members of SCMC who were also the members of Supreme Court’s High Powered Committee on Hazardous Wastes Management headed by Prof M G K Menon namely,Dr.Claude Alvares and Dr.D.B. Boralkar should be invited by the PSC to hear their testimonies. Prof. Menon should also be invited besides Shri Sanjay Parikh, lawyer Supreme Court who has been pursuing the case selflessly since 1995. They can reveal the plot being set by hazardous waste traders.
I submit that in our country all the municipal waste to energy plants have failed. The proposal of the hazardous waste to energy projects through the procedure for grant of approval for utilization of hazardous wastes as a supplementary resource or for energy recovery, or after processing under Rule 11 of Hazardous Wastes Management Rules, 2008 has not been examined as far as their adverse environmental health impact is concerned. This is unfolding under illegitimate acts of subordinate legislation.
I submit that the intent of the Commerce and Environment Ministry stood exposed when it proposed an amendment to the Hazardous Wastes (Management & Handling) Rules; after amendment it was to read "Hazardous Materials (Management, Handling and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2007. The proposed rules was to have the effect of exempting transit countries from obtaining prior informed consent for all shipments of hazardous waste to India. The proposal also stated that as long as a material contains less than 60 per cent contamination by a hazardous constituent, then it is safe for our ecology. Waste asbestos embedded in the structure of the scrap material is not banned. This sleight of hand at redefinition attracted widespread criticism from environment and public health groups. Startled by the proposed Rules environment and public health researchers and activists had charged that it has been done at the behest of hazardous waste traders. Even the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) had expressed its concerns in November 2007. The SCMC on Hazardous Wastes had also objected. As a consequence the word "wastes" was not replaced with "materials" but "Transboundary Movement" remains. In effect, the original Rules were mutilated and the process of mutilating it further is underway.
I submit that through a jugglery of words in the subordinate legislations on hazardous wastes, Union Ministries of Commerce and Environment have paved the way for officially opening floodgates for the dumping of world's hazardous waste in the name of recycling. This has unleashed unprecedented havoc on India's environment and health of its citizens. These subordinate legislations on hazardous wastes seeks to undo established, science-based definitions of waste and consider waste that is being recycled somehow less hazardous than the waste being landfilled in order to curry favor with hazardous scrapping industries.
I submit that through a not-so-subtle mangling of international definitions for "waste", "disposal" and "safe recycling" both these ministries have designed a veritable global waste funnel that will ensure that the world's waste will surge to our shores. All this is being done in the name of recycling.
I submit that the Hazardous Wastes (Management, Handling and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2008 has completely altered definitions are contrary to the international rules of the Basel Convention, which India is obliged to uphold.
I submit that it is illegal for both these ministries pretend to implement the Basel Convention but utilise definitions that outwit the intent of the treaty.
I submit following examples of departures from the Basel Convention and international law:
• India has decided that transit states do not have to receive prior informed consent for all shipments of hazardous waste.
• India has decided that dumping in rivers, oceans, and lakes, or burning waste somehow does not constitute disposal and therefore that which is dumped in aquatic environments, or burned, is not waste.
• The international definition of "environmentally sound management" has been ignored in favor of a new definition of "safe for recycling" that states that as long as a material contains less than 60% contamination by a hazardous constituent, then it’s safe!
• India has exempted bio-medical wastes and municipal wastes from this law yet these are meant to be covered under Basel.
• India appears to allow dioxin imports for disposal but not for recycling.
• Waste asbestos imports are banned unless they are contaminating other substances (e.g. old ships).
• Fails to implement the Ban Amendment forbidding all imports of hazardous waste from developed countries.
• Fails to recognize it is illegal to trade in waste with non-Parties of the Basel Convention such as the United States.
• While since 1982 over 5924 dead and hazardous wastes laden ships have been dumped in Indian waters, the Hazardous Wastes Management (Handling & Transboundary Movement Rules, 2008) provides that the Rules will not apply to “wastes arising out of the operation from ships beyond five kilometers of the relevant baseline as covered under the provisions of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 and rules made there under”. Subordinate legislations under Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 also merit attention
I submit that it is contrary to our constitution because the State is under obligation to protect people's right to health and environment), instead of an environmental law being protective of human health and the environment, these subordinate legislations are trade centric for hazardous waste.
I submit that its significance must be seen in the context of India-Japan Free Trade Agreement and India-EU Free Trade Agreements besides Economic Partnership Agreements with other developed countries who wish to externalize their pollution load following Lawrence Summers Principle of transferring harm to developing countries.
In such a backdrop, I wish to dispute the reply of the Union Environment Minister. If this reply of Union Minister of Environment and Forests is read with the *attached* 'Statement of Hazardous Goods Lying at Ports' given to the Parliament by Union Minister of Shipping, the true nature of the goings on stands exposed. How is it that waste oil which is officially admitted as waste oil referred to as hazardous good?
I submit that the Ministry appears to have done its homework to justify hazardous waste trade in various disguises. Under Rule 23 of Hazardous Wastes (Management, Handling and Transboundary Movement) Third Amendment Rules, 2008 refers to the “Responsibilities of Authorities” which is specified in its Schedule VII that provides the List of Authorities and Corresponding Duties” wherein it is mentioned that Directorate-General of Foreign Trade constituted under the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 has a duty to “Grant License for import of hazardous wastes”.
It is noteworthy that since 1989 till 2012, there have been several amendments to the Rules. Interestingly, the new 7 page Draft Hazardous Wastes (Management, Handling and Transboundary Movement) Fifth Amendment Rules, 2011 engineers these Rules and inserts a new definition of waste. It reads: "“(zea) “waste” means materials, that are not products or by-products, for which the generator has no further use in terms of his/her own purposes or for production, transformation or consumption, and of which he/she wants to dispose." Its Explanation1 reads: "Wastes may be generated during the extraction of raw materials, the processing of raw materials into intermediates and final products, the consumption of final products, and through other human activities. Residuals recycled or reused at the place of generation as a part of process are excluded." Its Explanation 2 reads: "By-product means a material that is not solely or separately produced by the production process but gets produced in the process and is used as such." I hold that the amendments are being done under undue influence of the global hazardous waste traders. The new Draft Rule is attached.
I submit that the subordinate legislation with regard to Hazardous Wastes (Management, Handling and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2008 are contrary to the orders issued by the Supreme Court. The order dated 14th October, 2003 endorsed UN’s Basel Convention. The new notification is in contempt of the Court and violates the spirit of the Basel treaty by allowing traders to deal with hazardous wastes who are endangering public and ecological health. It is indeed strange that while the Environment Ministry admits that there is huge deficit of capacity to deal with hazardous wastes generated in the country, the new Hazardous Waste Rules, Amendments and Procedures permit traders to import hazardous wastes.
I wish to inform you that the Supreme Court Monitoring Committee (SCMC) on Hazardous Wastes members opines that "Truly, we take three steps forward and then five steps backward." The attached court’s order that constituted the SCMC saying “We constitute a Monitoring Committee comprising of the aforesaid members as also Dr.Claude Alvares, NGO and Dr.D.B. Boralkar. This Committee shall oversee that the direction of this Court are implemented timely. It would also oversee that the aspects to which the Ministry has agreed are implemented in letter and spirit and without any laxity or delay in the matter. It would be open to the Monitoring Committee to co-opt a representative of the State Government or State Pollution Control Boards or any other person or authority as the Committee may deem fit and proper. The Monitoring Committee shall file quarterly reports in this Court.” I submit that Union Ministry of Environment & Forests has ignored the recommendations of both the court appointed members.
I submit that as per a 54 page Report of the Committee to Evolve Road Map on Management of Wastes in India, Union Ministry of Environment & Forests there are about 36,000 hazardous waste generating industries in India which generate 6.2 million tonnes out of which land fillable hazardous waste is about 2.7 million tonnes (44%), incinerable hazardous waste is about 0.4 million tonnes (7 %) and recyclable hazardous waste is about 3.1 million tonnes (49 %). Indiscriminate and unscientific disposal of wastes in the past has resulted in several sites in the country to become environmentally degraded. Isn't our own hazardous waste sufficient?
I submit that "141 hazardous waste dumpsites that have been primarily identified in 14 States/UTs out of which 88 critically polluted locations are currently identified" which in effect means that there no capacity to deal with these wastes. If they are unable to deal with the domestically generated waste in a scientific and environmentally sound manner and are compel them to dump them, how can Environment Ministry's reply to the Parliament that implies that India has the capacity to deal with the imported hazardous waste for any purpose be deemed convincing.
I submit that it has come to light from the Minister's statement that a co-ordination committee comprising of representatives from the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Commerce and Industries, the Ministry of Shipping, Central Pollution Control Board and select State Pollution Control Boards has been constituted that claims to be "working to sensitize the Customs authorities regarding enforcement of these Rules in order to check illegal import of hazardous waste into the country." It appears that through linguistic manipulation waste is been re-defined as non-waste. What has become evident is that Indian regulations offer least resistance to dumping of hazardous wastes. In fact it welcomes hazardous wastes trade in the name of "recycling or recovery or reuse" of hazardous wastes.
I submit that as a consequence hazardous waste importers are bringing in lakhs of tonnes of hazardous waste into India without facing any legal hurdle. Earlier, Environment Ministry’s Hazardous Waste Rules prohibited import of waste oil, ash and residues from incineration of municipal solid waste, plastic, and unsorted waste scrap. But the same was allowed under the Open General License of the export-import policy of the Commerce Ministry. This led to import of ash and residues from incineration of municipal solid waste has increased by about 130 times during 2006-2009. The import of plastic waste increased by seven times during this period. Countries such as Netherlands, Germany and the United Kingdom have realized that Indian regulations are hazardous waste friendly. There was a 48 per cent increase in hazardous waste trade import during 2006-2009.
I submit that acknowledging such a situation, the then Union Environment and Forest Minister had written a letter to Union Commerce Minister in April 2010 urging alignment of Hazardous Waste Rules and Export-Import policy to reduce “scope of confusion” at implementation level. “I suggest that a joint group of the two ministries be set up to resolve the issue”, the minister said and had further added that some export-oriented units especially those in the Special Economic Zones (SEZ) were importing hazardous waste without seeking approval from either the Ministries. They were also operating without a mandatory “consent to operate” under environmental laws aimed at protecting the environment. The minister had said, “An impression also seems to have gained ground that such units are exempt from the provisions of environment regulations can import hazardous wastes without any permission. These impressions need to be corrected”. What has happened since then is that instead of aligning and factoring in environmental concerns in the hazardous waste trade, blind profiteering has taken precedence over public health concerns. The Hazardous Wastes Rules do not apply to SEZ. PSC should demand that the names of SEZs which are importing hazardous wastes must be disclosed.
In view of the above, your immediate intervention alone can facilitate creation of legitimate legislative competence to regulate management and trade in hazardous wastes.
I will be happy to share relevant documents and reference materials in this regard.
Thanking You
Yours faithfully
Gopal Krishna
Convener
ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA)
New Delhi
Mb- 9818089660
E-mail- krishna1715@gmail.com,
Web: toxicswatch.blogpsot.com
Cc
Shri P. Karunakaran, Chairman, PSC on Subordinate Legislation
Shri Sitaram Yechury, Chairman, PSC on Transport, Culture & Tourism
Hon’ble Members of PSC on Subordinate Legislation
Shri Ghanshyam Anuragi
Shri Praveen Singh Aron
Shri Kalyan Banerjee
Shri E. T. Mohammed Basheer
Shri Ramen Deka
Dr. Mahesh Joshi
Shri Virender Kashyap
Shri Jitender Singh Malik
Dr. Thokchom Meinya
Smt. Mausam Noor
Shri Gajendra Singh Rajukhedi
Dr. Bhola Singh
Shri Vijay Bahadu Singh
Shri A.K.S Vijayan
Prof. M G K Menon, former Chairman, High Powered Committee on Hazardous Wastes
Hon’ble Members of Supreme Court Monitoring Committee on Hazardous Wastes
Dr Claude Alvares
Dr D B Boralkar
Shri Sanjay Parikh, Lawyer, Supreme Court
5:17 AM
Sound e waste management system
Written By Krishna on Thursday, May 24, 2012 | 5:17 AM
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT AND FORESTS
RAJYA SABHA
QUESTION NO 3426
ANSWERED ON 8.05.2012
Sound e waste management system
MINISTER OF STATE (INDEPENDENT CHARGE) FOR ENVIRONMENT AND FORESTS (SHRIMATI JAYANTHI NATARAJAN)
(a)&(b) Based on a survey carried out by the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), it is estimated that 1.47 lakh Metric Tons (MT) of e-waste was generated in the country in the year 2005, which is expected to increase to about 8.00 lakh MT by 2012. The ten States generating the maximum quantities of e-waste are as follows:
Sl. No. City E-Waste (MT)
(2004-05)
1. Mumbai 11017
2. Delhi 9729
3. Bangalore 4648
4. Chennai 4132
5. Kolkata 4025
6. Ahmedabad 3288
7. Hyderabad 2833
8. Pune 2584
9. Surat 1837
10. Nagpur 1769
(c) to (e)The Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) has notified the E-Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 2011 for effective management of e-waste in the country. The Rules have come in to effect from 1st May 2012. The concept of Extended Producer Responsibility has been enshrined in these rules to make it a mandatory activity for the manufacturers of electronic and electrical equipments. Under this the producers are responsible for collection of e-waste generated from the end of life of their products by setting up collection centers or take back systems either individually or collectively.
Collection centres are required to obtain authorization from the State Pollution Control Board (SPCB) concerned. Dismantlers and Recyclers are required to obtain authorization and registration from the SPCB concerned.
As per these Rules, E-waste recycling can be undertaken only in facilities authorized and registered with State Pollution Control Boards/Pollution Control Committees. Waste generated is required to be sent or sold to a registered or authorized recycler or re-processor having environmentally sound facilities.
Guidelines for Environmentally Sound Management of E-waste brought out by Central Pollution Control Board provide the approach and methodology for environmentally sound management of e-waste.
MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT AND FORESTS
RAJYA SABHA
QUESTION NO 3426
ANSWERED ON 8.05.2012
Sound e waste management system
MINISTER OF STATE (INDEPENDENT CHARGE) FOR ENVIRONMENT AND FORESTS (SHRIMATI JAYANTHI NATARAJAN)
(a)&(b) Based on a survey carried out by the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), it is estimated that 1.47 lakh Metric Tons (MT) of e-waste was generated in the country in the year 2005, which is expected to increase to about 8.00 lakh MT by 2012. The ten States generating the maximum quantities of e-waste are as follows:
Sl. No. City E-Waste (MT)
(2004-05)
1. Mumbai 11017
2. Delhi 9729
3. Bangalore 4648
4. Chennai 4132
5. Kolkata 4025
6. Ahmedabad 3288
7. Hyderabad 2833
8. Pune 2584
9. Surat 1837
10. Nagpur 1769
(c) to (e)The Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) has notified the E-Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 2011 for effective management of e-waste in the country. The Rules have come in to effect from 1st May 2012. The concept of Extended Producer Responsibility has been enshrined in these rules to make it a mandatory activity for the manufacturers of electronic and electrical equipments. Under this the producers are responsible for collection of e-waste generated from the end of life of their products by setting up collection centers or take back systems either individually or collectively.
Collection centres are required to obtain authorization from the State Pollution Control Board (SPCB) concerned. Dismantlers and Recyclers are required to obtain authorization and registration from the SPCB concerned.
As per these Rules, E-waste recycling can be undertaken only in facilities authorized and registered with State Pollution Control Boards/Pollution Control Committees. Waste generated is required to be sent or sold to a registered or authorized recycler or re-processor having environmentally sound facilities.
Guidelines for Environmentally Sound Management of E-waste brought out by Central Pollution Control Board provide the approach and methodology for environmentally sound management of e-waste.
5:06 AM
Stop Asbestos Cement Plant in Bargarh, Odisha
To
Shri Naveen Patnaik
Chief Minister
Government of Odisha
Bhubneshwar
Through Chief Secretary, Government of Odisha
Subject-Stop Asbestos Cement Plant in Bargarh, Odisha
Sir,
This is to draw your urgent attention towards the villagers’ protest against the proposed hazardous asbestos cement roofing factory at Naagaon-Lebidi villages, Sohella Block, Bargarh district, Odisha. The company M/s Viswakarma Roofings Ltd. intends to establish 150,000 Tonnes Per Annum of Asbestos Cement Sheets Manufacturing Project at Bargarh in state of Odisha. The proposal is to establish 0.15 MTPA Asbestos Cement Sheet Plant. The site includes Nuagan, Kendupali, Lebidi Mauza and several other villages.
I am an environmental health researcher. I have worked with national and international organizations working on environmental and occupational health. I am an applicant in the Supreme Court in the hazardous wastes/shipbreaking case and against asbestos fibers in the National Human Rights Commission, New Delhi.
I am writing on behalf of the New Delhi based Ban Asbestos Network of India (BANI) which has been working to speared awareness about the hazardous impact of asbestos fibers since 2002 has learnt that several hundreds of people, including women and children, participated in protest demonstrations against the proposed Asbestos Cement Sheet factory on May 22, 2012.
I have come to know villagers are resisting the efforts of the Vishwakarma Roofings Ltd. The ongoing protests commenced from the date of public hearing in September, 2011. The attached minutes of the public hearing reveal the same.
It is noteworthy that a member of BANI, ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA) is pursuing a case against asbestos fibers in the NHRC.
Both BANI and TWA express their support for the efforts of Jan Paribesh Suraksha Parishad (JPSP) to resist the plan to set up hazardous chrysotile asbestos (white asbestos) plant in Bargarh.
It has reliably been learnt that villagers will not allow the setting up of the asbestos cement sheet factory at any cost.
I submit that villagers are quite angry when they witnessed the construction work for the hazardous asbestos factory in the vicinity of more than 10 villages within a 2 km radius, including water bodies, schools, agricultural fields and a government food warehouse.
I submit that there was a rally against the proposed toxic plant that commenced from the National Highway 6, Dus Mile Chowk, 7 Km from Sohela Block, Bargarh district and culminated at the project site.
I submit that JPSP has informed me about the protest against the disastrous consequences for the villagers of Naagaon-Lebidi, Sohela Block, Bargarh district, Odisha.
I wish to inform you that some 55 countries have already banned asbestos of all kinds including white asbestos that is proposed to be used for manufacturing asbestos fiber based roofs. There is a compelling logic to initiate the process of banning asbestos manufacturing, trade and use in Odisha as well.
I submit that the State Government ought to take note of ten crucial national and international developments with regard to hazards from asbestos of all kinds including white asbestos with documentary proof:
1) Judgment of the Italian Criminal Court dated February 12, 2012 convicting owners of an asbestos company
2) Vision Statement on Environment and Human Health of Ministry of Environment & Forests
3) Notice of the National Human Rights Commission dated July 6, 2011 sent to Chief Secretary, Odisha Government
4) New Delhi Declaration Seeking Elimination of all forms of Asbestos including White Asbestos from India, March 2011
5) Government of India’s decision at UN’s 5th Conference of the Parties (COP5) to the UN’s Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade held in Geneva during June 20-24, 2011 wherein it agreed to the inclusion of chrysotile asbestos (white asbestos) in the list of hazardous chemicals paving the way for its ‘phase out’
6) Order of the Kerala Human Rights Commission dated January 31, 2009 on ‘asbestos roofs’,
7) Health Management Plan for Mesothalmia, Lung cancer and Asbestosis related problems in asbestos industries (Term of Reference of Experts Appraisal Committee, Industrial Projects),
8) Factsheet of World Health Organisation (WHO) and ILO Resolution
9) Union Ministry of Labour's Concept Paper on Plan to Ban Asbestos
10) NHRC Member's concern for use of carcinogenic asbestos roof by Union Rural Development Ministry in Indira Awas Yojna
I submit that these developments will help comprehend the matter of human rights violations from the proposed hazardous white asbestos fiber cement sheet projects in Bargarh.
I submit that European asbestos billionaires Mr Stephan Schmidheiny and Mr Baron Luis de Cartier have been fined and sentenced to 16 years gaol by an Italian criminal court for deliberately failing to warn workers, families and residents about the dangers of asbestos. Reference:http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-02-14/billionaires-sentenced-to-16-years-gaol-for/3828540 (1)
I wish to draw your attention towards the Union Environment Ministry’s 19 page Vision Statement on Environment and Human Health (Para 4.3.1) on page 12 which reads: “Alternatives to asbestos may be used to the extent possible and use of asbestos may be phased out”. Reference: Environment Ministry’s website: moef.nic.in/divisions/cpoll/envhealth/visenvhealth.pdf. (2)
I submit that the National Human Rights Commission has taken cognizance of various incurable diseases caused by white asbestos and the request for grant of a compensation package for present and future victims of Asbestos diseases. The Commission has issued notice to Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar. NHRC Notice attached. (3)
I submit that the Annual Report of NHRC 2003-2004 refers to a Report entitled “Asbestos – Health and Environment – an in-depth Study “submitted by the Institute of Public Health Engineers, India. The study underlines that safe and controlled use of asbestos is not possible. I submit that NHRC has passed an order in Case No: 693/30/97-98 recommending that the asbestos sheets roofing be replaced with roofing made up of some other material that would not be harmful.
I submit that the New Delhi Declaration Seeking Elimination of all forms of Asbestos including Chrysotile from India was adopted and endorsed by world renowned eminent scientists and doctors in March 24, 2011. The declaration is attached. (4)
I wish to inform you that the Government of India’s delegation at the UN Conference in Geneva agreed to the listing of chrysotile asbestos in the Annex III of the Rotterdam Convention which is the Prior Informed Consent (PIC) list of hazardous substances on June 22, 2011. The turnaround came at a contact group meeting which was set up for discussion on chrysotile asbestos also known as white asbestos as they member groups of the convention could not agree upon a consensus. However, when India announced its stand it was applauded and it received a standing ovation at the plenary. The UN’s Chemical Review Committee had recommended the listing of white asbestos on the grounds of WHO findings that asbestos was a hazardous substance harmful to human health and environment; it had also stated that PIC was especially important for developing countries which have weak legal and institutional structures for addressing hazardous materials. The deliberations are available at www.pic.int (5)
I submit that Justice N Dhinakar, the Kerala State Human Rights Commission (KSHRC) made three recommendations banning use of asbestos roofs in its order dated January 31, 2009. The recommendations are: “
a) The State Government will replace asbestos roofs of all school buildings under its control with country tiles in a phased manner.
b) The Government will take steps to see that the schools run under the private management also replace the asbestos roofs with country tiles by fixing a time frame.
c) The Government should see that in future no new school is allowed to commence its functions with asbestos roofs.”(6)
I submit that these recommendations are relevant for Odisha as well and it is natural to expect that the State Human Rights Commission will also take cognisance of it.
It is germane to note that Terms of Reference (TOR) that was awarded by the Experts Appraisal Committee, Industrial Project, Union Ministry of Environment & Forests to the project proponents for white asbestos based roofing factories state that they should prepare a “Health Management Plan for Mesothalmia, Lung cancer and Asbestosis related problems in asbestos industries.” Till date this has not been done. (7)
This underlines that the opposition of the villagers is quite justified on the ground that the proposed hazardous white asbestos fiber cement sheet project causes incurable fatal diseases.
I wish to inform you that the World Health Organization (WHO) re-iterates that the most efficient way to eliminate asbestos-related diseases is to stop the use of all types of asbestos and specifically states that its strategy is particularly targeted at countries still using chrysotile asbestos. The factsheet notes that “more than 107 000 people die each year from asbestos-related lung cancer, mesothelioma and asbestosis resulting from occupational exposure.” The relevant factsheet is asbestos available at: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs343/en/index.html The ILO resolution seeking elimination of chrysotile asbestos is attached. (8)
It is not surprising that "The Government of India is considering the ban on use of chrysotile asbestos in India to protect the workers and the general population against primary and secondary exposure to Chrysotile form of Asbestos." It has noted that "Asbestosis is yet another occupational disease of the Lungs which is on an increase under similar circumstances warranting concerted efforts of all stake holders to evolve strategies to curb this menace". A concept paper by Union Ministry of Labour revealed this at the two-day 5th India-EU Joint Seminar on “Occupational Safety and Health” on 19th and 20th September, 2011. Reference: http://www.labour.nic.in/lc/Background%20note.pdf (9)
I wish to draw your attention towards the fact that asbestos cement based building materials are being used in the Union Rural Development Ministry’s Indira Awas Yojna, this will have grave public health consequences. It is sad that central government’s definition of roofing material includes asbestos cement sheet along with Reinforced Brick Concrete and timber etc as per Union Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation. I submit that unmindful of the impending health crisis, the asbestos cement manufacturers are celebrating thrust given by the central government on rural housing through Indira Awaas Yojana because asbestos cement product sector derives sizeable portion of its demand from rural housing sector and remaining demand from industrial sheds. Central government’s Rs 10, 000 crore worth annual housing flagship scheme, Indira Awaas Yojana endangers the rural poor as its is using carcinogenic asbestos sheets to keep the cost below the ceiling of Rs 45,000 per house under the scheme. The National Human Rights Commission member, Shri Satyabrata Pal, a retired 1972 batch IFS officer has raised questions on the hazards as per a news report (Country’s flagship housing scheme turning out to be a debt trap, Iftikhar Gilani, Dec 26, 2011, DNA). (10)
Your immediate intervention can stop the crisis from assuming serious proportion.
It is due these concerns that asbestos of all kinds is banned in 55 countries. In India, mining of all kinds of asbestos is technically banned too besides trade in asbestos waste but its trade, manufacturing and use is yet to be banned. A considered step in Odisha would pave the way for all the states to follow.
It is deeply saddening to note that despite bitter opposition from villagers, their views and concerns are being ignored by the State Pollution Control Board which is to blatantly disregarding all the seven issues raised above including the Vision Statement on Environment and Human Health of the Union Environment Ministry with regard to asbestos.
I wish to inform you that villagers of Bargarh will make any sacrifice to stop the killer asbestos plant amidst their locality, which is akin to a ticking time bomb. In the light of the above referenced facts and the Vision Statement on Environment and Human Health of Union Environment ministry and NHRC notice in particular, we request you to put a moratorium on white asbestos based industrial projects in Odisha to safeguard the human rights of present future generations because asbestos fibers are lethal through its life cycle and even after its end of life. This action will enhance the prestige of the Commission and the State.
I wish to inform you that villagers of Chainpur-Bishunpur in Muzaffarpur, Bihar have stopped the asbestos plant. I submit that asbestos danger is lurking for the villagers of Bargarh and the State Government can set a healthy precedent by stopping it.
I can share all the relevant reference documents at the earliest to apprise you of the hazardous environment that is emerging due to the setting up of such universally established toxic plants that poses indiscriminate threat to residents of these villages.
Thanking You
Yours Sincerely
Gopal Krishna
Ban Asbestos Network of India (BANI)
ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA), Member, BANI
New Delhi
Phone: +91-11-2651781, Fax: +91-11-26517814
Mb: 9818089660
Web: banasbestosindia.blogspot.com, toxiscwatch.blogspot.com
Cc
Union Finance Minister, Government of India
Union Health Minister, Government of India
Union Commerce Minister, Government of India
Secretary, Union Ministry of Labour
Secretary, Union Ministry of Environment & Forests
Smt. Mira Mehrishi, Additional Secretary, Union Ministry of Environment & Forests
Chairperson, Odisha State Pollution Control Board
District Magistrate, Bargarh, Odisha
Superintendent of Police, Bargarh, Odisha
Shri Amitabh Mitra, Jan Paribesh Suraksha Parishad (JPSP), Bargarh, Odisha
Shri Naveen Patnaik
Chief Minister
Government of Odisha
Bhubneshwar
Through Chief Secretary, Government of Odisha
Subject-Stop Asbestos Cement Plant in Bargarh, Odisha
Sir,
This is to draw your urgent attention towards the villagers’ protest against the proposed hazardous asbestos cement roofing factory at Naagaon-Lebidi villages, Sohella Block, Bargarh district, Odisha. The company M/s Viswakarma Roofings Ltd. intends to establish 150,000 Tonnes Per Annum of Asbestos Cement Sheets Manufacturing Project at Bargarh in state of Odisha. The proposal is to establish 0.15 MTPA Asbestos Cement Sheet Plant. The site includes Nuagan, Kendupali, Lebidi Mauza and several other villages.
I am an environmental health researcher. I have worked with national and international organizations working on environmental and occupational health. I am an applicant in the Supreme Court in the hazardous wastes/shipbreaking case and against asbestos fibers in the National Human Rights Commission, New Delhi.
I am writing on behalf of the New Delhi based Ban Asbestos Network of India (BANI) which has been working to speared awareness about the hazardous impact of asbestos fibers since 2002 has learnt that several hundreds of people, including women and children, participated in protest demonstrations against the proposed Asbestos Cement Sheet factory on May 22, 2012.
I have come to know villagers are resisting the efforts of the Vishwakarma Roofings Ltd. The ongoing protests commenced from the date of public hearing in September, 2011. The attached minutes of the public hearing reveal the same.
It is noteworthy that a member of BANI, ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA) is pursuing a case against asbestos fibers in the NHRC.
Both BANI and TWA express their support for the efforts of Jan Paribesh Suraksha Parishad (JPSP) to resist the plan to set up hazardous chrysotile asbestos (white asbestos) plant in Bargarh.
It has reliably been learnt that villagers will not allow the setting up of the asbestos cement sheet factory at any cost.
I submit that villagers are quite angry when they witnessed the construction work for the hazardous asbestos factory in the vicinity of more than 10 villages within a 2 km radius, including water bodies, schools, agricultural fields and a government food warehouse.
I submit that there was a rally against the proposed toxic plant that commenced from the National Highway 6, Dus Mile Chowk, 7 Km from Sohela Block, Bargarh district and culminated at the project site.
I submit that JPSP has informed me about the protest against the disastrous consequences for the villagers of Naagaon-Lebidi, Sohela Block, Bargarh district, Odisha.
I wish to inform you that some 55 countries have already banned asbestos of all kinds including white asbestos that is proposed to be used for manufacturing asbestos fiber based roofs. There is a compelling logic to initiate the process of banning asbestos manufacturing, trade and use in Odisha as well.
I submit that the State Government ought to take note of ten crucial national and international developments with regard to hazards from asbestos of all kinds including white asbestos with documentary proof:
1) Judgment of the Italian Criminal Court dated February 12, 2012 convicting owners of an asbestos company
2) Vision Statement on Environment and Human Health of Ministry of Environment & Forests
3) Notice of the National Human Rights Commission dated July 6, 2011 sent to Chief Secretary, Odisha Government
4) New Delhi Declaration Seeking Elimination of all forms of Asbestos including White Asbestos from India, March 2011
5) Government of India’s decision at UN’s 5th Conference of the Parties (COP5) to the UN’s Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade held in Geneva during June 20-24, 2011 wherein it agreed to the inclusion of chrysotile asbestos (white asbestos) in the list of hazardous chemicals paving the way for its ‘phase out’
6) Order of the Kerala Human Rights Commission dated January 31, 2009 on ‘asbestos roofs’,
7) Health Management Plan for Mesothalmia, Lung cancer and Asbestosis related problems in asbestos industries (Term of Reference of Experts Appraisal Committee, Industrial Projects),
8) Factsheet of World Health Organisation (WHO) and ILO Resolution
9) Union Ministry of Labour's Concept Paper on Plan to Ban Asbestos
10) NHRC Member's concern for use of carcinogenic asbestos roof by Union Rural Development Ministry in Indira Awas Yojna
I submit that these developments will help comprehend the matter of human rights violations from the proposed hazardous white asbestos fiber cement sheet projects in Bargarh.
I submit that European asbestos billionaires Mr Stephan Schmidheiny and Mr Baron Luis de Cartier have been fined and sentenced to 16 years gaol by an Italian criminal court for deliberately failing to warn workers, families and residents about the dangers of asbestos. Reference:http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-02-14/billionaires-sentenced-to-16-years-gaol-for/3828540 (1)
I wish to draw your attention towards the Union Environment Ministry’s 19 page Vision Statement on Environment and Human Health (Para 4.3.1) on page 12 which reads: “Alternatives to asbestos may be used to the extent possible and use of asbestos may be phased out”. Reference: Environment Ministry’s website: moef.nic.in/divisions/cpoll/envhealth/visenvhealth.pdf. (2)
I submit that the National Human Rights Commission has taken cognizance of various incurable diseases caused by white asbestos and the request for grant of a compensation package for present and future victims of Asbestos diseases. The Commission has issued notice to Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar. NHRC Notice attached. (3)
I submit that the Annual Report of NHRC 2003-2004 refers to a Report entitled “Asbestos – Health and Environment – an in-depth Study “submitted by the Institute of Public Health Engineers, India. The study underlines that safe and controlled use of asbestos is not possible. I submit that NHRC has passed an order in Case No: 693/30/97-98 recommending that the asbestos sheets roofing be replaced with roofing made up of some other material that would not be harmful.
I submit that the New Delhi Declaration Seeking Elimination of all forms of Asbestos including Chrysotile from India was adopted and endorsed by world renowned eminent scientists and doctors in March 24, 2011. The declaration is attached. (4)
I wish to inform you that the Government of India’s delegation at the UN Conference in Geneva agreed to the listing of chrysotile asbestos in the Annex III of the Rotterdam Convention which is the Prior Informed Consent (PIC) list of hazardous substances on June 22, 2011. The turnaround came at a contact group meeting which was set up for discussion on chrysotile asbestos also known as white asbestos as they member groups of the convention could not agree upon a consensus. However, when India announced its stand it was applauded and it received a standing ovation at the plenary. The UN’s Chemical Review Committee had recommended the listing of white asbestos on the grounds of WHO findings that asbestos was a hazardous substance harmful to human health and environment; it had also stated that PIC was especially important for developing countries which have weak legal and institutional structures for addressing hazardous materials. The deliberations are available at www.pic.int (5)
I submit that Justice N Dhinakar, the Kerala State Human Rights Commission (KSHRC) made three recommendations banning use of asbestos roofs in its order dated January 31, 2009. The recommendations are: “
a) The State Government will replace asbestos roofs of all school buildings under its control with country tiles in a phased manner.
b) The Government will take steps to see that the schools run under the private management also replace the asbestos roofs with country tiles by fixing a time frame.
c) The Government should see that in future no new school is allowed to commence its functions with asbestos roofs.”(6)
I submit that these recommendations are relevant for Odisha as well and it is natural to expect that the State Human Rights Commission will also take cognisance of it.
It is germane to note that Terms of Reference (TOR) that was awarded by the Experts Appraisal Committee, Industrial Project, Union Ministry of Environment & Forests to the project proponents for white asbestos based roofing factories state that they should prepare a “Health Management Plan for Mesothalmia, Lung cancer and Asbestosis related problems in asbestos industries.” Till date this has not been done. (7)
This underlines that the opposition of the villagers is quite justified on the ground that the proposed hazardous white asbestos fiber cement sheet project causes incurable fatal diseases.
I wish to inform you that the World Health Organization (WHO) re-iterates that the most efficient way to eliminate asbestos-related diseases is to stop the use of all types of asbestos and specifically states that its strategy is particularly targeted at countries still using chrysotile asbestos. The factsheet notes that “more than 107 000 people die each year from asbestos-related lung cancer, mesothelioma and asbestosis resulting from occupational exposure.” The relevant factsheet is asbestos available at: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs343/en/index.html The ILO resolution seeking elimination of chrysotile asbestos is attached. (8)
It is not surprising that "The Government of India is considering the ban on use of chrysotile asbestos in India to protect the workers and the general population against primary and secondary exposure to Chrysotile form of Asbestos." It has noted that "Asbestosis is yet another occupational disease of the Lungs which is on an increase under similar circumstances warranting concerted efforts of all stake holders to evolve strategies to curb this menace". A concept paper by Union Ministry of Labour revealed this at the two-day 5th India-EU Joint Seminar on “Occupational Safety and Health” on 19th and 20th September, 2011. Reference: http://www.labour.nic.in/lc/Background%20note.pdf (9)
I wish to draw your attention towards the fact that asbestos cement based building materials are being used in the Union Rural Development Ministry’s Indira Awas Yojna, this will have grave public health consequences. It is sad that central government’s definition of roofing material includes asbestos cement sheet along with Reinforced Brick Concrete and timber etc as per Union Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation. I submit that unmindful of the impending health crisis, the asbestos cement manufacturers are celebrating thrust given by the central government on rural housing through Indira Awaas Yojana because asbestos cement product sector derives sizeable portion of its demand from rural housing sector and remaining demand from industrial sheds. Central government’s Rs 10, 000 crore worth annual housing flagship scheme, Indira Awaas Yojana endangers the rural poor as its is using carcinogenic asbestos sheets to keep the cost below the ceiling of Rs 45,000 per house under the scheme. The National Human Rights Commission member, Shri Satyabrata Pal, a retired 1972 batch IFS officer has raised questions on the hazards as per a news report (Country’s flagship housing scheme turning out to be a debt trap, Iftikhar Gilani, Dec 26, 2011, DNA). (10)
Your immediate intervention can stop the crisis from assuming serious proportion.
It is due these concerns that asbestos of all kinds is banned in 55 countries. In India, mining of all kinds of asbestos is technically banned too besides trade in asbestos waste but its trade, manufacturing and use is yet to be banned. A considered step in Odisha would pave the way for all the states to follow.
It is deeply saddening to note that despite bitter opposition from villagers, their views and concerns are being ignored by the State Pollution Control Board which is to blatantly disregarding all the seven issues raised above including the Vision Statement on Environment and Human Health of the Union Environment Ministry with regard to asbestos.
I wish to inform you that villagers of Bargarh will make any sacrifice to stop the killer asbestos plant amidst their locality, which is akin to a ticking time bomb. In the light of the above referenced facts and the Vision Statement on Environment and Human Health of Union Environment ministry and NHRC notice in particular, we request you to put a moratorium on white asbestos based industrial projects in Odisha to safeguard the human rights of present future generations because asbestos fibers are lethal through its life cycle and even after its end of life. This action will enhance the prestige of the Commission and the State.
I wish to inform you that villagers of Chainpur-Bishunpur in Muzaffarpur, Bihar have stopped the asbestos plant. I submit that asbestos danger is lurking for the villagers of Bargarh and the State Government can set a healthy precedent by stopping it.
I can share all the relevant reference documents at the earliest to apprise you of the hazardous environment that is emerging due to the setting up of such universally established toxic plants that poses indiscriminate threat to residents of these villages.
Thanking You
Yours Sincerely
Gopal Krishna
Ban Asbestos Network of India (BANI)
ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA), Member, BANI
New Delhi
Phone: +91-11-2651781, Fax: +91-11-26517814
Mb: 9818089660
Web: banasbestosindia.blogspot.com, toxiscwatch.blogspot.com
Cc
Union Finance Minister, Government of India
Union Health Minister, Government of India
Union Commerce Minister, Government of India
Secretary, Union Ministry of Labour
Secretary, Union Ministry of Environment & Forests
Smt. Mira Mehrishi, Additional Secretary, Union Ministry of Environment & Forests
Chairperson, Odisha State Pollution Control Board
District Magistrate, Bargarh, Odisha
Superintendent of Police, Bargarh, Odisha
Shri Amitabh Mitra, Jan Paribesh Suraksha Parishad (JPSP), Bargarh, Odisha