Nagasaki Peace Declaration 2025: Full Text
-
*Statement issued by Nagasaki Mayor Suzuki Shiro, on the 80th year of
nuclear bombing.*
The post Nagasaki Peace Declaration 2025: Full Text appeared firs...
Latest Post
Showing posts with label Corporate Crime. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Corporate Crime. Show all posts
Canadian Supreme Court fails to peirce the corporate veil of Chevron, denies justice to Ecuadorian communities
Written By mediavigil on Thursday, April 04, 2019 | 1:26 PM
In a setback to the cause of justice, Supreme Court of Canada's ruling regarding the case of Chevron in the Ecuadorian Amazon has refused to admit the appeals filed by the communities affected by Chevron -formerly Texaco- in the Ecuadorian Amazon. This ruling reinforces corporate impunity by protecting Chevron's Canadian assets. The struggle for access
to justice in other foreign jurisdictions remains unfinished.Canada's Supreme Court declined to review a decision that a group of Ecuadorians cannot go after a Canadian Chevron subsidiary's assets for $9.5 billion pollution judgment.It means that $9.5 billion Ecuadorian judgment against Chevron Corporation given by a local court in Lago Agrio, Ecuador in 2011 cannot be enforced against Chevron Canada Limited. In effect, Canadian Supreme Court has upheld the on May 23, 2018 order of the Ontario Court of Appeal that dismissed all claims against Chevron Canada Limited, holding that it is a separate entity from the parent Chevron Corporation with no obligation to the Ecuadorian justice system. Seven judges of the Supreme Court of Canada decided to accept jurisdiction to carry out an enforcement or “exequatur process” in Canada, upholding the legitimacy of the Ecuador Supreme Court´s decision on Chevron in 2015. This decision had brought strong hopes to the indigenous communities gathered in the Union of People Affected by Chevron – Texaco in Ecuador (UDAPT) that justice could be achieved.
Similar arguments has been advanced by Union Carbide Corporation (UCC), currently a subsidiary of Dow Chemicals Company in the Bhopal disaster case. The fact remains Court's accept such arguments in circumstances wherein it does not have the judicial will to pierce through the corporate veil. Subsidiaries of parent companies like Chevron Canada is not an autonomous and independent entity from the parent company Chevron.
It is worth remembering that Chevron´s operations in the Amazon deeply and negatively affected the lives of indigenous people, the ecosystem, water and common goods. From 1964 to 1992, the company dumped nearly 65,000 barrels of oil and more than 16 billion gallons of waste water into rivers and lands in the rainforest, affecting the health and livelihoods of over 30,000 indigenous people and peasants from various communities. The atrocious consequences of its activities in Ecuador resulted in the case being known as the “Amazon Chernobyl”.
In the face of a disaster of this magnitude, UDAPT has been fighting for over 25 years and currently its goal is to achieve the enforcement of the decision of the Ecuadorian Supreme Court, so that the environmental, social and cultural damage caused by the oil company is redressed.
In the face of a disaster of this magnitude, UDAPT has been fighting for over 25 years and currently its goal is to achieve the enforcement of the decision of the Ecuadorian Supreme Court, so that the environmental, social and cultural damage caused by the oil company is redressed.
A global network of over 200 organizations,
movements, trade unions and communities affected by transnational
corporations worldwide, Global Campaign to Reclaim Peoples´ Sovereignty, Dismantle Corporate
Power and End Impunity has expressed its disappointment with the decision of the Supreme Court of
Canada.
The decision of the Supreme Court of Canada reveals the character of the legal architecture that protects the transnational corporations. Cases like those of UCC and Chevron case create a logical compulsion for the States to endorse the negotiations for an international binding treaty on transnational corporations and human rights which is consistent with the call for international solidarity with communities affected by Chevron and UCC.
Companies Act 2015 continues to facilitate corporate funding for political parties and co-option of NGOs
Written By mediavigil on Thursday, May 28, 2015 | 5:41 AM
Provision for CSR in the Act needed to be revisited
The Companies (Amendment) Act, 2015 has received the assent of the President. It has been notified in the Official Gazette with effect from 26th May, 2015. Companies (Amendment) Bill, 2014 which was introduced to amend Companies Act, 2013 was approved by the Lok Sabha on17th December, 2014 and by the Rajya Sabha on 13th May, 2015. This Act along with the 2013 Act merits attention of all the lovers of true democracy. Notably, the Contesting Election on Government Expenses Bill, 2012 is pending in the Rajya Sabha which was long due for putting a check on increasing use of black money in elections and political activities but the Companies Act has emerged as a threat to the idea of State funding of elections. Yet another opportunity has been lost to deal with the menace of black money with the passage of the Act.
Union Cabinet chaired by the Prime Minister, Narendra Modi gave its approval for the Companies (Amendment) Bill, 2014 on 29th April, 2015. With this 2013 Act has received the seal of approval from the NDA government. There was a need for replacing corporate donation for political parties with provision of corporate donation for government’s electoral fund that can be used for State funding of elections. But the government accepted the status quo in general. Thus, regime has changed but the order has remained the same.
The Companies Act reveals double speak, insincerity and inconsistency of the ruling parties and opposition parties. The Companies Act should have banned corporate funding for electoral campaigns but this has not happened. This is contrary to several reports of the Parliamentary and government's committees which recommended State funding of elections to deal with black money.
The root of rampant corporate crimes committed with impunity, environmental destruction, poisoning of food chain and human rights violations by security forces has been traced to corporate funding of political parties. In the aftermath of industrial disasters, frauds and war crimes by companies world over, this Act merits rigorous scrutiny by all sections of legislatures and society.
It may be noted that there is a provision in the Act that reads: "Notwithstanding anything contained in any other provision of this Act, a company, other than a Government company and a company which has been in existence for less than three financial years, may contribute any amount directly or indirectly to any political party: Provided that the amount referred to in sub-section (1) or, as the case may be, the aggregate of the amount which may be so contributed by the company in any financial year shall not exceed seven and a half per cent of its average net profits during the three immediately preceding financial years".
It may be recalled that two contradictory things happened in the Lok Sabha on 14th December, 2011. Companies Bill, 2011 was introduced by Dr Veerappa Moily as a Union Minister in the afternoon that made provision for corporate funding of parties. Within hours of the introduction of this Bill, Manish Tiwari, National Spokesperson of the Indian National Congress who stood up to speak about UPA's seriousness in dealing about Black money stated, "I feel ashamed to state that black money which is linked to our advertisement policy is related to electoral finance that needs to be rectified."
The 2013 Act was passed with the endorsement of Yashwant Sinha headed Parliamentary Standing Committee on Finance. The 2015 Act has the endorsement of Indian National Congress in the Parliament.
The collusion between major parties that was witnessed in the report Indrajit Gupta headed Parliamentary Committee remains unaltered. The silence of the left parties is quite deafening in this regard. In the light of this development, the reluctance of the political parties except Communist Party of India to come under the ambit of Right to Information Act is not inexplicable.
The 2013 Act was passed with the endorsement of Yashwant Sinha headed Parliamentary Standing Committee on Finance. The 2015 Act has the endorsement of Indian National Congress in the Parliament.
The collusion between major parties that was witnessed in the report Indrajit Gupta headed Parliamentary Committee remains unaltered. The silence of the left parties is quite deafening in this regard. In the light of this development, the reluctance of the political parties except Communist Party of India to come under the ambit of Right to Information Act is not inexplicable.
The Act gives greater role to shareholders and promotes shareholder democracy of sort.
It is explicable as to this government forgot about the recommendations of the Group of Ministers (GoM), headed by the then Union Home Minister, L.K. Advani, to consider recommendations of the Indrajit Gupta headed Committee on State funding of elections during the Bhartiya Janata Party led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) Government. The Committee on State Funding of Election was headed by the former Union Home Minister and veteran CPI leader, Indrajit Gupta, had submitted its report to the Government on 14th January, 1999 favouring State funding of elections.
It merits recalling that at the Convention of Indian Youth Congress on November 29, 2011, Sonia Gandhi, Chairman, Indian National Congress reiterated the need for state financing of elections as a measure against corruption in the electoral process. Earlier, she had demanded it at the Congress plenary in December 2010. The Union Minister for Law & Justice informed the Lok Sabha on November 28, 2011 that --Group of Ministers constituted by the Central Government is considering measures that can be taken by the Government to tackle corruption which inter alia include the introduction of state funding of elections. The Act shows that what Sonia Gandhi had told the Convention of Indian Youth Congress has not been incorporated in the Act. BJP led NDA government wasted the opportunity of rectifying the Act.
It is evident that both Congress led UPA and BJP led NDA are preaching one thing and practicing just the contrary. The passage of this legislation re-legitimizes corporate funding of political parties instead of reversing the trend.
There is a provision in the Ac which appears quite dangerous. It reads: The Board of Directors of a company may contribute to bona fide charitable and other funds: Provided that prior permission of the company in general meeting shall be required for such contribution in case any amount the aggregate of which, in any financial year, exceed five per cent of its average net profits for the three immediately preceding financial years." This is a masterstroke to co-opt bonafide charitable institutions and turn them into fake public interest institutions who serve corporate interests. Both are divergent interests for sure.
While the hollowness of Concept of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) which is an exercise in advertising and brand positioning is well known, the same has been introduced in the Companies Act. The provision regarding CSR reads" Every company having net worth of rupees five hundred crore or more, or turnover of rupees one thousand crore or more or a net profit of rupees five crore or more during any financial year shall constitute a Corporate Social Responsibility Committee of the Borad consisting of three or more directors, out of which at least one director shall be an independent director. The Board's report shall disclose the composition of the Corporate Social Responsibility Committee. The Corporate Social Responsibility Committee shall,—(a) formulate and recommend to the Board, a Corporate Social Responsibility Policy which shall indicate the activities to be undertaken by the compay as specified in Schedule VII the company spends, in every financial year, at least two per cent of the average net profits of the company made during the three immediately preceding financial years, in pursuance of its Corporate Social Responsibility Policy.
While the hollowness of Concept of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) which is an exercise in advertising and brand positioning is well known, the same has been introduced in the Companies Act. The provision regarding CSR reads" Every company having net worth of rupees five hundred crore or more, or turnover of rupees one thousand crore or more or a net profit of rupees five crore or more during any financial year shall constitute a Corporate Social Responsibility Committee of the Borad consisting of three or more directors, out of which at least one director shall be an independent director. The Board's report shall disclose the composition of the Corporate Social Responsibility Committee. The Corporate Social Responsibility Committee shall,—(a) formulate and recommend to the Board, a Corporate Social Responsibility Policy which shall indicate the activities to be undertaken by the compay as specified in Schedule VII the company spends, in every financial year, at least two per cent of the average net profits of the company made during the three immediately preceding financial years, in pursuance of its Corporate Social Responsibility Policy.
Notably, Schedule VII mentioned in the clause provides a list of "Activities which may be included by companies in their Corporate Social Responsibility Policies" These activities relate to:— (i) eradicating extreme hunger and poverty; (ii) promotion of education; (iii) promoting gender equality and empowering women; (iv) reducing child mortality and improving maternal health; (v) combating human immunodeficiency virus, acquired immune deficiency syndrome, malaria and other diseases; (vi) ensuring environmental sustainability; (vii) employment enhancing vocational skills; (viii) social business projects; (ix) contribution to the Prime Minister's National Relief Fund or any other fund set up by the Central Government or the State Governments for socioeconomic development and relief and funds for the welfare of the Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes, other backward classes, minorities and women; and (x) such other matters as may be prescribed.
The activities that have been mentioned above are functions of the State towards the citizens. This is a case of outsourcing functions of the government to companies. It may have been better if instead of letting companies do CSR activities if the same 2 % of their annual profit is collected as tax to create a fund for undertaking state funding of elections? Prime Minister's National Relief Fund itself can collect it as Government of India did acting as parens patriae (guardian of the nation), passed the Bhopal Gas Disaster (Processing of Claims) Act, 1985 in the case against USA's Union Carbide Corporation, currently owned by USA's Dow Chemicals Company. A five judge bench of the Supreme Court upheld that the State had rightly taken over the exclusive right to represent and act on behalf of every person entitled to make a claim in the Charan Lal Sahu Vs Union of India and others on 22 December, 1989. The Companies Bill should provide for “creation of an Industrial Disaster Fund” to comply with this very order in the aftermath of world worst industrial disaster before the nuclear disasters of Chernobyl and Fukushima.
The political parties that will collect up to 7.5 % of annual profits of the companies as donations will not have the political will to regulate CSR activities and will not be able to acts in any case. A regime that is elected based on state funding of elections can undertake the above welfare activities and act as a genuine parens patriae. Citizens rightfully deserve it. The proposal of such CSR activities as acts of charity is an assault on provisions of the constitution that provides for entitlements for life and environment as a fundamental right.
The political parties that will collect up to 7.5 % of annual profits of the companies as donations will not have the political will to regulate CSR activities and will not be able to acts in any case. A regime that is elected based on state funding of elections can undertake the above welfare activities and act as a genuine parens patriae. Citizens rightfully deserve it. The proposal of such CSR activities as acts of charity is an assault on provisions of the constitution that provides for entitlements for life and environment as a fundamental right.
The provision of corporate funding for political parties must be looked at in the backdrop of the decision of Supreme Court of USA on January 21, 2010 in the Citizens United case, which was denounced by US President Barack Obama, apparently for the sake of record. The US Court considered whether there could be a ban on corporations using their general treasury funds for elections-related expenditure. A majority (5-4) of the Court ruled that such a ban was violative of the right to free speech. Essentially, the US Court struck down certain campaign-finance limits as a violation. The impact of this ruling is that corporate entities in the USA are free to use their general treasury funds to incur election-related expenditure, in a departure from past precedents. It also raised a question do corporations have free-speech rights, just as do individuals? If this is the path of corporations very soon, indeed "We The People" will be excluded from even representative government because of Corporate Personhood. It was said in the newspapers in USA that it would turn the political class into prostitutes.
In connection with this, the six page long The Contesting Election on Government Expenses Bill, introduced by Prabhat Jha, Member of Parliament merits attention.
In connection with this, the six page long The Contesting Election on Government Expenses Bill, introduced by Prabhat Jha, Member of Parliament merits attention.
Contrary to the wisdom of the Bill, this Act is aimed at doing away with the requirement for filing a declaration by a company before commencement of business or exercising its borrowing powers and rationalizing the procedure for laying draft notifications granting exemptions to various classes of companies or modifying provisions of the Act in Parliament, in order to ensure speedier issue of final notifications. This Bill reveals the incestuous relationship between business enterprises and the ruling parties.
Instead of setting matters right, the official amendments contained in the 2015 Act addresses issues related to ease of doing business and puts in place a speedier process for approval of draft notifications for providing exemptions etc. from specific provisions of the Act to a class of companies.
There is a logical compulsion for amending the Companies Act to outlaw the provision for corporate funding to political parties and substitute it with the provision of state funding for the political parties as envisaged in The Contesting Election on Government Expenses Bill.
Following footsteps of the trends in USA, the provisions in the Companies Bill is all set to turn most political parties into brothels wherein made-to-order legislations will have a field day if it is not the case already. Given this trend will it be surprising if very soon there will be approval for foreign direct investments in myriad disguises to facilitate setting up of legislation manufacturing factories?
Democratic institutions can only be strengthened if political parties and other political organizations are given a priority by the state through fiscal support for becoming a democracy given the fact that it is always a work in progress. Studies based on large data sets on political financing in more than 40 democracies provide empirical account of campaign finance and have brought to light hidden aspects of politics and questioning widespread beliefs about political finance, such as the rapid increase of campaign costs. The problems associated with the high cost of election campaigns and the establishment of a balanced and transparent system for their financing merit state's attention.
Democratic institutions can only be strengthened if political parties and other political organizations are given a priority by the state through fiscal support for becoming a democracy given the fact that it is always a work in progress. Studies based on large data sets on political financing in more than 40 democracies provide empirical account of campaign finance and have brought to light hidden aspects of politics and questioning widespread beliefs about political finance, such as the rapid increase of campaign costs. The problems associated with the high cost of election campaigns and the establishment of a balanced and transparent system for their financing merit state's attention.
The experience from contemporary European democracies shows that political parties are necessary and desirable institutions for democracy and direct involvement of the state through financing election campaigns is transforming parties from their status as voluntary private associations into parties as public utilities.
The legislation in question does not appreciate that it is the dependence of political parties on non-state actors for financing elections that determines their electoral and non-electoral performance. It is a flawed legislation which is compromising the political outcomes through an inherent political engineering which is co-terminus with property based citizens' rights.
While it has been admitted that --there is no guarantee that economic prosperity ensures democratization, the ulterior motive of the sponsors of electoral reforms is the former and not the latter. In the post-Citizens United era and in the era of legislated corporate funding through Companies Act is an act of rewriting the political geography and will reveal its residual democratic content.
By shaping not only the strategies, rational choice but also their goals, political parties as institutions structure political situations and leave their own imprint on political outcomes. This significance underlines the inference that parties cannot be left at the mercy of non-state actors. As long as these actors shape the outcome no matter who wins in electoral battles, democracy is not a winner because our deformed political system is turning legislatures into a forum for legalized bribery. The way out could be to recommend that these very corporate donations be pooled into an electoral fund which can be used for state funding of elections.
16th EU-India summit on April 16, 2015 “cancelled by the EU”
Written By Unknown on Wednesday, March 11, 2015 | 12:57 AM
16th EU-India summit on
April 16, 2015 “cancelled by the EU”
Promotion of hazardous waste trade by linguistic corruption will have catastrophic
environmental and occupational health consequences
The correspondence between European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
with India and High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs
and Security Policy has revealed that the scheduled 16th EU-India
summit on April 16, 2015 has been cancelled by the EU. The first India-EU Summit took place in
Lisbon in June 2000. The last engagement between both sides was held in May
2013 in New Delhi. There were few statements from both Indian and EU officials expressing keen interest to revive the talks. The
12th Summit in New Delhi on February 10 2012 was the first Summit to be held in
India after the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty. The EU as a bloc of 28
countries is India’s largest trading partner.
India and the EU have signed a number of bilateral agreements and MoUs
including Science & Technology Agreement, Joint Vision Statement for
promoting Cooperation in the field of Information and Communications Technology
and Joint Declaration on Enhanced Cooperation in Energy.
Disregarding the opposition to the Foreign
Direct Investment (FDI) in insurance sector, government of India promulgated
an ordinance approving hike in FDI cap in the insurance sector from
26 per cent to 49 per cent December 2014. This was one of the main demands of
the EU in FTA negotiations. Social movements, political parties, trade unions and cooperatives are
opposed to the FTA.
ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA) has been
opposing it for its promotion of hazardous waste trade by defining waste as
non-new good. Although as of January 2015, 182 states including India and the
European Union are parties to the UN’s Basel Convention on the Control of
Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal such EU-India FTA
and other such FTAs are undermining the Convention. The EU fully implemented the Basel Ban amendment
–that attempted to end the exploitation of the weaker regulations and
infrastructure of poorer countries to avoid the responsibility for minimizing
waste and hazards in richer countries- in its Waste Shipment Regulation, making
it legally binding in all EU member states. India is yet to ratify Basel Ban
and incorporate it in its law although its support was implicit in the support Group
of 77 gave to the amendment.
Under the influence of international recyclers EU apparently
revised its position and in a manifest inconsistency it supports ban on export
of old toxic computers (e-waste) from the EU
to a
developing countries like India but it approves of old end-of-life ships full of asbestos
and Persistent Organic Pollutants
for such export. EU-India FTA facilitated such inconsistencies. Unless India
bans hazardous waste, India will be faced with catastrophic environmental and
occupational health consequences because "like water running downhill,
hazardous wastes invariably will be disposed of along the path of least
resistance and least expense” in a situation where Indi does not have the
health infrastructure to deal with environmental and occupational diseases.
Notably,
a study by Cornell University estimated that 62 million deaths per year (40 % of
all deaths) can be attributed to environmental factors, particularly organic
and chemical pollutants that accumulate in the air and the water.
For Details: Gopal Krishna, ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA), Mb: 08227816731,
09818089660, E-mail:1715krishna@gmail.com, Web: www.toxicswatch.org
Verification of authenticity of documents of Danish end-of-life toxic ship MV Clipper (IMO No. 9232319) in Bhavnagar waters & compliance with Supreme Court’s order, Shipbreaking Code & Basel Convention
Written By Unknown on Monday, December 22, 2014 | 9:09 AM
To
Shri
Prakash Javadekar,
Union
Minister of Environment, Forests & Climate Change
Government
of India
New
Delhi
Secretary
Union
Ministry of Environment, Forests & Climate Change
Government
of India
New
Delhi
Secretary
Union
Ministry of Shipping
Government
of India
New
Delhi
Secretary
Union
Ministry of Steel
Government
of India
New
Delhi
December
22, 2014
Subject-Verification
of authenticity of documents of Danish end-of-life toxic ship MV Clipper (IMO
No. 9232319) in Bhavnagar waters & compliance with Ship Breaking Code,
Hon’ble Supreme Court’s order, Shipbreaking Code 2013 and Basel Convention
Sir,
With
reference to my previous letter dated December 2014, this is submit that I have
learnt it officially that Danish end-of-life toxic ship MV Clipper (IMO No.
9232319) in Bhavnagar waters as of today, I wish to draw your immediate
attention towards the phenomena of fake document factories at work in Alang in
particular and shipping industry in general.
I
have reliably learnt that concerned officials are expected to board the ship
from tomorrow onwards for inspection. I have repeatedly been informed that
these officials do not have the competence to verify the authenticity of
documents. I have officially demonstrated it in the past and the same has
officially been acknowledged but no remedial measures have been taken so far.
I
submit that after my complaint standing monitoring committee on ship breaking
yards, Union Ministry of Environment & Forests and officials of Hazardous
Substances Management Division undertook a site visit and submitted a report
requesting Directorate General of Shipping, Union Ministry of Shipping to
develop procedure for scrutiny of ship's certificates.
The
relevant part of the report of the standing committee reads: “The issue
regarding the submission of fake certificates by the ship owners/agents came up
for discussion. The committee members suggested that since GMB/Customs were not
able to verify the authenticity/genuineness of ship’s registry/flag in the fast
in respect of some ships referred to them, this task in respect of each ship
may be referred to the DG Shipping under the Ministry of Shipping to do such
verification henceforth. GMB has reported that they will consult this matter
with their senior officers and revert back to MoEF within 7 days. Subsequently, the GMB officials informed MoEF
that the suggestion of the committee is acceptable to them subject to such
verification by DG Shipping is done within a period of 2 working days. If no information is received from the DG
Shipping within 2 working days, it will be presumed that the certificate
submitted is authentic and genuine.” Such callous approach of GMB is quite
alarming merits serious attention and probe.
The
members of the Standing Monitoring Committee (SMC) on Shipbreaking comprised of
(1) Dr. M. Subba Rao, Director, MoEF, (2) Shri B. R. Naidu, Scientist-D and
Zonal Officer, CPCB, Vadodara (3) Shri B. D. Ghosh, Addl. Industrial Adviser,
Ministry of Steel, (4) Capt. J. S. Uppal, Principal Officer, Mercantile Marine
Department, DG Shipping, (5) Dr. S. R. Tripathi, Asstt. Director, NIOH, and (6)
Dr. R. R. Tiwari, Scientist-C, NIOH. The list of participants in the meeting of
Standing Monitoring Committee held at Bhavnagar is as under:
Sl.
No. Name & Designation
1. Dr. M. Subba Rao, Director, MoEF, New
Delhi
2. Capt. J. S. Uppal, PO, MMD, Kandla
3. Mr. B. D. Ghosh, Addl. I.A., M/o Steel,
New Delhi
4. Mr. B. R. Naidu, ZO, CPCB, Vadodara
5. Dr. S. R. Tripathi, Scientist ‘D’,
NIOH, Ahmedabad
6. Dr. R. R. Tiwari, Scientist ‘C’, NIOH,
Ahmedabad
7. Capt. S. Chadha, Port Officer, Alang
8. Mr. Atul Sharma, EE, GMB, Alang
9. Mr. N. V. Pandya, Director, Safety
& Training, GMB, Alang
10. Mr. A. V. Shah, RO, GPCB, Bhavnagar
11. Mr. V. R. Patel, Sr. EE, GPCB HO,
Gandhinagar
12. Mr. D. J. Mehta, Asstt. Commissioner of
Labour, Alang
13. Mr. J. D. Goswami, DEE, GPCB, Bhavnagar
14. Mr. M. M. Parmar, GMB, Alang
15. Mr. R. P. Gupta, DEE, GPCB, Bhavnagar
16. Mr. B. R. Kunadia, SSA, GPCB, Bhavnagar
17. Mr. J. R. Sharma, Supdt., Customs, Alang
18. Mr. R. B. Makwan, JSA, GPCB, Bhavnagar
19. Mr. Pravin S. Nagarsheth, ISSAI, Mumbai
20. Mr. Vishnu Kumar Gupta, President, SRIA,
Alang
21. Mr. Haresh Kumar Parmar, Member, SRIA,
Alang
22. Mr. Harshad Dathawala, SRIA, Alang
23. Mr. Chitan Kaithai, SRIA, Alang
24. Mr. Vipin Aggarwal, SRIA, Alang
25. Mr. Nitin Kanakiya, Jt. Secy, SRIA, Bhavnagar
26. Ms. Dina P. Patel, GMB, Alang
27. Ms. Rani Ranjan, GEPIL, Surat
The
letter was responded to by Shri D Mehrotra, Deputy Surveyor cum Senior DDG
(Tech.), DG Shipping by letter [No.ENG/CCI-24 (1))/2002] dated June 28, 2011
written to Secretary, MoEF. Following which an Office Memorandum
[No.29-3/2009-HSMD], MoEF dated August 29, 2011 seeking strict compliance with
the procedure to combat the menace of fake documents in the ship breaking
industry. This is required as per the recommendations of the Hon'ble Court's
order.
I
submit that the official procedure is as under:
1. Gujarat Maritime Board (GMB) to send
details of ship owner and copies of statutory and copies of the statutory
certificates to the local Mercantile Marine Department (MMD)
2. The Principal Officer of the said
Mercantile Marine Department (MMD) will verify the authenticity through Equasis
website and other available resources and inform GMB with reference to
authenticity of certificates.
3. In case certificates cannot be verified
by MMD, the MMD will forward the same to the Port State Control (PSC) Cell of
the Directorate justifying the inability. PSC Cell of the Directorate will take
the matter with the concerned Flag Administration and verify authenticity of
the certificates and convey the same to the GMB with copy to GMB.
I
submit that a copy of the procedure was sent to Principal Officer of the said
Mercantile Marine Department (MMD), Kandla.
I
submit that in a notification [F.No. SR-12020/2/2011-MG] issued in the Gazette
of India dated April 20, 2012, it is stated, “The Indian Coastguard and Indian
Navy may also check and verify the protection and indemnity insurance and the
name of Classification Society of the vessel, if considered necessary. If the
vessel is not in possession of a valid protection and indemnity insurance and
certificate of class, the matter shall be reported to the Directorate General
of Shipping immediately, for appropriate action under the Act.”
I
submit that besides this as per an official communication Directorate General
of Shipping, Ministry of Shipping [No.-NT (2)/Correspondent/12] dated
06/08/2013 on the subject of Non-IACS Classed old ships proceeding to ship
breaking yard stated, “the concerned Coastal State/Ports has the responsibility
to protect its coastline against shipping casualties which may/may not cause
pollution…”. IACS stands for Indian Association of Classification Societies.
It
further provided following safeguards required to be taken prior to the entry
of such ship into their ports, or transiting through such ports or
ship-breaking yards as the case may be, for the purpose of ship breaking:
1. Such ships to carry a valid Third Party
Insurance cover issued by the IG Club or otherwise (as acceptable to the
Directorate of Shipping).
2. Such ships to have in place valid
single voyage permission from the Flag Administration and Certificate of
Inspection issued by the authorized Recognized Organization (RO) of the Flag
Administration of such ships.
3. Such ships or ship-breaking yards must
carry out risk assessment prior to allowing entry of such ships to its water.
4. In the event of high risk cases, such
ports or ship-breaking yards may approach the Port State Control (PSC) Cell of
the D G Shipping or the local Principal Officer of Mercantile Marine Department
(MMD) for their inputs and advice including the conduct of Port State
Control/Flag State implementation (FSI) inspection if necessary.
I
submit that in the case of another end-of-life toxic ship Platinum II formerly
known as the SS Oceanic (and originally, the SS Independence) that arrived in
Indian waters for scrapping on 8 October 2009 with papers saying its flag was
that of the Republic of Kiribati and that it was owned by Platinum Investment
Services of Monrovia, Liberia. I had received official confirmation from the
Operations Manager at Kiribati Ship Registry, Liau Siew Leng, that the
registration was a forgery. The Kiribati Ministry of Communications, Transport
& Tourism Development Office further confirmed the falsified documents. The
communication was officially communicated by Kiribati Ministry of
Communications, Transport & Tourism Development Office to the concerned Indian
ministries including ministry of environment & forests.
I
wish to reiterate that the permission for beaching if it is granted would be in
violation of Hon’ble Supreme Court’s order, Shipbreaking Code 2013 and Basel
Convention. The real owner of this dead and obsolete ship is Shri Christian
Stadil, a noted Danish businessman who preaches a good deal about ethics in
business but is apparently involved in unethical act of increasing the toxic
burden on Alang’s ecosystem, migrant workers of the Gujarat’s shipbreaking
industry and adjoining village communities.
I
submit that in violation of the judgment of the Hon’ble court dated October 14,
2003 (reiterated in 2007 and 2012) which calls for prior decontamination of the
ship in the country of export, the movement of this Danish ship fails to ensure
the fundamental principle of “Prior Informed Consent”. The “reporting” is
taking place only after the hazardous waste ship arrives in the importing
country’s territory that a competent authority has the right to object and the
objection allowed is not to the importation but to the ship recycling plan or
ship recycling facility permit. Thus,
India is forced to receive hazardous waste in the form of ships. The movement of such harmful toxic ships
ignores Polluter Pays/Producer Responsibility Principle, Environmental Justice
Principle, Waste Prevention/Substitution Principles and Principle of National
Self Sufficiency in Waste Management.
I
submit that if concerned government authorities in India allow entry to this
Danish ship it will tantamount to grant of legal recognition to externalization
of the real costs and liabilities of ships at end-of-life by the shipping
companies of Europe and other developed countries.
We
submit that the transfer of the Danish ship fails to reflect compliance with
Basel Convention’s core obligation - minimisation of transboundary movements of
hazardous waste, and as such will not prevent hazardous wastes such as
asbestos, PCBs, old fuels, and heavy metals from being exported to the poorest
communities and most desperate workers in developing countries. It fails to end
the fatally flawed method of dismantling ships known as “beaching” where ships
are cut open on tidal flats. This is required because on a beach it is
impossible to contain oils and toxic contaminants from entering the marine
environment; safely use cranes alongside ships to lift heavy cut pieces or to
rescue workers; bring emergency equipment to the workers or the ships and
protect the fragile coastal environmental zone from the hazardous wastes on
ships. It allows hazardous substances from end-of-life ships to enter India
outwitting the motive of the Basel Convention and leaving a toxic legacy for
generations to come.
I
submit that the movement of this ship under the flag of Bahamas is in violation
of UN’s Basel Convention on Transboundary Movement of Hazardous Wastes and
Their Disposal to which India is a party. It is also in violation of relevant
European law by which it is governed. The letter dated 15 April, 2005 authored
by Ms Connie Hedegaard, the then Denmark's environment minister to her Indian
counterpart Shri A Raja about the illegal movement of a 51 year-old asbestos
laden ship, Kong Fredrick IX underlines it.
I
submit that the Danish ship Concord (IMO No. 9232319) offers an opportunity to
set matters right and undo the damage done by Shri A Raja’s tenure.
I
submit that the ship breaking activities are linked to issues of maritime and
national security as has been recorded repeatedly in the minutes of the
Inter-Ministerial Committee (IMC) on Ship breaking.
ToxicsWatch
Alliance (TWA) has been working on the issue of hazardous wastes and ship
breaking for over decade. It is an applicant before the National Human Rights
Commission (NHRC), Parliamentary Standing Committee on Science, Technology,
Environment & Forests, Parliamentary Petitions Committee, Parliamentary
Standing Committee on Labour and relevant UN agencies besides Inter-Ministerial
Committee on Ship breaking. It was the applicant before the Hon’ble Supreme Court
wherein the order for creation of the Shipbreaking Code was passed. It had
appeared before the Supreme Court’s Monitoring Committee on Hazardous Wastes,
Court’s Technical Experts Committee on Hazardous Wastes related to Ship
breaking and pursued cases involving famous ships like RIKY (Kong Frederik IX),
Le Clemenceau, SS Blue Lady, Platinum II and Exxon Valdez and others.
In
view of the above, we request you to ensure that the Danish ship in question is
not given beaching permission and send it back from the Indian waters and in
order to ensure that entry of end-of-life ships are compliant with obligations
under Basel Convention, Hon'ble Court's order and the Code.
I
will be happy to share more details in this regard.
Thanking
You
Yours
faithfully
Gopal
Krishna
ToxicsWatch
Alliance (TWA)
Mb:
08227816731, 9818089660
E-mail:gopalkrishna1715@gmail.com
Web:
http://www.toxicswatch.com
Cc
Shri
Nitin Gadkari, Union Minister of Shipping
Chairman,
Gujarat Maritime Board
Chairman
& Members, Parliamentary Standing Committee on Science,
Technology,
Environment & Forests
Chairman
& Members, Parliamentary Standing Committee on Transport
Shri
A K Seth, Cabinet Secretary, Government of India
Secretary,
Union Ministry of Home Affairs
Secretary,
Union Ministry of Defence
Secretary,
Union Ministry of Labour
Secretary,
Secretary, Union Ministry of External Affairs
Director
General of Shipping, Govt. of India
Dr.
Alok Srivastava, Joint Secretary, Union Ministry of Shipping
Director
General of Central Excise Intelligence (DGCEI), Union
Ministry
of Finance
Chairman,
Atomic Energy Regulatory Board, Mumbai
Director,
Hazardous Substances Management Division (HSMD), Union
Ministry
of Environment, Forests & Climate Change
Shri
Sanjay Parikh, Lawyer, Supreme Court
Member
Secretary, Gujarat Pollution Control Board (GPCB)
Chairman,
GPCB
Chairman,
Gujarat Maritime Board
Collector,
Bhavnagar District
Superintendent
of Police, Bhavnagar District