Trafigura found guilty of exporting toxic waste - BBC News BBC News Trafigura found guilty of exporting toxic waste 23 July 2010 Close share panel Image caption The case involves chemical waste dumped in 2006 A Dutch court has found multinational Trafigura guilty of illegally exporting toxic waste from Amsterdam and concealing the nature of the cargo. In 2006, Trafigura transported waste alleged to have been involved in the injury of thousands of people in Ivory Coast. Trafigura denied any wrongdoing. It expressed disappointment in the ruling and is considering an appeal. The firm was fined 1m euros (£836,894) for its ship, the Probo Koala, transiting Amsterdam with its cargo. The ship then went on to unload its cargo in Ivory Coast.

It is a good thing that they have been found guilty but it would be even better if they were sent to jail Guy Oulla, Alleged waste victim Guy Oulla's full story Trafigura employee Naeem Ahmed, who was involved in the ship's operation in Amsterdam, was fined 25,000 euros and the captain of the Probo Koala, 46-year-old Sergiy Chertov, was sentenced to a five-year suspended jail term. This is the first time Trafigura has faced criminal charges since the toxic waste scandal unfolded in Ivory Coast's commercial capital, Abidjan, in 2006. Trafigura, an oil trading company, initially tried to clean up low-grade oil by tipping caustic soda into the hold of the Probo Koala. The company tried to unload the waste in Amsterdam for treatment, declaring it as "harmless slops". When the treatment company came back with a higher price for cleaning the waste, the cargo was shipped to Africa where it ended up in Abidjan to be handled at a much lower rate.

Presiding Judge Frans Bauduin said: "Trafigura - which by that time knew of the exact composition [of the waste] - should never have agreed to its processing at such a price." Timeline Sept 2006 - Thousands in Ivory Coast report falling ill from waste in Abidjan Oct 2006 - About 1,000 Ivorians sue Trafigura Feb 2007 - Trafigura reaches $160m out-of-court settlement with government of Ivory Coast Oct 2008 - Ivory Coast court finds two people, not employees of Trafigura, guilty of dumping toxic waste in Abidjan Sept 2009 - Trafigura agrees to pay $50m to people in Ivory Coast who say they were poisoned by the waste June 2010 - Dutch prosecutors accuse Trafigura of illegally exporting hazardous waste to Ivory Coast Trafigura denies responsibility for the dumping of the waste and any deaths or injuries caused Trafigura said it was pleased to have been acquitted of the charge of forgery, but was "disappointed by the judges' ruling on the other two, which it believes to be incorrect".

A statement from Trafigura said: "Concerning the delivery of dangerous goods, it is important that the court has noted that there was limited risk to human health from these slops, and indeed no damage occurred in Amsterdam." Trafigura said it was considering an appeal. A lawyer representing the company, Robert de Bree, said: "I think it's important to notice that the convictions relate to highly technical, complex legal matters and we will carefully study the judgement to look at the possibility of an appeal." Another Trafigura lawyer, Michael Wladimiroff, was quoted by Associated Press news agency as saying the company believed the Marine Pollution Treaty applied and that the court had incorrectly applied the terms of another waste management treaty. The firm also maintained that Mr Ahmed "did nothing wrong". Out-of-court settlement Greenpeace, which brought this case, has welcomed the outcome, saying it was a warning to firms not to export waste to developing countries.

Image caption The risk posed by the waste has been heavily disputed Greenpeace toxics campaigner, Marietta Harjono, said that further legal action should be taken against Trafigura: "We must also be very clear that justice is not complete yet, because this is only the beginning, because Trafigura has not been brought to trial yet for the deliberate dumping of toxic waste in Africa." One of those who fell ill after waste was dumped, Ivorian Guy Oulla, told the BBC: "I believe it is a very good decision because people should pay for what they do, you know. So, I agree with that decision. You know, we live in Africa and it could happen again because in Africa people do everything for money." In 2008, a court in Ivory Coast found two non-Trafigura employees guilty of illegally dumping the waste. A Nigerian national named Salomon Ugborugbo was sentenced to 20 years in jail. He was the head of an Abidjan firm, Tommy, which Trafigura said it contracted in good faith to handle the waste from the Probo Koala.

Essoin Kouao, who worked as a shipping agent at the Port of Abidjan and had recommended Tommy to Trafigura, received a five-year prison term. In 2007 Trafigura paid $160m (£104m) to the government of Ivory Coast without admitting liability. Trafigura also paid $50m (£32m) in an out-of-court settlement to individuals in Ivory Coast who said they had been injured when the waste was spread on dumps around Abidjan. Trafigura lawsuits (re Côte d’Ivoire) | Business & Human Rights Resource Centre Trafigura lawsuits (re Côte d’Ivoire) hide message A message from Executive Director Phil Bloomer Over 2 million people visited our website in 2016. If each person donated the price of a cup of coffee, this would enable us to continue providing our free global coverage through 2017. To maintain our independence, we never accept donations from companies or corporate foundations so individual donations can make a big difference. Pour la version française de ce profil, cliquez ici.

On 19 August 2006 the ship Probo Koala unloaded a waste shipment at Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire (Ivory Coast). This waste was disposed of at open air sites around Abidjan. The ship was chartered by the London office of Trafigura, a Dutch international petroleum trader. The Probo Koala had attempted to discharge this waste at the port of Amsterdam, but the port service would not accept the waste without an additional handling charge because of the waste’s alleged toxicity. The ship left the port of Amsterdam without discharging its waste. After the waste from the ship was discharged in Abidjan, people living near the discharge sites began to suffer from a range of illnesses (nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, breathlessness, headaches, skin damage, and swollen stomachs). Sixteen people have died, allegedly from exposure to this waste, and more than 100,000 have sought medical attention. Trafigura sent two of its executives to Abidjan in August 2006 to investigate what happened. These executives and a representative from a Trafigura subsidiary, Puma Energy, were arrested by Ivorian authorities and imprisoned.

On 12 February 2007 the Government of Côte d’Ivoire signed a settlement agreement with Trafigura in which the company agreed to pay $198 million to the Ivorian government for a compensation fund, the construction of a waste treatment plant and to assist in the recovery operations. However, the company stressed this payment was not "damages" and that it did not admit liability. Côte d’Ivoire agreed to drop any prosecutions or claims, now or in the future, against Trafigura. After this settlement agreement was made, the Trafigura executives and the Puma Energy representative were released from prison. Claims in the United Kingdom In November 2006, the High Court of Justice in London agreed to hear a group action by about 30,000 claimants from Côte d’Ivoire against Trafigura over the alleged dumping of toxic waste from the Probo Koala. Applicants alleged that the waste had high levels of caustic soda, as well as a sulphur compound and hydrogen sulphide making it hazardous waste as defined by the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes.

Trafigura denied the waste was toxic and claimed the waste was standard waste from onboard operations of ships (“slops” as defined by the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution From Ships). Trafigura was alleged to have shipped the untreated chemical waste to Côte d’Ivoire with knowledge that there were no facilities to treat it. Trafigura denied responsibility, stating that they had entrusted the waste to an Ivorian disposal company, Tommy, which was established a few weeks before the ship’s arrival. Trafigura claimed it had no grounds for suspecting that Tommy would improperly dispose of the waste. Trafigura denied the number of applicants/victims and stated that only 69 people suffered significant injury. On 23 March 2009, the court granted the plaintiffs a temporary injunction barring Trafigura from contacting any of the claimants in the case. This injunction came after counsel for the claimants presented evidence that the company had been contacting individual claimants urging them to change their sworn statements.

In September 2009, the parties to the UK lawsuit reached a settlement agreement in which Trafigura agreed to pay each of the 30,000 claimants a certain amount, approximately $1500. The parties released a joint statement that said, among other things, "independent experts are unable to identify a link between exposure to the chemicals released from the slops and deaths, miscarriages, still births, birth defects, loss of visual acuity or other serious and chronic injuries. Leigh Day and Co, in the light of the expert evidence, now acknowledge that the slops could at worst have caused a range of short term low level flu like symptoms and anxiety". In October 2009 an individual, Claude Gohourou, came forward claiming to represent the victims through his organization - National Coordination of Toxic Waste Victims of Côte d’Ivoire. Mr Gohourou succeeded in freezing the bank account in which the settlement funds were being held. The claimants' lawyers dispute the authenticity of this organization and Mr Gohourou's authority to distribute the funds to the claimants.

On 22 January 2010, the Court of Appeals in Abidjan ruled in favour of Mr Gohourou and his organization and ordered the settlement funds be transferred to him. In mid-February 2010 the parties reached an agreement about the distribution of the settlement funds. However, 6000 of the victims still have not received the compensation. In June 2016, the High Court ruled that Leigh Day, the law firm representing the victims, should compensat the victims that had not received compensation due to the breach of its its duty of care. Leigh day declared: "...were devastated when some of the monies were misappropriated. We did our damnedest to recover the monies resulting in the great majority of our clients having received their compensation." Claims in the Netherlands In February 2008, Dutch prosecutors served notice that they intend to file criminal charges against Trafigura, among others, for its alleged part in the disposal of waste in Côte d’Ivoire. In June 2008 an Amsterdam court began hearing evidence in this case. The Dutch trial started in June 2010.

The Dutch prosecutors accused Trafigura of illegally exporting hazardous waste to Côte d’Ivoire. The allegations against the company are that it breached Dutch export and environmental laws as well as forging official documents. Trafigura rejected these charges. In July 2010 the Dutch court ruled that the company had concealed the dangerous nature of the waste aboard the Probo Koala and fined the company €1 million. The Dutch court also convicted a Trafigura employee and the Ukrainian captain of the Probo Koala for their roles in the matter. In the meantime, Greenpeace filed a complaint with the Court of Appeal in The Hague trying to compel the public prosecutor to prosecute the company for more than just the export of hazardous waste. In April 2011, the appeal court ruled that the public prosecution department is not required to prosecute Trafigura for the dumping of the waste in Côte d’Ivoire. When the regional court in Amsterdam decided in 2008 not to prosecute Trafigura's co-founder and director Claude Dauphin, the prosecutors appealed the court's decision.

They were turned down and later lodged another appeal before the Supreme Court, which sent the case back to the appeals court in Amsterdam to review the original decision. In January 2012, the court decided that Claude Dauphin can be prosecuted for the alleged illegal export of waste by Trafigura. In November 2012 the Dutch Public Prosecutor's Office and Trafigura reached an out-of-court settlement. Trafigura agreed to pay €300,000 compensation and paid a €67,000 fine in return for the withdrawal of the case against Claude Dauphin. In February 2015, lawyers representing 110,937 Ivorians sent a summons to Trafigura in respect of a new lawsuit. The lawsuit alleges that Trafigura caused " bodily, moral and economic injury...to the plaintiffs," and requests that Trafigura pay each claimant 2,500 euros in compensation, as well as cleaning up the waste. In November 2016, a Dutch court rejected the claim by a foundation representing them, finding that the foundation did not establish that the claim was in the best interests of the affected Ivorians.

Claims in France In July 2008, three French victims of the Probo Koala incident filed a complaint against Trafigura before an examining magistrate in Paris alleging corruption, involuntary homicide and physical harm leading to death. Oil giant Trafigura settles legal action over toxic waste dumping - Birmingham Post Birmingham Post Oil giant Trafigura settles legal action over toxic waste dumping 00:00, 24 Sep 2009 The High Court has formally approved the settlement of the legal action brought against oil trading giant Trafigura by thousands of people who claimed they fell ill after the alleged dumping of toxic waste in the Ivory Coast. Share Get daily news by email The High Court has formally approved the settlement of the legal action brought against oil trading giant Trafigura by thousands of people who claimed they fell ill after the alleged dumping of toxic waste in the Ivory Coast. The claims were launched against the multinational company following an incident in August 2006 when “slops” were deposited near Abidjan, the west African country’s commercial capital, from the Probo Koala, a ship hired by Trafigura.

In an agreed joint statement, issued a few days ago, the oil trading firm said it regretted the incident but did not accept legal liability as the dumping was carried out by a ship contractor which acted independently of, and without any authority from, Trafigura. It was also agreed that the slops could at worst have caused a range of short-term low-level flu-like symptoms and anxiety. The statement was read out in public by Trafigura’s counsel, Edwin Glasgow QC, after a private hearing in London at which Mr Justice MacDuff, who was due to hear the trial of the action next month, approved the confidential settlement. Libel proceedings brought by Trafigura against Leigh Day and Company, the London-based law firm which was pursuing the case, have also been resolved with the action stayed. Robert Jay QC, for the claimants, said they were very pleased with the settlement.

“My solicitors have met 24,000 clients over the last 10 days or so and each of them, bar none, has accepted it and warmly welcomed it, and the fact that this litigation has now been resolved.” UK authorities 'lack resources' to investigate Trafigura over toxic waste | World news | The Guardian Trafigura UK authorities 'lack resources' to investigate Trafigura over toxic waste Environment Agency says it lacks necessary expertise and resources to investigate oil firm over 2006 toxic waste dump in Ivory Coast A Dutch team spray water to liquefy the polluted soil and ease the pumping of the toxic waste in Abidjan on 21 September 2006.

Photograph: Issouf Sanogo/AFP/Getty Images Thursday 23 July 2015 08.01 EDT Last modified on Thursday 23 July 2015 19.00 EDT Close This article is 1 year old UK authorities have admitted they lack both the expertise and resources to investigate the oil company Trafigura for prosecution over its role in a toxic waste dump in Ivory Coast which left up to 100,000 people with skin rashes, headaches and respiratory problems. In the past 15 months, the human rights group Amnesty International has contacted UK police forces, agencies and prosecutors with a detailed dossier laying out its case for why authorities should explore a criminal conspiracy prosecution against the company for its role in one of the most controversial corporate incidents of the past decade. Amnesty’s case was centred around the shipping and subsequent deliberate dumping of toxic waste in Ivory Coast’s largest city by the Probo Koala, a vessel operated by a subcontractor of Trafigura , in 2006. The untreated waste caused tens of thousands of residents of Abidjan to complain of symptoms including headaches, rashes and breathing difficulties.

Trafigura attempted to keep a report detailing its involvement secret using a super-injunction against the Guardian in 2009, which was challenged and ultimately defeated . The Dutch multinational faced a civil claim brought by Leigh Day on behalf of 30,000 Ivorians, which was settled for approximately £30m. Trafigura also paid out $200m (£130m) –without admitting liability – to the Ivory Coast government, and was found guilty on two relatively minor charges of corporate crime in the Netherlands in connection with the incident. However, despite the involvement of UK-based executives in the planning of how to dispose of the waste, no UK prosecution has ever taken place. Amnesty first contacted the Metropolitan police and the director of public prosecutions with a detailed legal dossier setting out its view on the facts of the waste dump, the extent of involvement of UK-based executives, and the legal position, in a bid to encourage authorities to investigate and potentially prosecute the company.

Among the evidence cited by Amnesty were a number of emails that surfaced through the previous civil cases, which noted Trafigura had originally been sent a quote of €544,000 to responsibly treat and dispose of the waste it later dumped, but in the end paid a different company just $17,000 to get rid of it. This, Amnesty suggested, served as evidence executives knew the waste was not being disposed of “safely and lawfully”, especially as the company later asked for an invoice of over $100,000 after Dutch police started making inquiries after the waste dump. After some months, Amnesty claims it was told by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) that the responsible authority to investigate the matter was the Environment Agency. The agency first argued – incorrectly – that it did not have jurisdiction over the matter, before eventually issuing a fuller report as to why it would not investigate after Amnesty threatened judicial review of the decision. The Environment Agency’s report conceded that if the allegations against Trafigura were true, “a serious offence was committed with relevant aspect of the conduct taking place within the jurisdiction”.

However, the agency decided against investigating Trafigura because it has “limited experience of complex investigations”, and lacked the “appropriately skilled and experienced staff” to undertake it. The agency further admitted it was under “immediate financial pressures” and said Trafigura would probably “take any and every procedural opportunity to challenge steps taken in a further investigation”, which would extensively increase the costs. As such, it concluded, “the cost-benefit balance is strongly against the conduct of an investigation”. Amnesty International has criticised the UK authorities’ inaction on the matter, saying it effectively gives official sanction to corporate wrongdoing in the future. “The fact that the UK authorities do not have the tools, expertise or resources to investigate the case is truly shocking,” said Amnesty legal adviser Lucy Graham. “This is tantamount to giving multinational companies carte blanche to commit corporate crimes abroad. “The toxic waste dumping was a catastrophe for the citizens of Abidjan. The UK’s failure to act is a further disaster for justice and accountability. The government has to prove that it is not running scared of corporate giants.” A spokeswoman for the Metropolitan police (MPS) said: “In September 2014 the MPS was copied into correspondence addressed to a second agency.

No request for investigative assistance from police was made and a response was not required.” The Met said it had not responded to a letter to the CPS it had been copied into six months earlier because the CPS had made it clear it was a matter for the Environment Agency . “There was therefore no requirement for the Met to respond at that time,” the spokeswoman said. A spokeswoman for the CPS stressed that its mandate was to conduct prosecutions and not investigations, adding “allegations of dumping toxic waste are not a matter for the CPS as the Environment Agency is responsible for enforcing the law in this area”, and said the CPS had passed correspondence to the agency in connection with the matter. A spokesman for the Environment Agency said it prioritised its investigations to provide value for money to the public, and focus on those “who pose a serious risk”. “This allegation by Amnesty International was brought to our attention eight years after the alleged crime,” he added. “We decided not to pursue an investigation overseas because of the length of time since the alleged crime and the likelihood of securing a successful prosecution.” Trafigura said it was “disappointed” Amnesty International was still pursuing it over its role in the toxic waste dump, and accused Amnesty of recycling inaccurate claims about the company.

Trafigura declined, however to address a number of specific points put to it by the Guardian, and did not specify which of Amnesty’s claims it believed to be inaccurate. “The Amnesty International (AI) document about the 2006 Probo Koala incident is a compendium of information and correspondence relating to the recent decision by the UK Environment Agency to reject AI’s call for a criminal investigation into Trafigura in relation to this incident, as well as a repetition of allegations against the company made by AI in previous reports and legal memoranda,” said a statement from the company. “In a final decision on AI’s request for a review, issued on 17 March 2015, the UK Environment Agency rejected the request outright. “Trafigura maintains that given over the last decade the Probo Koala incident has already been exhaustively investigated by authorities in the Ivory Coast, the UK and the Netherlands and settlements have been reached in a number of jurisdictions, it is time to move on. “We feel that the position of the Environment Agency completely validates this opinion.

We are disappointed that AI continues to raise claims that have been proven to be without merit (or wrong) in multiple jurisdictions and to recycle the inaccuracies and misrepresentations it has made in previous reports.” Feature: Laying waste in the Ivory Coast Feature: Laying waste in the Ivory Coast Feature: Laying waste in the Ivory Coast Politics.co.uk Thursday, 17 September 2009 12:00 AM How the British arm of an oil multinational found itself embroiled in accusations of dumping toxic waste in the Ivory Coast. By Ian Dunt It was the largest group injury claim in UK legal history. Trafigura, the British operating arm of the world's third-largest independent oil multinational, agreed with a court late in 2008 that it would no longer defend its conduct in transporting toxic waste to the Ivory Coast. Victims' lawyers say the waste led to health problems in thousands of people. It happened very quietly. On October 23rd, Trafigura accepted a high court order in which they agreed to no longer defend key parts of a case questioning their actions in the build up to the dumping in August 2006.

Honey bees - vital to our food chain Some 30,000 Ivorians had brought the case against the company for transporting the waste and then handing it over to a man who disastrously mismanaged it. "He had no equipment apart from an open dumpsite," Martyn Day, senior partner at Leigh Day & Co and solicitor for the claimants, told politics.co.uk last year. "He didn't even own any trucks." The order meant that when the trial went to court this year, the case would only look at whether the waste made people ill, and would no longer question the way Trafigura conducted itself. As it turned out, there would never be a case. Last night, news emerged that Trafigura would settle. It sounds paradoxical, but last year British human rights lawyers Leigh Day & Co were conflicted. The agreement brought their clients much closer to compensation, but the company's behaviour would never be subject to the full scrutiny of the courts, with all the media attention that entails. This is how it started. Two years ago, Trafigura's ship, the Probo Koala, docked in Abidjan in the Ivory Coast.

It then passed 528 cubic metres of waste to a local company called Tommy, headed by Salamon Ugborugbo. Ugborugbo's company dumped the waste in several different areas of the city, the largest in the Ivory Coast and home to the country's commercial and banking centre. Ivory Coast government reports estimate over 100,000 people became ill as a result of exposure to the waste, with 15 people dying. "Certainly, human rights were violated in the Ivory Coast," Okechukwu Ibeanu, special rapporteur of the United Nations Human Rights Council on the adverse effects of illicit movement and dumping of toxic waste on human right, told politics.co.uk last year, as he wrote a report into Trafigura's behaviour. "It is very well known that a right to health and a right to information and, you know, even a right to life was widely violated. There's no debate about that. The debate is about whether this was a result of dumping the waste and who has the liability." There were two main parts to Trafigura's defence. One, that the waste had been passed on to an authorised waste disposal company.

Trafigura said that Ugborugbo had all the necessary permissions. That argument seemed weak, according to the victims' lawyers, as he only just set up his firm and had no decent facilities or experience in treating waste like this. Ugborugbo was charged with poisoning in a major criminal trial in the Ivory Coast earlier this year and sentenced to 20 years in jail. Second, the company said the waste wasn't toxic in the first place. That argument is also hotly disputed by the victims' lawyers. "There's no question it was toxic," Day told politics.co.uk. "The only question is 'how toxic?'" The waste originated from a cargo cleaning process. Trafigura had purchased cheap oil cargoes with very high sulphur levels. On board the ship, they 'washed' it to remove the sulphur by mixing in caustic soda. This unusual process created a complex and extremely alkaline mixture of caustic soda and gasoline, allegedly contaminated by phenols, disulfides, mercaptans and hydrogen sulphide. The victims claim these compounds, dumped near their homes, made them sick. "If you're exposed to these gases they cause immediate reactions," Day continued.

"They had vomiting, diarrhoea, eye problems, skin problems, respiratory problems. A significant proportion are complaining about ongoing symptoms." The caustic washing process originated in an attempt to increase the value of the oil being shipped across the world. It's a complex process, and there are concerns that countries accepting this waste are fundamentally unable to deal with it. "The problematic thing is the capacity, in terms of technology, to treat these wastes in developing countries is not there," says Ibeanu. "So there's a responsibility on behalf of the export countries to make sure local companies can deal with these wastes." According to the Ivory Coast victims' lawyers, Trafigura had attempted to 'wash' sulphur from raw gasoline earlier that year at the Mediterranean port of La Skhirra in Tunisia. The resulting gases caused significant health problems, leading to a ban from the port authorities. It was then the decision was made to conduct the washing process at sea, off the Gibraltar Coast. Washing the cargoes generated waste, which needed to be disposed of. A prosecution of Trafigura in the Netherlands claimed that when they tried to take the waste to Amsterdam, the company unsuccessfully attempted to pass it off as ordinary waste created by washing out cargo tanks.

Last year, Trafigura tried to get these charges against them in the Netherlands thrown out. The Dutch court said the prosecution should continue. It is still ongoing. With that criminal case still looming, and with Mr Ugborugbo in jail, the company took the option of least resistance. "In early September we served them a whole host of documents and with a dossier of requests regarding their defence, which I think were unanswerable," Day continued. "They realised the game was up." In the UK, the court order that Trafigura agreed meant that when the case was set to go to trial in October 2009, Trafigura only had to prove their line that the waste was not dangerous. They would not have to justify to a UK judge their behaviour in Amsterdam or why they trusted Ugborugbo. But it was all for nothing. The case would never go to court. Meanwhile, the company were successfully managing to battle legal actions against them.

"Although the company Tommy was directly responsible for dumping the toxic waste in Abidjan, it acted on instructions from Trafigura and its Cote d'Ivoire affiliate Puma Energy, both of which have not been part of this trial," Marietta Harjono, senior campaigner at the genetic engineering, shipping and toxic department of Greenpeace Netherlands, told politics.co.uk. "This omission is a direct consequence of an obscure deal between the president of the Ivory Coast and Trafigura in February 2007. By paying £152 million towards clean-up costs, without accepting liability or responsibility for the dumping of toxic chemical wastes, Trafigura bought off the prosecution," she claimed. In actual fact Trafigura signed an out of court settlement with the president of the Ivory Coast for $198m in February 2007 for damages suffered by the State, reimbursement for decontamination costs and compensation for victims. "Not only is there no assurance that this payment is adequate, as a result of the deal the public will never know what actually happened and who was responsible, and won't be able to ensure that such a disaster never happens again," she added.

Trafigura is sticking to its line, so much so that there is a libel case pending against the BBC. Moreover, media coverage of the waste dumping and pending litigation has been dogged by threatened or actual litigation against numerous media organisations. Fear of such legal action prevented the publication of much of the above information by politics.co.uk last year. Meanwhile, the financial settlement for the more than 30,000 claimants has yet to be agreed. Today Trafigura released a statement saying: "It currently appears that this settlement is likely to be acceptable to most, if not all of the claimants. Claims are not being made in this litigation for deaths, miscarriages, still births, birth defects and other serious injuries.

Trafigura has always maintained that the dumped slops could never have caused the deaths and serious illnesses which have been alleged." Amnesty and Greenpeace in Trafigura investigation call - BBC News BBC News Amnesty and Greenpeace in Trafigura investigation call 25 September 2012 Close share panel Image caption Thousands of people sought medical treatment after the waste was dumped Campaigners have called for a UK criminal investigation to be brought against Trafigura for the dumping of toxic waste in Ivory Coast in 2006. The Dutch-based company with London offices paid an Ivorian company to dump the waste in Abidjan. Thousands of people sought hospital treatment. Amnesty and Greenpeace say a three-year investigation shows the UK and Dutch authorities failed to stop the dumping or hold Trafigura to account. Trafigura denies any wrongdoing. One of the world's largest transport companies, it has always argued the waste was not dangerous. It says a new report - The Toxic Truth, based on Amnesty and Greenpeace's three-year investigation - contains significant inaccuracies and misrepresentations and oversimplifies difficult legal issues.

Disputed risks In August 2006 families in Abidjan, the commercial port of Ivory Coast, woke to a foul smell, with toxic fumes wafting into their homes, says BBC Africa analyst Martin Plaut. The reason why I did not raise the issue higher up is because my experience is that it would not be acted upon Dutch policeman who warned Trafigura's London office the ship was carrying chemical waste Chemical waste had been brought to their city by a ship chartered by Trafigura and dumped, untreated, on rubbish sites around the city by a newly formed local company. The company denies the waste could have caused the reported illnesses, and said it had paid a local company to properly and legally dispose of the waste. The exact risk to humans from the waste has been heavily disputed. Series of payments Amnesty and Greenpeace say the Trafigura case exposes how international law needs to be updated to cover companies that operate across borders. "One company has been able to take full advantage of legal uncertainties and jurisdictional loopholes, with devastating consequences," said Greenpeace International Executive Director Kumi Naidoo. Probo Koala, the ship carrying the waste, had docked in Amsterdam.

But when the cost of treating it was considered too high, the Dutch allowed the ship to leave port and it then went on to be unloaded in Ivory Coast. A Dutch policeman warned the London office of Trafigura that the ship was carrying chemical waste, the report says. The policeman - quoted anonymously - said: "I never realised that Trafigura would leave the waste in Africa. I thought that if I would continue making phone calls... the company would not dump the waste at sea but keep the waste onboard instead until the ship would return to Europe. "The reason why I did not raise the issue higher up is because my experience is that it would not be acted upon." Trafigura has made a series of payments in relation to the case without admitting liability. In 2007, it paid an estimated $160m (£100m) to the Ivorian government in compensation. Two years later it also agreed to pay $45m to individual claimants in an out-of-court settlement before the case came to trial in London - after a group of British lawyers, Leigh Day and Co, organised a class action involving 30,000 Ivorians.

In July 2010, a Dutch court found Trafigura guilty of illegally exporting toxic waste from Amsterdam and concealing the nature of the cargo, fining the company 1m euros ($1.3m; £800,000). Britain urged to investigate Trafigura scandal Britain urged to investigate Trafigura scandal ROBBIE COREY-BOULET Share View photos ADDS ATTRIBUTION TO IVORIAN AUTHORITIES FILE In this Sept. 17, 2006 file photo, waste removal experts work to remove hazardous black sludge from a garbage dump in Abidjan, Ivory Coast. A new report published Tuesday, Sept.

25, 2012 is calling on British authorities to investigate multinational oil trader Trafigura over a 2006 toxic waste dumping scandal that Ivorian authorities say killed at least 15 people and affected tens of thousands more in Ivory Coast's commercial capital of Abidjan.(AP Photo, File) More ABIDJAN, Ivory Coast (AP) — The British government is urged by Amnesty International and Greenpeace to investigate possible criminal charges against the multinational firm Trafigura, over the dumping of toxic waste in Ivory Coast that is blamed for several deaths and sickening thousands. The 2006 waste disposal in Abidjan has come here to represent the arrogance of the western world toward the African continent. A three-year-long investigation by Amnesty International and Greenpeace published Tuesday points to "clear evidence that at least part of the decision-making process on export of the waste from Europe and delivery to Abidjan emanated from London," making U.K. prosecutions feasible. The report calls for the United Kingdom to undertake criminal investigations against Trafigura.

It also urges Ivory Coast to review a 2007 decision that gave Trafigura immunity from prosecution on Ivorian soil, and to probe how compensation from an out-of-court settlement in the U.K. was allowed to be misappropriated. Britain's government responded Tuesday, saying it would be inappropriate for the U.K. to launch an investigation because the vessel involved was not registered in the U.K. and the waste wasn't loaded in or originating from the U.K. "We condemn incidents such as occurred in Abidjan where toxic waste was dumped, with such devastating effects on human life and the environment," a spokesman from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said. "Controls are in place in the UK to help prevent such incidents occurring, including controls on ships waste and on the import and export of hazardous waste." More than 100,000 people sought medical treatment in the first five months after the waste was dumped in Abidjan in 2006, according to Ivorian authorities. A national commission of inquiry reported 15 deaths, though an Ivorian court put that number at 17.

Trafigura has disputed those figures, saying the waste could only have caused "low level flulike symptoms and anxiety." The new report says the dead included a 6-month-old baby and an inmate at Abidjan's main prison said to be 12 or 13 years old. Waste had been dumped just a few meters from the prison's juvenile block. Six years ago on a morning burned into the collective memory of this West African nation, Abidjan residents awoke to a smell that was a mixture of rotten eggs and gasoline fumes. Overnight on Aug. 20, 2006, toxic waste from the ship Probo Koala had been dumped in at least 18 locations throughout the city, including near houses, schools and crops. Before long, residents reported symptoms including nausea, respiratory problems and burning skin, and the lack of information on what was causing the smell and symptoms created panic. The new report describes how Trafigura purchased large amounts of an unrefined gasoline called coker naphtha, then subjected it to a refining process known as "caustic washing," which is known to create hazardous waste.

The caustic washing was initially carried out on land in the United Arab Emirates and Tunisia, but Tunisian authorities suspended the process in April 2006 after workers became ill, and the rest of the process was carried out at sea, according to the report. The multinational attempted to offload the waste in Gibraltar, Malta, France and Italy without success, the report says. An agreement was then reached with a Dutch company to offload the waste in Amsterdam, but the company raised its price after tests showed the waste would require more specialized treatment than had originally been expected. After failing to offload the waste in Lagos, Nigeria, a Trafigura subsidiary arranged for it to be offloaded in Abidjan in August by Compagnie Tommy, a firm that had received its operational license the previous month. Fabrice Gbangbo, 37, who lives near the open-air Akouedo dumpsite, the initial offloading point for the waste, described to the AP how he woke up the morning after the waste had been deposited to see large blisters forming on his skin. "Everybody was panicking here," he said.

"No one knew where the smell was coming from." Although the case has received much attention, the new report contends that Trafigura's role in the dumping "has never been subject to a full court proceeding." It also says Trafigura has blocked attempts to obtain full information about the nature of the waste. For example, Gbangbo said that without this information, residents of his village would never know if they were completely safe. "I don't know if I'm still affected because we never had a good medical analysis," he said. "We think we are OK, but maybe we're suffering inside. I don't know." Responding to the report in a letter addressed to Amnesty Africa Director Audrey Gaughran, Trafigura said the report contains "significant inaccuracies and misrepresentations," but does not specify them. "The report oversimplifies difficult legal issues, analyzes them based on ill-founded assumptions and draws selective conclusions which do not adequately reflect the complexity of the situation of the legal processes," reads the letter, signed by Eric de Turckheim, a member of Trafigura's supervisory board. "Courts in five jurisdictions have reviewed different aspects of the incident, and decisions and settlements have been made.

It is simply wrong to suggest that the issues have not had the right judicial scrutiny." Trafigura agreed in February 2007 to pay roughly $200 million to Ivory Coast for compensation and clean-up. This was the same settlement that gave Trafigura immunity from prosecution in the country. However, it is unclear whether all victims deemed eligible by the government for compensation had received any money, said Amnesty's Gaughran, who added that the government's list of victims was likely incomplete. An additional $45 million in compensation was paid by Trafigura as part of a 2009 settlement in a case brought in the U.K. by 30,000 victims, but the distribution process was corrupted when an organization falsely claiming to represent victims effectively robbed some 6,000 victims of the money they were due to receive. Ivory Coast's Minister for African Integration Adama Bictogo resigned in May over his alleged role in the scandal, though a prosecutor said in July that charges would not be brought against him.

The letter from Trafigura says the apparent misappropriation of compensation payments was "regrettable," but that this was "entirely outside our control." Gaughran said it was important for Ivory Coast to review past problems with compensation and to continue to distribute money to victims who were not able to access previous compensation schemes. One of the main lessons of the case, she added, was how difficult it was to ensure accountability for actions taken in multiple countries, but she said it was important that Trafigura be held responsible. "We can't end up in the position that just because three or four countries are involved that somehow nobody can get to grips with the problem," she said. Reblog Toxic waste dumping – Stop Wildlife Poisoning By: claudia-hodkinson During our meeting yesterday Angela from WWF told us about the problem of pesticide dumping in Africa constitutes one of the most serious environmental crimes that she is working on. The implications for Wildlife are enormous. Africa it seems, is Europe’s most popular dumping ground for radioactive waste and toxic chemicals.

Although the European Union agreed in 1988 to implement a ban that prohibits the export of hazardous wastes from developed countries to the developing world, the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand refused to sign up. There’s big money in dumping and this breeds corruption. It is claimed that each month more than 500 container loads, of 400,000 dead computers, arrive in Nigeria to be processed. The problem of waste dumping hit me in the gut when I realized how it affects individual people. You may have heard about the dumping of petroleum products in the Ivory coast 2 years ago by a Dutch firm. In August 2006 a local company hastily fly-tipped truckload after truckload of chemical waste at around 15 locations around the city. The United Nations says the dumping of the 500m tonnes of waste led to at least 16 deaths and more than 100,000 other victims needing medical treatment.

The legal case against Trafigura, the Dutch multi national shipper company that dumped the residue, was dropped in an out of court settlement in early 2007 when they agreed to pay the Ivorian government around $200m (£100m) in one of the largest ever payments of its kind. This money was to pay for the clean up and for compensation to the victims who each received approximately 500$ The waste, which contained a mixture of gasoline, water, caustic washings and the poisonous gas hydrogen sulfide, was unloaded in Abidjan from the vessel Probo Koala on August 19 2006 and then dumped in open air sites throughout the densely populated city. According to this news article Abidjan may lose up to 1,000 more people as a result of the toxic dump which is emitting choking fumes. Local authorities claim that over 70 people have so far died from inhaling the fumes; most of them children and the aged. Figures from the World Health Organization indicate that 135,000 people have sought medical treatment for various ailments arising from the toxic dump.

The Ivorian Health ministry puts the figure at 131,113. A thousand deaths will mean plucking out one fifth of the population of Akouedo, one of the worst affected communities. It is believed that this is a conservative estimate, the casualties are likely to be much greater. To me it’s obvious that Trafigura accepts responsibility for the crisis although they claim ‘officially’ that the payment is not an admission of liability but that it was ‘made out of sympathy for Ivorian people, and it also disputes whether the chemical slops were the cause of the large number of medical cases’. The multinational, which specialises in trading oil and metals, undertook to identify and clean up any sites which could still contain toxic waste linked to its shipment. The deal is good for everyone except the people of Africa. the Ivory coast cannot pursue Trafigura of any further charges, and the two French executives of Trafigura, Claude Dauphin and Jean-Pierre Valentini, were released and never charged. The Ivory Coast government agreed not to pursue Trafigura for any further compensation as part of the deal.

The bad guys include officials who endorsed the dumping and Ivory Coast’s prime minister responded by dissolving his 32-member cabinet as a result. Understandably the public are still angry and they set fire to the home of the Abidjan port director and attacked the country’s transport minister. That was the 18th August 2006. Well, it’s two years later and guess what? The money has been paid and the waste is still there and people are still dying. While Trafigura cannot be charged in Ivory coast the world is not standing back. This week an Amsterdam court will start hearing evidence relating to the Probo Koala waste scandal . This case is about the Probo Koala and does not affect the dump in the Ivory coast but their handling in Amsterdam. It now emerges that Trafigura, chartered a vessel, which at first attempted to have the waste processed in Amsterdam, but the company it contracted for this rejected the cargo because of its odour. Trafigura later ordered the Probo Koala to set sail for Ivory Coast where a local company registered only a few days earlier had promised to do the job.

Meanwhile British lawyers have mounted the largest class action yet lodged in the UK courts for up to 30,000 Africans allegedly poisoned by this toxic waste dump. This action is being brought against Trafigura, a London-based multinational, over the dumping in 2006 of 400 tonnes of toxic waste in the Ivory Coast. According to Times online Martyn Day, senior partner with Leigh Day & Co stated “That we can bring a case with 30,000 claimants from a far-off land to trial within three years of the events shows that in England we have a system for group claims that is second-to-none in the world in holding multinationals to account for their actions,” The law firm was brought in by Greenpeace, which in turn was asked to help by the Ivorean Government. Until 2006 Day was chairman of Greenpeace UK and is still on the executive of the Greenpeace Trust. By bringing the claims under the ‘no win, no fee’ scheme Greenpeace we can develop a treasure chest to help to finance large cases like this. So you’d think like Trafigura has learned a lesson right? Wrong!

According to Afrol News on 24th June this year a vessel from the shipping company Trafigura, “High Land”, landed in the Nigerian port of Lagos where it was observed off loading allegedly dangerous and poor gasoline, aimed at West African consumers. The vessels previously stopped in Tema, Ghana, where it may also have loaded off bad gasoline. Trafigura is the world’s third largest independent oil trader. According to their own figures, last year’s turnover amounted to US$ 51 billion. The company so far has denied any wrongdoings and claims to operate by strict ethical guidelines. This article explains that “The Basel Convention was adopted in 1989 largely due to African outrage over dumping incidents and schemes such as the infamous Koko beach dumping in Nigeria in 1987. The original Basel Convention which demanded controls on such exports however was seen by most countries as being far too weak to control the toxic waste trade which can involve great profits and potential therefore for corruption. Thus in 1995 the Convention Parties decided to create the Basel Ban Amendment – a total prohibition on all forms of toxic waste exports from OECD/EU countries to the rest of the world.

This amendment however, while implemented by the European Union, has not yet entered into global force and ironically many of the countries that are currently having their workers and environmental health severely impacted by hazardous waste have failed as yet to ratify it. These countries include, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Philippines, and Cote D’Ivoire. Some countries like the United States, Canada, Australia and South Korea have openly opposed the global ban. Worst of all the US, the nation that produces the most hazardous waste per capita, has failed to ratify the original Basel Convention let alone the Basel Ban Amendment”. Trafigura fined €1m for exporting toxic waste to Africa | World news | The Guardian Trafigura Trafigura fined €1m for exporting toxic waste to Africa Dutch court convicts oil trader of illegally exporting waste to Ivory Coast and concealing its hazardous nature in Amsterdam Friday 23 July 2010 09.27 EDT First published on Friday 23 July 2010 09.27 EDT Close This article is 6 years old The oil trader Trafigura has been fined ¤1m (£840,000) for illegally exporting tonnes of hazardous waste to west Africa.

It is the first time the London-based firm has been convicted of criminal charges over the environmental scandal, in which 30,000 Africans were made ill when the toxic waste was dumped in Ivory Coast . A court in the Netherlands also ruled today that the firm had concealed the dangerous nature of the waste when it was initially unloaded from a ship in Amsterdam. Eliance Kouassi, president of the victims' group in Ivory Coast, said: "Finally Trafigura has been called out in a court of law. It's a real victory for us." The fine is, however, only half the amount sought by the Dutch prosecutors. Amsterdam district court judge Frans Bauduin also convicted a Trafigura employee and the Ukranian captain of the ship that carried the waste for their roles in the 2006 scandal. The seven-week trial centred on Trafigura's initial attempt to get rid of the waste cheaply in Holland. Look Bougert, prosecuting, told the court that Trafigura had put "self-interest above people's health and the environment". The prosecutor said Trafigura initially tried to conceal how dangerous the waste was, adding that the firm wrongly described it as routine slops from ordinary tank-cleaning.

Residents complained about the foul smell. The company hired to dispose of the waste in Holland wanted more money for the job. Trafigura then pumped the toxic waste back on to its tanker. The vessel, the Probo Koala, was sent to Ivory Coast, where the cost of getting rid of the waste was much lower. Instead of disposing of it properly, Trafigura "dumped it over the fence" in Abidjan, Bougert said. "Cheap, but with consequences," he added. Last year, amid an international furore, Trafigura was forced to pay compensation totalling £30m to the thousands of Africans who needed medical treatment. The payments settled out of court a civil legal action brought by London lawyers Leigh Day. Three years ago, in another settlement, Trafigura paid £100m to the Ivorian government to help clean up the waste. Trafigura has consistently denied wrongdoing, insisting that the waste could not have caused serious illness. After today's verdict, it said it would consider an appeal. "While Trafigura is pleased to have been acquitted of the charge of forgery, it is disappointed by the judge's ruling on the other two, which it believes to be incorrect.

Concerning the delivery of dangerous goods, it is important that the court has noted that there was limited risk to human health from these slops, and indeed no damage occurred in Amsterdam." The court convicted Trafigura employee Naeem Ahmed of leading the effort to dump the waste "while its dangerous nature was concealed". Ahmed was fined ¤25,000 and given a six-month suspended sentence. The Ukrainian captain of the Probo Koala, Sergey Chertov, also was sentenced to a five-month suspended prison term. Greenpeace campaigner Marietta Harjono said: "This is a first step towards justice and a clear signal to other companies that the illegal export of waste to Africa will not go unpunished." Trafigura has become notorious for threatening reporters who delve into its conduct. It has been paying for the services of lobbyists Bell Pottinger and libel lawyers Carter-Ruck. Last year, it was forced to back down when it tried to enforce a so-called super-injunction against the Guardian , gagging it from reporting proceedings in parliament.

Amnesty and Greenpeace in Trafigura investigation call | UK Immigrant Magazine Follow @UkImmigMagazine Amnesty and Greenpeace in Trafigura investigation call Campaigners have called for a UK criminal investigation to be brought against Trafigura for the dumping of toxic waste in Ivory Coast in 2006. The Dutch-based company with London offices paid an Ivorian company to dump the waste in Abidjan. Thousands of people sought hospital treatment. Amnesty and Greenpeace say a three-year investigation shows the UK and Dutch authorities failed to stop the dumping or hold Trafigura to account. Trafigura denies any wrongdoing. One of the world’s largest transport companies, it has always argued the waste was not dangerous. It says a new report – The Toxic Truth, based on Amnesty and Greenpeace’s three-year investigation – contains significant inaccuracies and misrepresentations and oversimplifies difficult legal issues. Disputed risks In August 2006 families in Abidjan, the commercial port of Ivory Coast, woke to a foul smell, with toxic fumes wafting into their homes, says BBC Africa analyst Martin Plaut.

The company denies the waste could have caused the reported illnesses, and said it had paid a local company to properly and legally dispose of the waste. The exact risk to humans from the waste has been heavily disputed. Series of payments Amnesty and Greenpeace say the Trafigura case exposes how international law needs to be updated to cover companies that operate across borders. “One company has been able to take full advantage of legal uncertainties and jurisdictional loopholes, with devastating consequences,” said Greenpeace International Executive Director Kumi Naidoo. Probo Koala, the ship carrying the waste, had docked in Amsterdam. But when the cost of treating it was considered too high, the Dutch allowed the ship to leave port and it then went on to be unloaded in Ivory Coast. A Dutch policeman warned the London office of Trafigura that the ship was carrying chemical waste, the report says. The policeman – quoted anonymously – said: “I never realised that Trafigura would leave the waste in Africa. I thought that if I would continue making phone calls… the company would not dump the waste at sea but keep the waste onboard instead until the ship would return to Europe.

“The reason why I did not raise the issue higher up is because my experience is that it would not be acted upon.” Trafigura has made a series of payments in relation to the case without admitting liability. In 2007, it paid an estimated $160m (£100m) to the Ivorian government in compensation. Two years later it also agreed to pay $45m to individual claimants in an out-of-court settlement before the case came to trial in London – after a group of British lawyers, Leigh Day and Co, organised a class action involving 30,000 Ivorians. In July 2010, a Dutch court found Trafigura guilty of illegally exporting toxic waste from Amsterdam and concealing the nature of the cargo, fining the company 1m euros ($1.3m; £800,000).

Question: Legal action by 30,000 Ivory Coast people was brought against which company for the allged dumping of toxic waste?
Answer: Trafigura