Press Release – The hypocrisy of better beaches: winners of the “Public Eye Investigation Award” shed light on shipbreaking in Alang and Swiss companies’ involvement

Belgian journalist Gie Goris, Editor in Chief of MO* Magazine, and Nicola Mulinaris, Communication and Policy Officer of the NGO Shipbreaking Platform, received Public Eye’s first ever “Investigation Award” for their research on the shipbreaking business.

 

Gie Goris looked for signs of Swiss shipping companies in the Indian town of Alang, where ships go to die. There, he saw many middle-aged wrecks, and met angry trade unionists and workers deprived of their rights and risking their health on a daily basis for a meagre wage. Swiss ship owners, including container giant MSC, use the Alang beach to dispose of their floating toxic waste while boosting their profits. The “recycling” methods of the Geneva-based company MSC, which recently attracted critical headlines for the damage its containers caused in the North Sea, show the vast rift between sustainability promises and the reality of the Swiss shipping industry’s business practices. 

 

Nicola Mulinaris supported Goris in shedding light on the political context behind the illegal trade of toxic waste and showing the important, but ignominious, role played by landlocked Switzerland in dealing with end-of-life ships.

This story, which was published yesterday also by Public Eye, is just an extract of a bigger investigation. The full report "Behind the Hypocrisy of Better Beaches" takes a closer look at industry attempts to greenwash beaching and the lobbying for double standards by embedded policymakers in Europe.

"With this investigation we expose how vested interests have become greenwashing champions to derail and delay real progress."
Nicola Mulinaris - Communication and Policy Officer - NGO Shipbreaking Platform

 

Set up to celebrate Public Eye’s 50th anniversary in 2018, the “Investigation Award” honoured and funded journalistic research into human rights violations, environmental offences or other irresponsible practices of Swiss companies in developing or emerging countries. A jury comprised of renowned media professionals and Public Eye staff selected two projects [1] from a shortlist of 55.

 

Yesterday, the two investigations were presented to the public in Zurich, during an event held at Kosmos. A panel debate on the relationship between media and NGOs followed the authors’ presentations.

 

 

 

NOTE

 

[1] “The Blazing Success of Swiss Cigarettes in Africa” is the other project that won the "Public Eye Investigation Award". Lausanne-based reporter Marie Maurisse examined the secret recipes that Swiss tobacco companies use for cigarettes earmarked for export to Africa, in particular to Morocco. In 2017 alone, 2,900 tonnes – or 3,625 cigarettes – were exported to the country. Tests undertaken exclusively for her research revealed a scandalous double standard: cigarettes produced by Philip Morris and Japan Tobacco International (JTI) in Switzerland and sold in Morocco contained markedly higher levels of particles, nicotine and carbon monoxide than those produced for the domestic market. In contrast to the laws in the EU, Swiss legislation allows tobacco companies registered in the country – clearly not by coincidence – to produce and export products that are significantly more harmful and addictive than those sold in Switzerland. According to the WHO, the number of smoking-related deaths in Africa will double by 2030 (with help from Switzerland).

 

 

Where ships go to die – Winner of the Public Eye Investigation Award

Where ships go to die

Switzerland and the uncontrolled dismantling of ships

Decommissioned deep-sea vessels are floating toxic waste. Their disposal is laborious and costly, and regarded as a menace by those who want to protect both the workers and the environment. The more unscrupulous companies have their ships scrapped on South Asian beaches, where they poison the waters and endanger the wreckers. Swiss companies are among those who save a lot of money that way.

 

 

 

GIE GORIS - EDITOR IN CHIEF - MO* MAGAZINE

 

 

Research partner: Nicola Mulinaris - NGO Shipbreaking Platform

Financial supporter: Public Eye

 

 

The road to Alang is lined with shops and warehouses selling items that come from ships that used to sail across oceans: oak desks, faux crystal chandeliers, life vests and lifeboats, ropes, electric cables and switches, leather chairs, paintings, giant generators and motors – just about anything you can name. This is ship recycling in its most literal sense, even though these commodities are in reality no more than surplus products. The real reasons why huge ships end up on the beaches of Alang are their steel hulls and frames. Steel is where the real profits are to be made.

 

Alang and neighbouring Sosiya used to be simple fishing villages on India’s north-western coast. Today, they are famous – or rather infamous – because shipbreaking yards are now taking up kilometers of beaches along the Gulf of Khambhat, where the Arabian Sea cuts deep into the state of Gujarat. These shores have thus become boat cemeteries. 

 

A few days before we arrived in Alang, in early September 2018, two men died while working at the RKB Group-owned Honey Ship Breaking yard. Bhuddabhai Kudesha from Alang, and Ali Ahmed from Jharkhand, fell victim to an industry often seen as providing “the most dangerous jobs in the world”. The same yard was used less than a year ago by the Swiss company MSC to break up the MSC Alice. You can read more on this story below.

 

NO TRESPASSING!

The omnipresence of impressive images of ocean-going giants on Asian beaches could give the impression that the yards are quite accessible. This is not the case. Driving into Alang, a big blue banner welcomes visitors to the Alang-Sosiya Ship Recycling Yard, but it soon becomes clear that the welcome is conditional. Journalists, academics and foreigners can usually only enter with permission from officials in Gandhinagar, Gujarat’s capital. The procedure can take months, or even longer, and in the rare instances where permission is granted it comes with many restrictions that limit access. Not having this green light from Gandhinagar, we were stopped at our first attempt to visit Alang. The Gujarat Maritime Board allowed us to go on the roof of their building overlooking the yard, but even a carefully disguised attempt at a selfie was stopped in its tracks: “No pictures, sir!” So it was clear that one needs to be inventive and try to circumvent the Gujarat Maritime Board checkpoint, persuade a yard owner to give the go-ahead, or have an extremely well connected liaison person who can introduce you. We combined these three conditions to get closer to the breaking yards. 

 

 

Shipbreaking yards in Alang, India - © Amit Dave 2018

 

 

Bhuddabhai’s last day

Bhuddabhai was 33. On August 31 2018, as on every other working day, he woke up around six in the morning, when the first light penetrates the darkness and ends the silence in his village. His eight-year-old son and two daughters, aged six and four, were still sleeping, but his wife was already up and preparing their breakfast. Six years ago, Bhuddabhai had managed to get a job on the shipbreaking yards of Alang, situated about three kilometers from their house. He knew how rare it was for a Kholi – originally a fisherman’s caste but now mostly day laborers in seasonal agriculture – to find work in that industry.

 

On the morning of the accident, Bhuddabhai was busy removing toilets from the MV Ocean Gala. His employer would later sell these items to the second-hand shops that line the road to Alang. It wasn't a particularly well-paid job, but it certainly made a better living than the farm work his father and younger brother Rajabhai did. Bhuddabhai would often lend them a helping hand on Sundays or before he left for the yards on his Honda motorcycle at 7.30 in the morning. On that day, Bhuddabhai took, for the last time, the dusty road from his home to the Honey Ship Breaking Yard.

 

We visited Alang only a few days later, and the exact circumstances of the accident were still murky when we spoke to his family. What transpires is that a piece of the hull must have broken off unexpectedly, taking Bhuddabhai with it as well as Ali Ahmed, the gas cutter who was cutting through the steel on the ship's ninth floor to create an extra exit. None of the workers were wearing safety belts. Nor were they required to, according to the shipyard’s owner. They were working inside the ship; only the cutters working on the ship’s exterior must wear safety belts.

 

Cruise ship MV Ocean Gala in Alang, India - © Amit Dave 2018

 

 

An endless list of problems

To better understand the conditions under which breakers work in Alang, we met Vidyadhar Rane, who is secretary-general of the union trying to organize workers there. In addition to the safety problems on the sites, there are many essential points that should be improved or obtained: “Housing. Toilets. Canteens. Correctly paid overtime. Paid holidays. Health and accident insurance for everyone. Adequate hospital capacity.” The latter can make the difference between life and death when disaster strikes. When Bhuddabhai had the accident at Honey Ship Breaking Yard, he was brought to the public hospital in Bhavnagar, a provincial town more than 50 kilometers from Alang. It takes more than an hour to cover that distance on the narrow two-lane road, full of speed bumps, stray cows, trucks and dangerous traffic. There is a small, 10-bed clinic run by the Indian Red Cross and the Alang Hospital, which has 20 beds, but these do not have the equipment to deal with serious injuries. These infrastructures are completely insufficient to meet the needs of almost 160 yards in Alang, on which 15,000 to 30,000 workers dismantle huge ships under extreme conditions, risking their limbs and lives. The numbers given vary with each interview, and official statistics are not available, since most labor is informal anyway.

 

 

A billion rupees industry

“There is no union in Alang,” says Nikhil Gupta, co-owner of Rudra Green Ship Recycling, one of the “better” shipbreaking yards in Alang. “And that makes doing business in Gujarat so nice: we have no unions because everyone is on the same page.” Gupta makes this surprising – and patently untrue – statement at the end of an interview during which he has tried to explain the economic laws of demand and supply that govern the world of globalized shipping and shipbreaking, or as industry captains like him prefer to call it: “recycling”. Although the other yard owners we speak to aren’t as disparaging, no-one has anything resembling a formal relation with a union. Nor do they engage in collective bargaining at company or sectoral level. “When there are problems, we deal with the workers directly. Much faster that way” says Nitin Kanakiya, the secretary of the Ship Recycling Industry Association (SRIA) and the owner of Triveni Yard, in Alang.

 

“The laws to protect workers are insufficient and are not enforced,” explains Dr Sahu Geetanjoy, a researcher at the Tata Institute for Social Studies in Mumbai, and one of just a few academics studying labor conditions in the shipbreaking industry. The government’s own financial interests may explain its lack of commitment to enforcing labor and environmental rules, he says. Through taxes and the leasing of land on the beaches, the shipbreaking industry contributes around 7 billion rupees, or about €87.5 million, to the Gujarat state coffers per year.

 

When we asked Bhuddabhai’s family what they expect from the owner of the shipbreaking yard, the answer came instantly: “Nothing.” Their answer reflects centuries of humiliation and marginalization; Kholis have never been able to expect anything from the wealthy or the upper castes. Bhuddabhai’s brother and nephew still don’t know whether the family will receive any compensation. Raj Bansal, the Honey Ship Breaking Yard owner, promises that the family will receive about €6,250, an amount that corresponds to three years of work on the yard. But a pension for the widow, Bansal says, will not be provided. Added to the immense pain of having lost her husband and the father of her three children is the destitution, more desperate than anything she has known so far.

 

Every year around 1000 ships are scrapped.

65 to 75 % of them end up on one of the three breaking beaches in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh.

Bhuddabhai's tragic story evokes the threat to the lives of so many others; tens of thousands of men who, to support themselves and their families, dismantle ships with little or no protection on the beaches of South Asia. According to data published by the Brussels-based international NGO Shipbreaking Platform, every year around 1000 ships are scrapped, and 65 to 75 percent of them end up on one of the three breaking beaches in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh.

 

Once a ship is destined for dismantling, it is considered to be hazardous waste under international law, specifically the 1989 Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal.

 

 

Weakening and circumventing laws

Click on the images below to discover the legal framework's weaknesses and how ship owners use loopholes to circumvent legislation.

 

UNEP

IMO

EU

UNEP Basel Convention

The United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP) adopted the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal in 1992 following numerous hazardous waste trafficking scandals in the late 1980’s. The Basel Convention, which has been transposed into EU law by the EU Waste Shipment Regulation, controls the international trade of hazardous wastes. It is relevant for ship dismantling as a ship, which usually contains hazardous materials within its structure, is considered hazardous waste when destined for breaking. The Basel Convention, ratified by 187 countries, remains the only international legislation in force that aims at protecting developing countries from the dumping of toxic ships. Still, the shipping industry has exploited loopholes in the Basel regime and opted for the more profitable breaking of ships on South Asian beaches. Due to the fact that a vessel becomes waste only when the intent to dispose of it is evident, to escape the Basel regime it is sufficient for ship owners to hide their true intentions from the authorities of the exporting state - the state from where the vessel leaves for its final voyage to the scrap yard.

IMO Hong Kong Convention

When the Basel Convention State Parties started discussing more effective ways of regulating the trade of toxic ships – such as pinpointing the responsibility of countries where ship owners are headquartered – the United Nations’ specialized agency International Maritime Organization (IMO) decided to start working on a new legally binding convention specifically on ship recycling to be based instead on enforcement by the flag states. The resulting Hong Kong Convention (HKC) on the Safe and Environmentally Sound Recycling of Ships is not expected to enter into force before many years, since, to date, it has been ratified only by six countries. Civil society has been joined by the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and Toxics, European policy makers and developing countries in denouncing the HKC for setting low standards that would rubberstamp current dirty and dangerous practices on South Asian beaches.

 

EU Ship Recycling Regulation

At the European level, due to the ease by which ship owners have been circumventing existing waste laws, a new regulation on ship recycling was adopted. From 31 December 2018, EU-flagged vessels can only be recycled in facilities compliant with the regulation’s requirements and included in the European List of ship recycling facilities. The EU regulation sets higher standards than the HKC: the beaching method is not allowed and requirements related to downstream toxic waste management as well as labor rights are included.

 

The most dangerous job in the world

In 2015, the International Labour Organisation (ILO) warned about the dreadful consequences of this practice: “Shipbreaking has grown into a major occupational and environmental health problem. It is amongst the most dangerous of occupations, with unacceptably high levels of fatalities, injuries and work-related diseases.”

 

According to The Indian Supreme Court, the incidence of fatal accidents in shipbreaking (two in every 1,000 workers) is higher than that in mining (0.34 per 1,000 workers).

In India, data from the Gujarat Industrial Safety and Health Department show that at least 470 fatal accidents occurred in Alang between 1983, the start of the local shipbreaking industry, and 2013, indicates Dr Geetanjoy of the Tata Institute for Social Studies. “There is no central and reliable register of accidents in the yards,” he explains. But according to the Indian Supreme Court, the incidence of fatal accidents in shipbreaking (two in every 1000 workers) is higher than that in mining (0.34 per 1,000 workers), which is nevertheless considered to be “the most accident-prone industry.”

 

In 2009, the UN Special Rapporteur on toxic wastes already described in a report the long-term risks of shipbreaking, a time-bomb: “In shipbreaking yards, workers are often exposed to toxic chemicals including asbestos dust and fibres, highly toxic industrial chemicals which have been banned for decades but are still present in ships, as well as lead, mercury, arsenic or cadmium in paints, coatings and electrical equipment. Workers are often without protective equipment that reduces exposure. Prolonged exposure to these chemicals increases the risk of developing slow-progressing but fatal diseases, which may not become apparent until many years after exposure.”

 

As in other sensitive sectors, the human and environmental costs of such practices are paid by poor countries. The current Special Rapporteur, Baskut Tuncak, is more explicit about the responsibility of the shipping industry, “which externalises impacts on poor workers and communities in developing countries”. In that sense, container ships and other vessels are, right to the end, sad symbols of the abuses of globalization.

 

 

Ecological disaster and the “gravity method”

The environmental consequences are also dramatic. In June 2016, the EU Directorate-General for the Environment published an overview of several studies, one of which clearly showed just how heavily the Alang–Sosiya natural environment has been polluted by copper, cobalt, manganese, lead, cadmium, nickel, zinc and mercury. The Commission also refers to a previous study, published in 2001, that found that mercury levels in Alang were 15,500 percent higher than at a control site, and 16,973 percent higher for petroleum hydrocarbons. The researchers also detected the presence of certain bacteria at high levels.

 

Questioned on this point, Dr Geetanjoy Sahu, at the Tata Institute of Social Sciences, complains about the dire lack of research into the state of fish populations, groundwater, air quality and noise pollution in the region. “The government makes it all but impossible to work independently in Alang, even for Indian researchers. That makes one wonder: what is it that needs to be hidden? What interests need to be protected so desperately?”

 

Some of the pollution is directly related to what the shipbreaking industry calls the “gravity method”: this is when large parts of the ship are cut with a blowtorch and crash down on the beach. The incredible impact of falling tons of steel combined with the process of cutting steel using very high-temperature gas flames causes often-toxic paints to be released into the sea and soil. The ships are broken during low tide and all the oil residues, heavy metals and toxic substances that aren’t cleaned up before high-tide are spread across the entire marine environment.

 

Scrapped blocks in the intertidal area in Alang, India - © Amit Dave 2018

 

 

“Europe is hypocritical”

However, all the site owners we interviewed have a common refrain: “Alang’s yards are well on track to becoming green, but the European companies lack serious commitment to the cause they preach.” Nithin Kanakiya, owner of Triveni ship recycling yard in Alang and the secretary of the local Ship Recycling Industry Association (SRIA), is even louder and clearer. “Europe is hypocritical. From one side, it demands the impossible in terms of salaries, insurances, safety and environmental protection, while from the other side their only interest is profit maximization, for which they are prepared to play one yard against the other,” he insists.

 

We asked Komalkant Sharma, the owner of the Leela Group of Companies, whether he looks at the big shippers for support: “When we find that ship owners are only interested in top dollars, then it becomes impossible for us to continue doing business with them. Leela aims to be better than the others in social and ecological terms, but that does not come for free. And that is why European ship owners should bear their share of responsibility and encourage the necessary investments by accepting lower prices for their vessels, or by engaging in the longer term with recycling companies. But the ship owners dump the responsibility on the recyclers.”

 

If Leela is considered to be one of the “best” yards in Alang, then it’s good to remember that Ravindra Chaudhari died there on Sunday, April 15 2018, while doing maintenance work. A sheet of steel, which was half cut out of the hull of the vessel Plata Glory, fell down.

 

 

A hell for (mostly) internal migrants

Many vessels are dismantled in Chittagong, Bangladesh, where labour and environmental conditions are even worse than at Alang. Mohamed Ali Shahin, who works for Young People in Action (YPSA) and is deeply involved in the shipbreaking issue, told us on the phone that on 10 November a worker at the SH Enterprise yard died while breaking the Ukraine-owned MV Velda. And that the day before another worker died while disassembling the Indian-owned Peri at the Golden Iron Works yard. Earlier this year, two workers died on the Zuma Enterprise yard; they were working on the MT EKTA, an oil tanker that, according to shipping databases, was sold to the breaker by the Swiss shipping company Navimar. Navimar bought the vessel that was operated by Maran Tankers, a subsidiary of Greek Anangel Shipping Group, in September 2017, only a month before it was brought to the beach at Chittagong, so it’s clear that the Swiss company acted as a conduit to scrap the ship, making a purely financial transaction.

"Zuma Enterprise is one of the worst yards in Chittagong. It has no safety measures, no compliance to international environmental standards and no waste management. Why would a Swiss company choose such an unsafe yard to cooperate with?"
MD Ali Shahin - YPSA

Zuma is not only unsafe, it’s also cheap with regard to workers’ health. “Their practice,” adds Shahin, “is to pay the family of a worker who died in an accident the legal minimum of 100.000 taka (a little over 1000 euros). But other yards would compensate such a tragic loss with 500.000 taka.”

 

 

19 fatalities in 2018, a new sad record

The government should do more to make it cleaner and safer, he argues, but it’s not just a Bengali responsibility. As he emphasizes: “European ship owners could do so much more to demand and stimulate safe and clean shipbreaking. They can enforce European standards and should invest, for instance, in waste-collection facilities. And, of course, they could start with cleaning out their ships of all the toxic materials before they even send them to South Asia.”

 

As in Alang, many of the shipbreaking workers in Chittagong are internal migrants who live in unsanitary accommodation. They work long hours, usually without labor contracts, and can take no holidays. The shipbreaking yards prevent trade unions from organizing the workers. In Chittagong, at least 15 workers were killed in 2017, while at least 22 suffered severe injuries. Provisional figures for 2018 indicate that 19 workers have lost their lives, the highest number in the past nine years. The majority of the deaths are caused by fires, falls from great heights, and workers being crushed by ship parts that come loose.

 

Shipbreaking yards in Chittagong, Bangladesh - © Studio Fasching 2017
Burns on worker's hands in Chittagong, Bangladesh - © Studio Fasching 2017

 

 

Switzerland is a global dumper, too

Although it has no access to the sea, Switzerland is home to big companies specializing in maritime chartering. Whereas Mediterranean Shipping Co. (MSC) is well known among cruise lovers, most people have never heard of the other shipping companies, most of which are domiciled on the shores of Lake Geneva. Even less well known is the sad fact that the Swiss shipping sector also has a poor track record regarding the dismantling business in South Asia.

 

According to our calculations and based on a variety of industry sources, ninety Swiss-owned vessels ended up on beaches in Bangladesh, India and Pakistan between 2009 and today. The names of the companies involved are on the record, but receive little publicity: Atlanship S.A., Doris Maritime Services S.A., FleetPro Passenger Ship Management AG, Lumar S.A., MSC Mediterranean Shipping Co., Sallaum Group SA, Shipfin S.A., Sider Navi S.p.A., and Taunus Shipping S.A.

 

According to the UN Conference for Trade and Development (UNCTAD), Switzerland ranks 20th in the world in terms of the number of ships owned. However, the NGO Shipbreaking Platform reports that, in terms of the number of ships scrapped on South Asian beaches, Switzerland rises in the ranking. Almost all Swiss ships end their working years in such conditions, making Switzerland one of the biggest polluters in terms of the irresponsible management of its old ships.

 

 

MSC does not walk its talk

 

Of the 90 Swiss-owned vessels scrapped on South Asian beaches in the last ten years, a stunning 80 belonged to MSC.

Of the 90 Swiss-owned vessels scrapped on South Asian beaches in the last ten years, a stunning 80 belonged to MSC, the second-biggest container shipping company in the world. This giant with a turnover of 27 billion euros in 2017 does not have to publish its numbers, since it’s a family owned and run company, headed by its Italian co-founder Gianluigi Aponte.

 

In 2009, he received the Neapolitan Excellence of the World award from the then Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, and in 2013, the Cavaliere del Lavoro (Knight of Labor) honorary title from the President of the Republic, Giorgio Napolitano. To be considered for the title, candidates must have an impeccable record of civil and social accomplishments, and have abided by all tax laws, while paying particular attention to workers’ protection and assistance. More recently, in October 2018, MSC won the Greenest Ship Owner of the Year award at the annual Green Shipping Summit in Amsterdam. “MSC was commended for its efforts to promote the sustainable use of marine resources and investments in green technologies,” the company writes on its website.

 

A shipping company that, to quote their Chief Sustainability Officer, aims “to become the most sustainable, technologically advanced and customer-focused shipping line in the industry” while at the same time sending its decommissioned vessels to South Asian beaches, has some explaining to do. We therefore contacted MSC two weeks after they were honored with the Greenest Ship Owner Award 2018 and told them that we wished “to get the facts and numbers about ships sold for breaking/recycling and to understand the decision processes or criteria used by MSC.” The response from Geneva was brief: “Thank you for your interest in MSC’s environmental strategy. As of today, we decline to take part in your research.”

 

 

Inexistent standard

In MSC’s sustainability report there is only one reference to the issue: “Our ship recycling practice is another important area of emphasis for MSC, as it is strictly related to labor standards, environmental protection and human rights […] only recycling yards with IMO HKC standards (see box 3) , ISO 14001 (environment), ISO 30001 (recycling management) and OSHAS 18001 (health & safety) standards are selected for recycling at the end of the useful life of a ship.” It’s remarkable that MSC refers to ISO 30001 as one of the conditions for working with shipbreaking yards, as this ISO standard number does not actually exist! Or perhaps it’s symptomatic of the whole sustainability of its shipbreaking practice: big declarations, but no results?

 

We wanted to know specifically whether MSC could confirm that all these requirements are fulfilled by the yards in Alang used by that company. For a company that prides itself on its corporate social responsibility, the response was again disappointing: “We hereby confirm that we are not able to satisfy your request.”

 

 

Poort track record in Alang

The beach at Alang is where the business practices of MSC and the destiny of Bhuddabhai converge, although with a time lag. On 4 August 2009, the MSC Jessica caught fire while it was being disassembled on a beach in Alang, resulting in the deaths of six workers. In 2011, the container ship MSC Chitra collided with the Khalijia3 in the port of Mumbai. After a long effort to remove most of the containers from the ship, the MSC Chitra was sold to be scrapped in Alang. But after it became clear that the ship was too damaged to be towed even the relatively short distance to Alang, Indian authorities ordered that it be sunk outside of Indian territorial waters. In 2017, not even a year before Bhuddabhai’s accident, the MSC Alice was scrapped at the Honey Ship Breaking yard in Alang. Although its certifications suggest that the yard is one of the better ones in Alang, the accident on 31 August 2018, in which two workers died while dismantling a cruise ship, shows that such privately issued certificates claiming compliance with the weak standards of the Hong Kong Convention fail to combat even the worst dangers of shipbreaking.

 

© Pradeep Shukla 2015

 

 

This story, which has been published also by Public Eye, is just an extract of a bigger investigation. Click here or on the image below to access the full investigation report.

 

 

Shedding light on hidden facts can change the world: this strong belief led Public Eye to set up the Investigation Award on the occasion of its 50th birthday to support the work of journalists or NGOs that investigate the practices of companies and their harmful ramifications on developing or emerging countries.

 

A prestigious jury selected two projects from 55 proposals submitted from over 20 countries. They received crowdfunding – over 300 people contributed to our participative funding-raising campaign. They allowed Nicola Mulinaris, from the NGO Shipbreaking Platform and Gie Goris of MO* magazine (Belgium), to carry out this investigation, and enabled Marie Maurisse to reveal the secret recipes of Swiss cigarette companies

 

 

MO* Magazine/NGO SBP/Public Eye - Behind the hypocrisy of better beaches

Press Release – Another Dutch ship owner faces huge fine for having beached a vessel

Dutch ship owner Holland Maas Scheepvaart Beheer II BV has been fined 780.000 EUR and paid a settlement of 2.2 million EUR - totaling to a price tag of almost 3 million EUR - for having beached a ship for scrapping in India.

 

In 2013, Holland Maas Scheepvaart Beheer II BV, a subsidiary of WEC Lines BV, sold the HMS Laurence to a cash buyer, a company specialised in the trade of end-of-life vessels to beaching yards. The vessel ended up in Alang, India, where it was broken under conditions that “cause serious damage to the environment and expose the health of workers and the local population to grave danger”, according to the Dutch Public Prosecutor. Scrapping ships on tidal mudflats is not allowed in Europe, and the export of hazardous materials [1] from the EU to developing countries is prohibited. 

 

Following criminal investigations on the illegal export of the vessel from Italy, the Dutch Public Prosecutor agreed to a settlement of 2.2 million EUR: the amount that Holland Maas Scheepvaart Beheer II BV had earned by selling the ship to the beaching yard. The Prosecutor stated that it had accepted the settlement as the company has announced that it will take measures to avoid scrapping vessels on beaches in the future. 

"It is very encouraging to see that ship owners are being held accountable for the trafficking of toxic ships – it is also encouraging to see that WEC Lines BV is now committed to the safe and clean recycling of its fleet off the beach. With that they join other responsible ship owners, such as Dutch Boskalis, German Hapag Lloyd, and Scandinavian companies Wallenius-Wilhelmsen and Grieg, that already have sustainable recycling policies in place that clearly rule out beaching."
Ingvild Jenssen - Executive Director and Founder - NGO Shipbreaking Platform

Already in 2015, the captain of the HMS Laurence was sentenced by the Dutch Maritime Disciplinary Court to a six-month conditional suspension of his master’s navigation license. Beaching the vessel was in breach of the captain’s duty of care to the environment, according to the Disciplinary Court. This first suspension of a European ship master revealed that also the crew can be held liable for dirty and dangerous shipbreaking.

 

In March last year another Dutch shipping company, Seatrade, was convicted for having intended to scrap four vessels in India. Five subsidiaries of the company received fines, as did two of Seatrade’s CEOs, who were also sentenced to professional bans. 

 

The Netherlands is taking a leading position on the cracking down on illegal trafficking of toxic ships. More investigations are also underway in other European countries, such as the Harrier case in Norway and the North Sea Producer case in the UK. Last week, in Bangladesh, a shipbreaker was sentenced to a 280.000 USD fine for having scrapped a vessel on the touristic Parki Sea Beach. The court emphasised that beaching causes irreparable damage to the local ecology.

"Both exporting and importing countries are starting to hold industry stakeholders accountable – it is high time to scrap the beaching method and replace it by proper recycling in facilities that can contain pollutants and ensure safe working conditions. Better methods exist and facilities that operate under higher standards have the capacity to take in more ships. An increased demand for sustainable practices will see more investments in yards that meet the standards of the EU Ship Recycling Regulation. "
Ingvild Jenssen - Executive Director and Founder - NGO Shipbreaking Platform

EU-flagged vessels are now exempt from the EU Waste Shipment Regulation that regulates the export of hazardous wastes, as they fall under the scope of the new EU Ship Recycling Regulation [2]. Under the new legal regime, EU-flagged ships must be recycled only in safe and sound facilities included by the EU in the European List of ship recycling facilities. Beaching yards will not be accepted on the EU list as they fall short of the environmental and safety requirements that the Regulation sets. 

 

NOTES

 

[1] The HMS Laurence – as most vessels – contained toxic materials within its structure. 

 

[2] The EU Waste Shipment Regulation continues to cover non-EU flagged vessels. 

 

 

Platform News – Greenpeace regrets beaching of Rongdhonu (ex Rainbow Warrior II)

The NGO Shipbreaking Platform regrets that the Rongdhonu, former Greenpeace Rainbow Warrior II, has been sold for scrapping on the beaches of Chittagong, Bangladesh. Greenpeace International had donated their former flagship to another NGO, Friendship, for use as a hospital ship in Bangladesh. This NGO sold the vessel for breaking in Chittagong under supervision of Greenpeace.

 

Greenpeace has issued a statement of regret and of their full support for the NGO Shipbreaking Platform’s campaign to get ship recycling off the beach. Indeed, Greenpeace campaigned on this issue for many years.

 

The NGO Shipbreaking Platform, an alliance of human rights, labour, and environmental non-governmental organizations working internationally to raise the standard of ship recycling, agrees with the European Union (EU) that ship recycling must take place off the beach and in safe, secure facilities that the EU has listed based on environmental and social criteria. We will continue to work with leaders in the industry and governments to reform the shipping industry’s substandard practices that every year cause fatalities, occupational disease, and irreparable harm to the marine environment.

Press Release – Europe has capacity to recycle its ships, new data shows – yet shipowners want to use dangerous, polluting yards abroad

Ship recycling yards approved by the EU will have enough capacity to handle demand from EU-flagged ships that need to be scrapped, a new analysis shows. The shipping industry wants low-cost ship ‘breaking’ yards outside the EU – with dangerous working conditions and poor environmental standards – to be added to the EU list of approved facilities in order to meet demand from vessels bound by the bloc’s ship recycling law, which enters force on 1 January 2019. But the current EU list can accommodate the numbers and sizes of EU-flagged ships that are scrapped every year, the new report by NGOs Shipbreaking Platform and Transport & Environment (T&E) shows.

 

Damen Verolme Rotterdam ship recycling yard – © DAMEN / Offshore Ship Recycling Rotterdam – OSRR

The 20 EU yards currently recognised as meeting ship-recycling standards have had the capacity to handle all EU ships broken since 2015, the report shows. Shipbreaking Platform and T&E said lawmakers should not succumb to pressure to either delay the implementation of the regulation or add sub-standard shipbreaking facilities – which would never be allowed to operate in EU countries – to the EU list.

 

Yards that use the beaching method are of particular concern. Vessels are full of hazardous materials, including asbestos, chlorine compounds, heavy metals and residue oils. On a tidal mudflat it is not possible to contain these toxics – instead they are washed out to the sea, and ravage coastal ecosystems. Without proper protective equipment, workers are also sickened and exposed to unnecessary risk. Accidents at the beaching yards kill or maim young men each year due to unsafe practices. [1]

 

"The shipowners’ capacity claims are a clear red herring. Alternatives to beaching end-of-life ships exist. It boils down to not accepting the low occupational safety and environmental protection standards that allow many unapproved yards to operate cheaply."
Ingvild Jenssen - Executive Director and Founder - NGO Shipbreaking Platform

Shipowners misleadingly cite the EU yards’ historical capacity to claim that they are over-capacity. However, this does not take into account the EU facilities operating under capacity due to being undercut by sub-standard competition overseas. It also ignores the capacity of newly-opened yards which are just starting to operate.

 

"The business of breaking EU ships is an opportunity to boost circular economy and create green jobs in Europe. EU-listed yards have the capacity to break all EU-flagged ships and more. There is no excuse for sending ships to dangerous and polluting yards on beaches overseas."
Lucy Gilliam- Shipping Officer - T&E

The European Commission, national experts and stakeholders meet on 3 October to discuss the implementation of the regulation.

 

Press Release – Investigations on the Harrier tighten as it reaches Turkey for recycling

Norwegian press DN revealed this summer that Aqualis Offshore and insurance company Skuld Maritime Agency are under investigation for their involvement in the attempt to illegally export the Harrier to Pakistan for scrapping. Aqualis Offshore issued two certificates for the ship – one for a break-up voyage to Pakistan, another for a voyage to Dubai – and it is suspected that the latter was issued to dupe Norwegian authorities in order to circumvent the European waste export ban. Skuld Maritime Agency was involved in issuing the last-voyage insurance for the vessel and is therefore being investigated for having aided the illegal export.

 

The former and current owners of the ship, Georg Eide and cash buyer Wirana, are also targeted in the ongoing investigations, and risk being held criminally liable for their attempt to illegally export the Harrier.

"It is encouraging to see authorities enforce the law on ships destined for recycling. Following also the Seatrade judgement in the Netherlands, the Harrier case is yet another warning to ship owners that selling a vessel for the highest price to a cash buyer is dirty business."
Ingvild Jenssen - Executive Director and Founder - NGO Shipbreaking Platform

Another owner, Herbjorn Hansson of Nordic American Tankers, is under the spotlight in Norway for having sold eight vessels for beaching. Reactions to these revelations have been strong with the Norwegian Oil Pension Fund as well as the banks DNB and Nordea condemning beaching as a method for breaking ships.

 

The Norwegian Environment Agency urges ship owners to use facilities that have been approved by the EU for the recycling of their vessels, regardless of the flag of their ship. Its director, Ellen Hambro, states that it is unacceptable to endanger workers’ health and pollute the environment in developing countries for the sake of higher profits.

"We support the statements made by the Norwegian authorities and call also upon other stakeholders in shipping, such as insurers and financers, to play their part in putting an end to the dirty and dangerous practice of beaching. Safer and cleaner alternatives exist and ship owners must be pushed towards using these facilities."
Ingvild Jenssen - Executive Director and Founder - NGO Shipbreaking Platform

Yesterday the Harrier arrived in Aliaga, Turkey, where it will be recycled in line with the European waste laws. Waste Management company Norsk Gjennvinning will be supervising the process.

 

 

Press Release – NGO Shipbreaking Platform presents Annual Report 2017

The NGO Shipbreaking Platform presents its Annual Report 2017.

 

The NGO Shipbreaking Platform works to ensure that vessels are recycled without causing harm to workers and the environment. Thanks to our continued efforts, concerned policy makers, progressive investors and banks, and law enforcers are now echoing the Platform’s demand. Read more about this in our new Annual Report.

 

We need your support to effectively prevent the human rights abuses and environmental injustice provoked when ships are traded to dirty and dangerous breaking yards! Share this publication and make a donation.

Download the Platform’s Annual Report 2017 here.

 

Press Release – Seatrade convicted for trafficking toxic ships

Today, the Rotterdam District Court sentenced, on the basis of the EU Waste Shipment Regulation, shipping company Seatrade for the illegal export of vessels sent for scrapping on the beaches of South Asia. The Seatrade company has been heavily fined, and two of its executives have also been banned from exercising the profession as director, commissioner, advisor or employee of a shipping company for one year.

 

For the first time, a European shipping company has been held criminally liable for having sold vessels for scrap to substandard shipbreaking yards in India and Bangladesh, where, as widely acknowledged and according to the Prosecutor, “current ship dismantling methods endanger the lives and health of workers and pollute the environment”. The Prosecutor’s request that the Seatrade executives face prison was only waived in light of this being the first time such criminal charges had been pressed.

 

This groundbreaking judgement sets a European-wide precedent for holding ship owners accountable for knowingly selling vessels, via shady cash-buyers, for dirty and dangerous breaking in order to maximize profits.

"We strongly welcome the judgement of the Rotterdam Court. The ruling sends a clear-cut message that dirty and dangerous scrapping will no longer be tolerated."
Ingvild Jenssen - Executive Director and Founder - NGO Shipbreaking Platform

Press Release – NGOs respond to legal threats by shipbreaking industry and withdraw from industry conference

On Monday, the NGO Shipbreaking Platform, an international coalition of labour, human rights and environmental organisations, withdrew their participation from the TradeWinds Ship Recycling Forum that starts today in Hamburg. This is in response to a letter from cash buyer GMS threatening to sue unless the Platform removes all mention of GMS from their website. The Platform has frequently exposed the cash buyer for enabling the dirtiest and most underhanded practices in the shipbreaking industry [1]. Tradewinds refused to replace GMS company staff as chair in the sessions in which the Platform was to participate as experts, despite being noted that it is a conflict of interest and inappropriate to allow discussions to be moderated by a person representing a company that is threatening to legally attack a session invitee.

 

No company would accept to participate in a debate moderated by someone threatening to sue them”, says Ingvild Jenssen, Founder and Director of the NGO Shipbreaking Platform. “We regret not being able to present our views at TradeWinds where we would have especially provided our support to the many financers, investors and authorities that are now engaging to set a standard for the industry and who are demanding to move the industry off the beach”, she adds.

 

In reaction to the attempt by GMS to silence critical civil society voices that reveal the company’s unethical, dangerous and environmentally disastrous business practices, the Platform’s legal counsel in Belgium and in the US has further responded in a letter that neither an apology nor retractions will be forthcoming.

 

We have no intention to remove truthful information from our website and will not apologise for reporting on the business of trafficking ships for dirty and dangerous breaking. It is our organisation’s mission to provide authorities, journalists, and industry stakeholders with information on the deplorable realities of current shipbreaking practices which encourage the circumvention of existing labour and environmental protection laws“, says Ingvild Jenssen.

 

The harassment by GMS comes in addition to the earlier threat to sue the Platform made by PHP, a Bangladeshi shipbreaking yard and a supporting sponsor of this year’s TradeWinds Ship Recycling Forum.

 

NOTE

 

[1] Dubai-based GMS has been involved in several cases of illegal hazardous waste exports that are being/have been investigated by authorities and the police in several countries. For instance:
- GMS was revealed to be the cash-buyer for the illegal export of the North Sea Producer from the UK to Bangladesh: https://old.danwatch.dk/en/undersogelse/maersk-og-det-farlige-affald-i-bangladesh
- Three drill rigs stacked in Scotland were stopped from leaving after their destination was suspected to be to a beaching yard in South Asia. GMS has been confirmed as the buyer of the rigs: https://www.energyvoice.com/opinion/162853/opinion-scrap-shady-underbelly-offshore-industry/?utm_source=twitter
- Last year, a worker in Bangladesh claimed compensation for injuries incurred while breaking a ship owned by Zodiac Maritime. GMS was revealed to be the cash buyer behind the sale to the shipbreaking yard: https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/dec/02/chittagong-shipbreaking-yards-legal-fight
- In 2009 the company was fined $518,500 dollars by the US EPA for illegally exporting a PCB laden passenger liner to South Asia: http://www.marinelog.com/DOCS/NEWSMMIX/2009jan00311.html

 

 

Maersk’s toxic trade: the North Sea Producer case

Maersk's toxic trade: the North Sea Producer case

In August 2016 the FPSO NORTH SEA PRODUCER was beached in Chittagong, Bangladesh. The ship was allowed to leave the UK based on false claims that it would be further operationally used in the Tin Can port in Nigeria. In both the UK and Bangladesh, the Platform is fronting the battle to hold the owners, and cash buyer GMS, accountable for the illegal export of the FPSO.

 

The North Sea Producer (ex Dagmar Maersk) was deployed in the McCulloch field in the North Sea, transporting and extracting oil from the UK continental shelf for 17 years. It was owned by the North Sea Production Company, a single-ship joint venture between Danish A.P. Moeller Maersk and Brazilian Odebrecht. Once the field closed, the NORTH SEA PRODUCER was laid up in Teesport, UK, for a year while the owners were looking for buyers. For scrapping purposes the ship was only allowed to be sold to a facility within the OECD as any export of hazardous waste outside the OECD is in breach of EU law. 

 

Maersk and Odebrecht chose to sell the ship to the largest vessels’ scrap dealer, cash buyer GMS, through a St. Kitts and Nevis post box company called Conquistador Shipping Corporation. They then provided the UK authorities with a false contract stating that the NORTH SEA PRODUCER had found a new owner who would operate the ship in Nigeria.

 

Despite the vessel being under the radar of local communities in Teesside and was well-known in the shipping industry for needing to be scrapped, the UK authorities relied on the false contract to allow the FPSO to leave on tug. But the NORTH SEA PRODUCER never ended up in Nigeria. Instead it was towed directly all the way from the UK, around the African continent, to Bangladesh. The Platform was quick to alert both the UK and Bangladesh governments of the illegal export. It was only once the FPSO had left the UK – and after the case was strongly criticised in Danish and international press – that Maersk was “very, very sorry” that Conquistador Shipping Corporation had beached the NORTH SEA PRODUCER in Chittagong. According to Maersk, the new owners took this decision independently – and Maersk had been tricked. In their Sustainability Report 2016, Maersk also stated that they had cut all commercial ties with the buyer of the NORTH SEA PRODUCER: an obviously meaningless statement if that implies cutting ties with Conquistador Shipping Corporation, a single-ship post box company. Only when caught red-handed did Maersk admit that they knew all along the buyers were GMS, the largest waste traffickers in end-of-life ships. Maersk and Odebrecht knew the vessel would be scrapped - they also knew GMS would bring it to South Asia for dirty and dangerous scrapping in breach of EU waste laws.

 

Once the ship arrived at the Janata Steel shipbreaking yard in Chittagong, and upon alerts issued by local NGOs, the Bangladesh Attorney General of the Department of Environment set up a special committee to determine the presence of contaminated residues and to investigate the ship’s illegal import due to the lack of necessary clearances and false claims that it was hazardous-free. Having operated in the North Sea, the vessel’s pipelines likely contain residues contaminated by radioactive materials and sulphur. Other toxics, such as asbestos and heavy metals, are contained within the structure and paints of the ship. 

 

Upon a request from the Platform’s member organisation Bangladesh Environmental Lawyers’ Association (BELA), the report on the ship’s condition was released: it’s conclusion was that radioactive residues were found upon inspection and that further surveys needed to be carried out on the whole ship. BELA subsequently succeeded in getting an injunction on the breaking of the NORTH SEA PRODUCER. On 14 November the High Court Division of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh declared the import, beaching and breaking of the infamous FPSO North Sea Producer illegal.

 

The Court further noted with dismay the incessant violations of national and international laws by the shipbreaking industry, and passed several directions upon the government to regulate the sector in line with earlier rulings. The Court directed authorities to i) subject cash buyers and agents to stricter scrutiny, including a detailed recording of their particulars, and to hold them accountable to the strictest sanctions; ii) regulate the import of vessels registered under “last voyage” grey- or black-listed flags which are particularly popular with cash buyers, including Comoros, Palau and St. Kits and Nevis, and; iii) ensure that no vessel is imported without proper verifiable pre-cleaning certificates and declarations of in-built hazardous wastes, and/or by yards that do not fully comply with the requirements for obtaining an Environmental Clearance.

 

In the UK, the Platform demanded the Secretary of State for Environment to investigate the illegal export from Teesside. UK authorities have been looking into the case since then to establish the responsibility of all parties involved. Providing fraudulent documentation in order to circumvent existing waste export bans is a criminal offence, in Europe and internationally via the Basel Convention. In parallel Danish parliamentarians have requested that the Environment Minister to also take action to hold Maersk accountable.

 

Maersk and Odebrecht were well acquainted with the GMS’ notorious trafficking of waste ships. They were also well aware of the illegality of selling the vessel for scrapping in South Asia. This is not a case of poor human rights due diligence, but one where companies collude to earn big bucks on the back of people and the environment.