Ashpreet Sethi, New Delhi, Jun 13, 2012, DHNS :
Govt ignored NHRC notice on asbestos use: Experts
The Delhi government has not responded to a notice by the National Human Rights Commission on removing all asbestos sheets from across Delhi last year, alleged environmentalists.
Prolonged exposure to asbestos can cause severe health problems. White asbestos are fibrous material used for building roofs and walls, and they can cause lung cancer. Health experts have been raising concern over the use of this material since 2001.
Even the NHRC’s Annual Report of 2003-2004 refers to a report titled ‘Asbestos: An In-Depth Study’ submitted by the Institute of Public Health Engineers, underlining that safe and controlled use of asbestos is impossible.
The NHRC’s recommendations state that asbestos sheets should be replaced with harmless material. All structures in Delhi, ranging from schools to hospitals have asbestos sheets.
Notice issued last year
The NHRC had issued this notice to the chief secretary on July 6, 2011, while acting on a complaint by Toxic Watch Alliance (TWA). The NHRC statement dated June 5, 2012 highlighted that the department has not filed its report on asbestos exposure in Delhi.
“Most authorities at the Centre level as well as states and Union Territories have failed to give reports to the NHRC on safeguarding exposure to asbestos.”
‘Residents unsafe’
“It is sad that the Delhi government is acting like an ostrich and is waiting for the epidemic of incurable asbestos related diseases like lung cancer and ovarian cancer to be identified in great numbers,” said Gopal Krishna, activist with TWA.
“The department’s failure to submit the report shows that it has a callous attitude towards health issues. It is also under tremendous pressure from the white asbestos industry,” said Krishna.
Even the People’s Summit in Rio, Brazil, will organise a programme on ‘Deadly Business: Asbestos’ on June 15.
The invitation highlighted that the most vulnerable communities who use and work with asbestos are in India, where mostly women and children are exposed to the harm associated with this material.
Krishna said the Union environment ministry’s 19-page vision statement on health reads, “Alternatives to asbestos may be used to the extent possible and use of asbestos may be phased out.”
Railways lead by example
On the positive side, activists said the railway ministry has circulated an order within the department asking all divisional railway managers to replace white asbestos with aluminium sheets.
New Delhi railway station is the first area in Delhi that has decided to go asbestos free and prevent damage to public health.
“We have 16 platforms in New Delhi railway station, of which 13 have been replaced with aluminium sheets. The rest will be replaced soon,” said A K Sachan, New Delhi DRM.
http://www.deccanherald.com/content/256861/breathing-toxi-city.html
Thursday, June 14, 2012
Vaishali villagers hold Mahadharana against white asbestos plant
To
Shri Navin Kumar
Chief Secretary
Government of Bihar
Patna
Date 15/6/2012
Subject- Vaishali villagers hold Mahadharana against white asbestos plant
Sir,
This is with reference to the Mahadarna of villagers of Vaishali’s Chaksultan Rampur Rajdhari near Panapur in Kanhauli Dhanraj Panchayat of in Goraul block held a Mahadharana against the proposed white asbestos plant of Utkal Asbestos Limited (UAL) company in their village on June 14. White asbestos also called chrysotile asbestos is banned in 55 countries.
On behalf of ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA), I have visited the plant site. I wish to inform you that villagers have been protesting against this lung cancer causing hazardous plant under the banner of Khet Bachao Jeevan Bachao Jan Sangarsh Committee (KBJBJC) for the last 2 years. Local officials like BDO and SDO informed the villagers about Shri Jitendra Srivastva, new DM’s assurance that the administration will examine the concerns of the villagers and would do the needful. The attached petition of the KBJBJC addressed to Deputy Chief Minister, DM and SDO was submitted to the offihttp://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifcials. The petition demands immediate stoppage of work at the UAL’s plant.
I submit that the role of local officials who overlooked the plant’s faulty Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) report and misrepresented facts about the location of the plant merit an inquiry.
I wish to inform you that the setting up of the constitutes a case of human rights violation of villagers of Goraul Block due to threat of exposure from cancer causing fibers from the proposed asbestos plant. This was revealed at a 2-day conclave in New Delhi organised by Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) during 24-24 February 2012. Some 150 participants from about 100 organisations across the country were informed that a fake public hearing was held in Vaishali on the basis of a 4 page EIA report. The 283 page complete EIA report which is ridden with falsehoods was never shared with the villagers. Although there is documentary evidence in the EIA report itself that the plant site is an agricultural land but it claims that it’s a barren land. There are several villages and schools in the vicinity but its maps do not show them.
I submit that the fake green clearance granted to Asbestos Fibre Cement Corrugated Sheets Manufacturing Plant (2,50,000 TPA) being set up by UAL Bihar (Utkal Asbestos Industries Ltd) for which asbestos fibers will be imported from countries like Canada and Russia.
I submit that although human biology of people of Muzaffarpur and Vaishali is the same, it is strange that the plant in the former district has been wound up but the same is being allowed to be set in the latter district.
I submit that State Government ought to take note of ten crucial national and international developments with regard to hazards from asbestos of all kinds including white asbestos with documentary proof:
1) Judgment of the Italian Criminal Court dated February 12, 2012 convicting owners of an asbestos company
2) Vision Statement on Environment and Human Health of Ministry of Environment & Forests
3) Notice of the National Human Rights Commission dated June 6, 2011 sent to Chief Secretary, Bihar Government
4) New Delhi Declaration Seeking Elimination of all forms of Asbestos including White Asbestos from India, March 2011
5) Government of India’s decision at UN’s 5th Conference of the Parties (COP5) to the UN’s Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade held in Geneva during June 20-24, 2011 wherein it agreed to the inclusion of chrysotile asbestos (white asbestos) in the list of hazardous chemicals paving the way for its ‘phase out’
6) Order of the Kerala Human Rights Commission dated January 31, 2009 on ‘asbestos roofs’,
7) Health Management Plan for Mesothalmia, Lung cancer and Asbestosis related problems in asbestos industries (Term of Reference of Experts Appraisal Committee, Industrial Projects),
8) Factsheet of World Health Organisation (WHO) and ILO Resolution
9) Union Ministry of Labour's Concept Paper on Plan to Ban Asbestos
10) NHRC Member's concern for use of carcinogenic asbestos roof by Union Rural Development Ministry in Indira Awas Yojna
I wish to draw your attention towards the dubious move of the UAL staffers who burnt their own premises in broad day light. It appears that it was done to accuse the peaceful villagers who were protesting there at the gate the factory about which prior information was given to the Police and the administration. This appears to be an attention diversion tactics. It has been done to trap villagers into concocted cases as part of company’s design to malign the movement of the KBJBJC.
I wish to share the attached pamphlet of KBJBJC that refers to Union Government’s views against asbestos. "The Government of India is considering the ban on use of chrysotile asbestos in India to protect the workers and the general population against primary and secondary exposure to Chrysotile form of Asbestos." It has noted that "Asbestosis is yet another occupational disease of the Lungs which is on an increase under similar circumstances warranting concerted efforts of all stake holders to evolve strategies to curb this menace". A concept paper by Union Ministry of Labour revealed this at the two-day 5th India-EU Joint Seminar on “Occupational Safety and Health” on 19-20th September, 2011.
(Reference: http://www.labour.nic.in/lc/Background%20note.pdf).
It also draws Bihar Government’s attention towards Union Environment Ministry’s 19 page Vision Statement on Environment and Human Health (Para 4.3.1) on page 12 which reads: “Alternatives to asbestos may be used to the extent possible and use of asbestos may be phased out”.
The same is available at moef.nic.in/divisions/cpoll/envhealth/visenvhealth.pdf.
The pamphlet referred to the resolutions of ILO and WHO which calls for the elimination of asbestos. It also referred to former Union Health Minister, Mrs Sushma Swaraj’s statement in the Parliament that exposure to asbestos fibers cause mesothelioma, asbestosis and lung cancer on August 18, 2003. These are incurable diseases yet Bihar Govt is promoting it.
I wish to inform you that in India, mining of asbestos is technically banned but its import from other countries is yet to be banned. Trade in asbestos (dust & fibers) is also banned. Asbestos producing countries like Canada, Russia, Kazakhstan, China and Brazil are dumping their asbestos to user countries like India. Interestingly, Canada has a no home use policy. Trade, manufacturing and use of white asbestos is going on because of the corporate influence of the asbestos companies over ruling parties.
I submit that there are grave concerns about asbestos exposures resulting in public health crisis world over. In the absence of environmental and occupational health infrastructure, the passivity of the state governments cannot be deemed acceptable given the fact that health is a State subject.
I submit that one ex-army person Shri Ram Agar Singh who is in the business of supplying security guards observed at the Mahadharna that most of the guards he supplied to asbestos factories in Rajasthan became diseased.
I wish to request you to intervene at the earliest to frustrate the shady designs of the UAL company against the villagers to protect its hazardous plant at the cost of villagers’ health.
I wish to inform you that TWA supports the struggle of KBJBJC and appeals to Bihar Govt to take immediate steps to prevent environmental and occupational exposure to asbestos' besides non-occupational exposures to asbestos by banning use and manufacturing of white asbestos based products. It will set a healthy precedent for all the other states, the central government and neighboring countries. If a decision is taken ahead of Rio+20, United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development being held during June 20-22, 2012 in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil where a global political document is due to adopted by the Heads of States to mark the 20th anniversary of the 1992 Earth Summit, it will enhance State’s prestige among the comity of nations.
In a related development, a statement from National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has revealed that Bihar government has failed to submit its report on asbestos related diseases. The statement dated June 5, 2012 is attached. NHRC had issued a notice to Chief Secretary, Bihar Government on July 6, 2011. The same is attached as well.
I submit that Union Railway Ministry has started procuring asbestos free products.
In the light of the above, TWA demands that State government should set up a special committee to examine the occupational health status of the migrant workers from Bihar who work in hazardous industries like asbestos based factories and provide medico-legal relief to them. The status of workers currently employed in asbestos based factories in Bihar also merit serious attention because their life is in grave danger.
Thanking You
Yours faithfully
Gopal Krishna
ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA)
New Delhi
Mb: 08002263335, 09818089660,
E-mail:krishna1715@gmail.com
Phone: +91-11-26517814, Fax: +91-11-26517814
Web:toxicswatch.blogspot.com, banasbestosindia.blogspot.com
Cc
Shri Ravikant, Principal Secretary, Government of Bihar
Shri Binod Prasad Singh, Additional Secretary, Government of Bihar
Shri Vijay Kumar Verma, Joint Secretary, Government of Bihar
Shri Upendra Nath Pandey, Deputy Secretary, Government of Bihar
Shri Jitendra Srivastava, District Magistrate, Vaishali
Shri Navin Kumar
Chief Secretary
Government of Bihar
Patna
Date 15/6/2012
Subject- Vaishali villagers hold Mahadharana against white asbestos plant
Sir,
This is with reference to the Mahadarna of villagers of Vaishali’s Chaksultan Rampur Rajdhari near Panapur in Kanhauli Dhanraj Panchayat of in Goraul block held a Mahadharana against the proposed white asbestos plant of Utkal Asbestos Limited (UAL) company in their village on June 14. White asbestos also called chrysotile asbestos is banned in 55 countries.
On behalf of ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA), I have visited the plant site. I wish to inform you that villagers have been protesting against this lung cancer causing hazardous plant under the banner of Khet Bachao Jeevan Bachao Jan Sangarsh Committee (KBJBJC) for the last 2 years. Local officials like BDO and SDO informed the villagers about Shri Jitendra Srivastva, new DM’s assurance that the administration will examine the concerns of the villagers and would do the needful. The attached petition of the KBJBJC addressed to Deputy Chief Minister, DM and SDO was submitted to the offihttp://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifcials. The petition demands immediate stoppage of work at the UAL’s plant.
I submit that the role of local officials who overlooked the plant’s faulty Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) report and misrepresented facts about the location of the plant merit an inquiry.
I wish to inform you that the setting up of the constitutes a case of human rights violation of villagers of Goraul Block due to threat of exposure from cancer causing fibers from the proposed asbestos plant. This was revealed at a 2-day conclave in New Delhi organised by Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) during 24-24 February 2012. Some 150 participants from about 100 organisations across the country were informed that a fake public hearing was held in Vaishali on the basis of a 4 page EIA report. The 283 page complete EIA report which is ridden with falsehoods was never shared with the villagers. Although there is documentary evidence in the EIA report itself that the plant site is an agricultural land but it claims that it’s a barren land. There are several villages and schools in the vicinity but its maps do not show them.
I submit that the fake green clearance granted to Asbestos Fibre Cement Corrugated Sheets Manufacturing Plant (2,50,000 TPA) being set up by UAL Bihar (Utkal Asbestos Industries Ltd) for which asbestos fibers will be imported from countries like Canada and Russia.
I submit that although human biology of people of Muzaffarpur and Vaishali is the same, it is strange that the plant in the former district has been wound up but the same is being allowed to be set in the latter district.
I submit that State Government ought to take note of ten crucial national and international developments with regard to hazards from asbestos of all kinds including white asbestos with documentary proof:
1) Judgment of the Italian Criminal Court dated February 12, 2012 convicting owners of an asbestos company
2) Vision Statement on Environment and Human Health of Ministry of Environment & Forests
3) Notice of the National Human Rights Commission dated June 6, 2011 sent to Chief Secretary, Bihar Government
4) New Delhi Declaration Seeking Elimination of all forms of Asbestos including White Asbestos from India, March 2011
5) Government of India’s decision at UN’s 5th Conference of the Parties (COP5) to the UN’s Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade held in Geneva during June 20-24, 2011 wherein it agreed to the inclusion of chrysotile asbestos (white asbestos) in the list of hazardous chemicals paving the way for its ‘phase out’
6) Order of the Kerala Human Rights Commission dated January 31, 2009 on ‘asbestos roofs’,
7) Health Management Plan for Mesothalmia, Lung cancer and Asbestosis related problems in asbestos industries (Term of Reference of Experts Appraisal Committee, Industrial Projects),
8) Factsheet of World Health Organisation (WHO) and ILO Resolution
9) Union Ministry of Labour's Concept Paper on Plan to Ban Asbestos
10) NHRC Member's concern for use of carcinogenic asbestos roof by Union Rural Development Ministry in Indira Awas Yojna
I wish to draw your attention towards the dubious move of the UAL staffers who burnt their own premises in broad day light. It appears that it was done to accuse the peaceful villagers who were protesting there at the gate the factory about which prior information was given to the Police and the administration. This appears to be an attention diversion tactics. It has been done to trap villagers into concocted cases as part of company’s design to malign the movement of the KBJBJC.
I wish to share the attached pamphlet of KBJBJC that refers to Union Government’s views against asbestos. "The Government of India is considering the ban on use of chrysotile asbestos in India to protect the workers and the general population against primary and secondary exposure to Chrysotile form of Asbestos." It has noted that "Asbestosis is yet another occupational disease of the Lungs which is on an increase under similar circumstances warranting concerted efforts of all stake holders to evolve strategies to curb this menace". A concept paper by Union Ministry of Labour revealed this at the two-day 5th India-EU Joint Seminar on “Occupational Safety and Health” on 19-20th September, 2011.
(Reference: http://www.labour.nic.in/lc/Background%20note.pdf).
It also draws Bihar Government’s attention towards Union Environment Ministry’s 19 page Vision Statement on Environment and Human Health (Para 4.3.1) on page 12 which reads: “Alternatives to asbestos may be used to the extent possible and use of asbestos may be phased out”.
The same is available at moef.nic.in/divisions/cpoll/envhealth/visenvhealth.pdf.
The pamphlet referred to the resolutions of ILO and WHO which calls for the elimination of asbestos. It also referred to former Union Health Minister, Mrs Sushma Swaraj’s statement in the Parliament that exposure to asbestos fibers cause mesothelioma, asbestosis and lung cancer on August 18, 2003. These are incurable diseases yet Bihar Govt is promoting it.
I wish to inform you that in India, mining of asbestos is technically banned but its import from other countries is yet to be banned. Trade in asbestos (dust & fibers) is also banned. Asbestos producing countries like Canada, Russia, Kazakhstan, China and Brazil are dumping their asbestos to user countries like India. Interestingly, Canada has a no home use policy. Trade, manufacturing and use of white asbestos is going on because of the corporate influence of the asbestos companies over ruling parties.
I submit that there are grave concerns about asbestos exposures resulting in public health crisis world over. In the absence of environmental and occupational health infrastructure, the passivity of the state governments cannot be deemed acceptable given the fact that health is a State subject.
I submit that one ex-army person Shri Ram Agar Singh who is in the business of supplying security guards observed at the Mahadharna that most of the guards he supplied to asbestos factories in Rajasthan became diseased.
I wish to request you to intervene at the earliest to frustrate the shady designs of the UAL company against the villagers to protect its hazardous plant at the cost of villagers’ health.
I wish to inform you that TWA supports the struggle of KBJBJC and appeals to Bihar Govt to take immediate steps to prevent environmental and occupational exposure to asbestos' besides non-occupational exposures to asbestos by banning use and manufacturing of white asbestos based products. It will set a healthy precedent for all the other states, the central government and neighboring countries. If a decision is taken ahead of Rio+20, United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development being held during June 20-22, 2012 in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil where a global political document is due to adopted by the Heads of States to mark the 20th anniversary of the 1992 Earth Summit, it will enhance State’s prestige among the comity of nations.
In a related development, a statement from National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has revealed that Bihar government has failed to submit its report on asbestos related diseases. The statement dated June 5, 2012 is attached. NHRC had issued a notice to Chief Secretary, Bihar Government on July 6, 2011. The same is attached as well.
I submit that Union Railway Ministry has started procuring asbestos free products.
In the light of the above, TWA demands that State government should set up a special committee to examine the occupational health status of the migrant workers from Bihar who work in hazardous industries like asbestos based factories and provide medico-legal relief to them. The status of workers currently employed in asbestos based factories in Bihar also merit serious attention because their life is in grave danger.
Thanking You
Yours faithfully
Gopal Krishna
ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA)
New Delhi
Mb: 08002263335, 09818089660,
E-mail:krishna1715@gmail.com
Phone: +91-11-26517814, Fax: +91-11-26517814
Web:toxicswatch.blogspot.com, banasbestosindia.blogspot.com
Cc
Shri Ravikant, Principal Secretary, Government of Bihar
Shri Binod Prasad Singh, Additional Secretary, Government of Bihar
Shri Vijay Kumar Verma, Joint Secretary, Government of Bihar
Shri Upendra Nath Pandey, Deputy Secretary, Government of Bihar
Shri Jitendra Srivastava, District Magistrate, Vaishali
Wednesday, June 13, 2012
Villagers to Hold Mahadharana Against White Asbestos Plant on June 14 in Vaishali
Press Release
State Government Fails to Submit Report on Asbestos Fiber related diseases to NHRC
Villagers to Hold Mahadharana Against White Asbestos Plant on June 14 in Vaishali
Ban Use & Manufaturing of Silent Killer Fiber Based Products
Patna/New Delhi June 13, 2012: A statement from National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has revealed that State government has failed to submit its report on asbestos related diseases. The statement dated June 5, 2012 is attached. NHRC had issued the notice to Chief Secretary, Bihar Government on July 6, 2011. Meanwhile, Union Railway Ministry has started procuring asbestos free products.
ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA) demands immediate steps to prevent environmental and occupational exposure to asbestos' besides non-occupational exposures to asbestos by banning use and manufacturing of white asbestos based products. It will set a healthy precedent for all the other states, the central government and neighboring countries. If a decision is taken ahead of Rio+20, United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development being held during June 20-22, 2012 in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil where a global political document is due to adopted by the Heads of States to mark the 20th anniversary of the 1992 Earth Summit, it will enhance State’s prestige among the comity of nations. A program titled "Deadly Business – Asbestos: Are you the next victim?" is planned at People’s Summit at Rio on June 15, 2012.
A copy of the notice is attached. NHRC’s release in Hindi is attached as well. The English version is availble at http://nhrc.nic.in/dispArchive.asp?fno=2334
ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA) demands that Chief Secretary ought to take cognizance of the incurable diseases caused by white asbestos. It is high time he intervened to stop any asbestos plant from being set up in the State because among other things it damages the reputation of the State by showing complete absence of scientific temper. Chief Secretary should submit its report on victims of Asbestos diseases to the NHRC at the earliest announce compensation package for present and future victims of these incurable lung diseases. The attached TWA’s paper on Status of Hazardous White Asbestos Factories in Bihar gives an overview of the situation.
Underlining the importance of NHRC’s notice, villagers of Vaishali’s Chaksultan Ramppur Rajdhari near Panapur in Kanhauli Dhanraj Panchayat of in Goraul block have decided to hold a Mahadharana against the proposed white asbetsos plant of Utkal Asbestos Limited (UAL) company in their village on June 14, 2012. Their pamphlet is attached. Villagers have been proesting against the fake public hearing and faulty environmental clearnce under the banner of Khet Bachao Jeevan Bachao Jansangarsh Committee. They had organised a public meeting in this regard on May 1, 2012 as well wherein local officials were also present.
State Government should persuade the central government which does not favour new asbestos plants in the country in principle to translate its pious intention into practice. "The Government of India is considering the ban on use of chrysotile asbestos in India to protect the workers and the general population against primary and secondary exposure to Chrysotile form of Asbestos." It has noted that "Asbestosis is yet another occupational disease of the Lungs which is on an increase under similar circumstances warranting concerted efforts of all stake holders to evolve strategies to curb this menace". A concept paper by Union Ministry of Labour revealed this at the two-day 5th India-EU Joint Seminar on “Occupational Safety and Health” on 19-20th September, 2011. (Reference: http://www.labour.nic.in/lc/Background%20note.pdf).
In this regard the attached New Delhi Declaration Seeking Elimination of all forms of Asbestos including White Asbestos from India that was issued by world’s renowned scientists, doctors and jurists in March 2011 also merit attention.
TWA appeals to the Bihar Government to pay heed to the recommendations of Kerala State Human Rights Commission (KSHRC) in its order dated January 31, 2009. The recommendations are: a) The State Government will replace asbestos roofs of all school buildings under its control with country tiles in a phased manner. b) The Government will take steps to see that the schools run under the private management also replace the asbestos roofs with country tiles by fixing a time frame. c) The Government should see that in future no new school is allowed to commence its functions with asbestos roofs. These recommendations are relevant for Bihar as well. It underlines the need for banning use of asbestos roofs in the State.
In a related development, Bihar State Human Rights Commission (BSHRC) announced that the white asbestos plant that was under construction in Chainpur-Bishunpur village, Jakhra Sheikh Panchyat, Marwan block of Muzaffarpur has been wound up. The relevant File Note 45/11 Justice S N Jha Chairman, BSHRC is attached.
Bihar Government should take note of the Union Environment Ministry’s 19 page Vision Statement on Environment and Human Health (Para 4.3.1) on page 12 which reads: “Alternatives to asbestos may be used to the extent possible and use of asbestos may be phased out”. The same is available at moef.nic.in/divisions/cpoll/envhealth/visenvhealth.pdf.
Asbestos producing countries like Canada, Russia, Kazakhstan, China and Brazil have are dumping their asbestos to user countries like India. Interestingly, Canada has a no home use policy. In India, asbestos mining is technically banned. Trade in asbestos waste (dust and fibers) is banned but the process of banning trade, manufacturing and use of white asbestos is held because of the corporate infleunce of the asbetsos companies over ruling parties.
There are grave concerns about asbestos exposures resulting in public health crisis world over. This has compelled 55 countries to ban use of asbestos. In the absence of environmental and occupational health infrastructure, the passivity of the state governments cannot be deemed acceptable given the fact that health is a State subject.
For Details: Gopal Krishna, ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA), Mb: 08002263335, 09818089660, E-mail:krishna1715@gmail.com Web:toxicswatch.blogspot.com, banasbestosindia.blogspot.com
State Government Fails to Submit Report on Asbestos Fiber related diseases to NHRC
Villagers to Hold Mahadharana Against White Asbestos Plant on June 14 in Vaishali
Ban Use & Manufaturing of Silent Killer Fiber Based Products
Patna/New Delhi June 13, 2012: A statement from National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has revealed that State government has failed to submit its report on asbestos related diseases. The statement dated June 5, 2012 is attached. NHRC had issued the notice to Chief Secretary, Bihar Government on July 6, 2011. Meanwhile, Union Railway Ministry has started procuring asbestos free products.
ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA) demands immediate steps to prevent environmental and occupational exposure to asbestos' besides non-occupational exposures to asbestos by banning use and manufacturing of white asbestos based products. It will set a healthy precedent for all the other states, the central government and neighboring countries. If a decision is taken ahead of Rio+20, United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development being held during June 20-22, 2012 in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil where a global political document is due to adopted by the Heads of States to mark the 20th anniversary of the 1992 Earth Summit, it will enhance State’s prestige among the comity of nations. A program titled "Deadly Business – Asbestos: Are you the next victim?" is planned at People’s Summit at Rio on June 15, 2012.
A copy of the notice is attached. NHRC’s release in Hindi is attached as well. The English version is availble at http://nhrc.nic.in/dispArchive.asp?fno=2334
ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA) demands that Chief Secretary ought to take cognizance of the incurable diseases caused by white asbestos. It is high time he intervened to stop any asbestos plant from being set up in the State because among other things it damages the reputation of the State by showing complete absence of scientific temper. Chief Secretary should submit its report on victims of Asbestos diseases to the NHRC at the earliest announce compensation package for present and future victims of these incurable lung diseases. The attached TWA’s paper on Status of Hazardous White Asbestos Factories in Bihar gives an overview of the situation.
Underlining the importance of NHRC’s notice, villagers of Vaishali’s Chaksultan Ramppur Rajdhari near Panapur in Kanhauli Dhanraj Panchayat of in Goraul block have decided to hold a Mahadharana against the proposed white asbetsos plant of Utkal Asbestos Limited (UAL) company in their village on June 14, 2012. Their pamphlet is attached. Villagers have been proesting against the fake public hearing and faulty environmental clearnce under the banner of Khet Bachao Jeevan Bachao Jansangarsh Committee. They had organised a public meeting in this regard on May 1, 2012 as well wherein local officials were also present.
State Government should persuade the central government which does not favour new asbestos plants in the country in principle to translate its pious intention into practice. "The Government of India is considering the ban on use of chrysotile asbestos in India to protect the workers and the general population against primary and secondary exposure to Chrysotile form of Asbestos." It has noted that "Asbestosis is yet another occupational disease of the Lungs which is on an increase under similar circumstances warranting concerted efforts of all stake holders to evolve strategies to curb this menace". A concept paper by Union Ministry of Labour revealed this at the two-day 5th India-EU Joint Seminar on “Occupational Safety and Health” on 19-20th September, 2011. (Reference: http://www.labour.nic.in/lc/Background%20note.pdf).
In this regard the attached New Delhi Declaration Seeking Elimination of all forms of Asbestos including White Asbestos from India that was issued by world’s renowned scientists, doctors and jurists in March 2011 also merit attention.
TWA appeals to the Bihar Government to pay heed to the recommendations of Kerala State Human Rights Commission (KSHRC) in its order dated January 31, 2009. The recommendations are: a) The State Government will replace asbestos roofs of all school buildings under its control with country tiles in a phased manner. b) The Government will take steps to see that the schools run under the private management also replace the asbestos roofs with country tiles by fixing a time frame. c) The Government should see that in future no new school is allowed to commence its functions with asbestos roofs. These recommendations are relevant for Bihar as well. It underlines the need for banning use of asbestos roofs in the State.
In a related development, Bihar State Human Rights Commission (BSHRC) announced that the white asbestos plant that was under construction in Chainpur-Bishunpur village, Jakhra Sheikh Panchyat, Marwan block of Muzaffarpur has been wound up. The relevant File Note 45/11 Justice S N Jha Chairman, BSHRC is attached.
Bihar Government should take note of the Union Environment Ministry’s 19 page Vision Statement on Environment and Human Health (Para 4.3.1) on page 12 which reads: “Alternatives to asbestos may be used to the extent possible and use of asbestos may be phased out”. The same is available at moef.nic.in/divisions/cpoll/envhealth/visenvhealth.pdf.
Asbestos producing countries like Canada, Russia, Kazakhstan, China and Brazil have are dumping their asbestos to user countries like India. Interestingly, Canada has a no home use policy. In India, asbestos mining is technically banned. Trade in asbestos waste (dust and fibers) is banned but the process of banning trade, manufacturing and use of white asbestos is held because of the corporate infleunce of the asbetsos companies over ruling parties.
There are grave concerns about asbestos exposures resulting in public health crisis world over. This has compelled 55 countries to ban use of asbestos. In the absence of environmental and occupational health infrastructure, the passivity of the state governments cannot be deemed acceptable given the fact that health is a State subject.
For Details: Gopal Krishna, ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA), Mb: 08002263335, 09818089660, E-mail:krishna1715@gmail.com Web:toxicswatch.blogspot.com, banasbestosindia.blogspot.com
Monday, June 11, 2012
Letter to Quebec Premier Seeking End to Govt Support for Asbestos Industry
Montreal, June 11, 2012
The Honorable Jean Charest, M.N.A.
Premier of Québec
Édifice Honoré-Mercier, 3rd Floor
835 René-Lévesque Blvd. E.
Québec, QC G1A 1B4
Dear Premier Charest:
As the world prepares for Rio+20, we renew our call for you to end government support for the asbestos industry and refuse the loan guarantee that would allow Jeffrey Mine to reopen.
Rio+20 will mark the 20th anniversary of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (the “Earth Summit”). With a green economy theme, the conference is announced as an historic opportunity to define pathways to a safer, more equitable, cleaner, greener and more prosperous world for all.
The United Nations Environment Program defines green economy as one that results in improved human well-being and social equity, while significantly reducing environmental risks and ecological scarcities. Promoting the mining and export of Quebec asbestos – a known human carcinogen – is inconsistent with a green economy and sustainable development goals.
You played a leadership role at the 1992 Earth Summit as Canada’s environment minister. Now, on the occasion of Rio+20, we appeal to you to concretely demonstrate your continued commitment to a green economy by ending government support for the deadly asbestos trade.
We look forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Wayne Peppard, Business Representative Allied Hydro Council of British Columbia
Linda Reinstein, CEO and Co-founder, Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization
Tracy Ford, Co-founder, Asbestos-related Research, Education and Advocacy Fund
Anthony Whitston, Chair Asbestos Victims Support Groups Forum (U.K.)
Eric Jonckheere, Co-president Association belge des victimes de l'amiante (Belgium)
Dr. Yv Bonnier Viger, President
Association des médecins spécialistes en santé communautaire du Québec
Marc Hindry, Board Member Association nationale de défense des victimes de l'amiante (France)
Dr. Najwa Bourawi, President Association pour la protection de l'environnement et le développement durable de Bizerte (Tunisia)
Lucie Thibodeau, President Association pour la santé publique du Québec
Gopal Krishna, Convener Ban Asbestos Network of India - Toxics Watch Alliance (India)
Dr. Helen Clayson, Chair Barrow Asbestos-Related Disease Support (U.K.)
Eliezer João de Souza
Brazilian Asbestos Exposed People Association (Brazil)
Rosanne Cohen, Executive Director Breast Cancer Action Montreal
Tom Sigurdson, Executive Director
British Columbia and Yukon Territory Building and Construction Trades Council
Dr. Éric Notebaert, Board Member Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment
Suzanne Dubois, Director General Canadian Cancer Society - Quebec Division
Fe de Leon, Researcher
Canadian Environmental Law Association
Debra Lynkowski, CEO Canadian Public Health Association
Sheryl Thompson, CEO Canadian Society of Asbestos Victims
Stacy Cattran, Co-founder Canadian Voices of Asbestos Victims
Madhumita Dutta, Coordinator Corporate Accountability Desk - The Other Media (India)
Karel Mayrand, Director General for Québec David Suzuki Foundation
Emmanuel Odjam-Akumatey, Executive Director Ecological Restorations (Ghana)
Kaitlyn Mitchell, Lawyer
Ecojustice
Bruce Cox, Executive Director Greenpeace
Lee Loftus, Business Manager
International Association of Heat and Frost Insulators and Allied Workers - Local 118
Laurie Kazan-Allen, Coordinator International Ban Asbestos Secretariat
John Flanagan, Information Officer Merseyside Asbestos Victim Support Group (U.K.)
Jamie Kneen, Co-Manager Mining Watch
Christian Simard, Director General Nature Québec
María Elena Rozas
Pesticide Action Network Chile (Chile)
Javier Souza, Coordinator Pesticide Action Network Latin America (Argentina)
Diana Daghofer, Co-Chair Prevent Cancer Now
Dr. Jean Zigby, President of the Environment and Health Committee
Quebec College of Family Physicians
Dr. Ruth Vander Stelt, President Quebec Medical Association
Kathleen Ruff, Founder and Director RightOnCanada.ca
Howard Willems, Chairperson Saskatchewan Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization
Kathy Burns, Director Science Corps (U.S.A.)
Dr. Mahmood A. Khwaja, Senior Advisor Sustainable Development Policy Institute (Pakistan)
Fernanda Giannasi, Coordinator Virtual Citizen Network for the Banishment of Asbestos in Latin America
The Honorable Jean Charest, M.N.A.
Premier of Québec
Édifice Honoré-Mercier, 3rd Floor
835 René-Lévesque Blvd. E.
Québec, QC G1A 1B4
Dear Premier Charest:
As the world prepares for Rio+20, we renew our call for you to end government support for the asbestos industry and refuse the loan guarantee that would allow Jeffrey Mine to reopen.
Rio+20 will mark the 20th anniversary of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (the “Earth Summit”). With a green economy theme, the conference is announced as an historic opportunity to define pathways to a safer, more equitable, cleaner, greener and more prosperous world for all.
The United Nations Environment Program defines green economy as one that results in improved human well-being and social equity, while significantly reducing environmental risks and ecological scarcities. Promoting the mining and export of Quebec asbestos – a known human carcinogen – is inconsistent with a green economy and sustainable development goals.
You played a leadership role at the 1992 Earth Summit as Canada’s environment minister. Now, on the occasion of Rio+20, we appeal to you to concretely demonstrate your continued commitment to a green economy by ending government support for the deadly asbestos trade.
We look forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Wayne Peppard, Business Representative Allied Hydro Council of British Columbia
Linda Reinstein, CEO and Co-founder, Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization
Tracy Ford, Co-founder, Asbestos-related Research, Education and Advocacy Fund
Anthony Whitston, Chair Asbestos Victims Support Groups Forum (U.K.)
Eric Jonckheere, Co-president Association belge des victimes de l'amiante (Belgium)
Dr. Yv Bonnier Viger, President
Association des médecins spécialistes en santé communautaire du Québec
Marc Hindry, Board Member Association nationale de défense des victimes de l'amiante (France)
Dr. Najwa Bourawi, President Association pour la protection de l'environnement et le développement durable de Bizerte (Tunisia)
Lucie Thibodeau, President Association pour la santé publique du Québec
Gopal Krishna, Convener Ban Asbestos Network of India - Toxics Watch Alliance (India)
Dr. Helen Clayson, Chair Barrow Asbestos-Related Disease Support (U.K.)
Eliezer João de Souza
Brazilian Asbestos Exposed People Association (Brazil)
Rosanne Cohen, Executive Director Breast Cancer Action Montreal
Tom Sigurdson, Executive Director
British Columbia and Yukon Territory Building and Construction Trades Council
Dr. Éric Notebaert, Board Member Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment
Suzanne Dubois, Director General Canadian Cancer Society - Quebec Division
Fe de Leon, Researcher
Canadian Environmental Law Association
Debra Lynkowski, CEO Canadian Public Health Association
Sheryl Thompson, CEO Canadian Society of Asbestos Victims
Stacy Cattran, Co-founder Canadian Voices of Asbestos Victims
Madhumita Dutta, Coordinator Corporate Accountability Desk - The Other Media (India)
Karel Mayrand, Director General for Québec David Suzuki Foundation
Emmanuel Odjam-Akumatey, Executive Director Ecological Restorations (Ghana)
Kaitlyn Mitchell, Lawyer
Ecojustice
Bruce Cox, Executive Director Greenpeace
Lee Loftus, Business Manager
International Association of Heat and Frost Insulators and Allied Workers - Local 118
Laurie Kazan-Allen, Coordinator International Ban Asbestos Secretariat
John Flanagan, Information Officer Merseyside Asbestos Victim Support Group (U.K.)
Jamie Kneen, Co-Manager Mining Watch
Christian Simard, Director General Nature Québec
María Elena Rozas
Pesticide Action Network Chile (Chile)
Javier Souza, Coordinator Pesticide Action Network Latin America (Argentina)
Diana Daghofer, Co-Chair Prevent Cancer Now
Dr. Jean Zigby, President of the Environment and Health Committee
Quebec College of Family Physicians
Dr. Ruth Vander Stelt, President Quebec Medical Association
Kathleen Ruff, Founder and Director RightOnCanada.ca
Howard Willems, Chairperson Saskatchewan Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization
Kathy Burns, Director Science Corps (U.S.A.)
Dr. Mahmood A. Khwaja, Senior Advisor Sustainable Development Policy Institute (Pakistan)
Fernanda Giannasi, Coordinator Virtual Citizen Network for the Banishment of Asbestos in Latin America
Saturday, June 9, 2012
NHRC Seeks Reports on Asbestos Exposure from Centre & States
Press Statement
NHRC Seeks Reports on Asbestos Exposure from Centre & States
Rio 2012 People's Summit to hold program on Deadly Business of Asbestos Industry
New Delhi, June 10, 2012: Acting on a compliant filed by ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA), in a June release, National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has underlined that most of the authorities at Centre and States/Union Territories have failed to give reports to the NHRC on safeguarding exposure to white asbestos or chrysoyile asbestos. Taking note of this omission, the NHRC had ordered for issuing reminders, returnable in six weeks, to the Chief Secretaries of all States/Union Territories and other concerned authorities at Centre who have failed to submit requisite reports on May 21, 2012.
Earlier, on the 5th March, 2012, NHRC had given six weeks more time when most of them failed to give the requisite reports. A copy of the June 5, 2012 release of NHRC and its original notice of July 6, 2011 is attached. Such callous approach of the governments in India merit criticism
TWA has sought Commission's intervention for a ban on the use of chrysotile asbestos (white asbestos), which is hazardous for the health of people and causes various incurable diseases. The white asbestos is a fibrous material used for building roofs and walls and various in other forms.
Notably, People’s Summit, Rio 2012 is organsing a program on "Deadly Business – Asbestos: Are you the next victim?" on 15 June 2012 in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in the backdrop of epidemic of asbestos related diseases. The invitation letter from the Brazilian organisers of this meeting reads: "Chrysotile Asbestos is a global killer, with over 100,000 occupational death annually." More than 50 countries no longer produce nor use Asbestos, a deadly killer. It refers to "the most vulnerable communities who use and work with asbestos, in India including women and children."
TWA expresses its deep sense of dismay at the failure of central and state governments to submit requisite reports to the NHRC to facilitate remedial measures for the past, present and future victims. The States of Mizoram, Nagaland and the National Institute of Occupational Health Ahmedabad have submitted their reports. These reports should be examined at the earliest for relevant recommendations.
While "Government of India is considering the ban on use of chrysotile asbestos in India to protect the workers and the general population against primary and secondary exposure to Chrysotile form of Asbestos," its indifference towards NHRC's notice is surprising. It has noted that "Asbestosis is yet another occupational disease of the Lungs which is on an increase under similar circumstances warranting concerted efforts of all stake holders to evolve strategies to curb this menace". A concept paper by Union Ministry of Labour revealed this at the two-day 5th India-EU Joint Seminar on “Occupational Safety and Health” on 19th and 20th September, 2011. Reference: http://www.labour.nic.in/lc/Background%20note.pdf
NHRC, while seeking their responses, had particularly drawn their attention the Supreme Court directions with regard to Para 16 of the Writ Petition, which are as follows: a) Ministry of Labour in the Union of India and Department of Industries and Labour in all the State Government shall ensure that the directions contained in the judgment of this Court in the case of Consumer Education and Research Centre (supra) are strictly adhered to; b) In terms of the above judgment of this Court as well as reasons stated in this judgment, we hereby direct the Union of India and the States to review safeguards in relation to primary as well as secondary exposure to asbestos keeping in mind the information supplied by the respective States in furtherance to the earlier judgment as well as fresh resolution passed by the ILO.
The Commission had taken cognizance of TWA's complaint in June, 2011 wherein it estimated that about fifty thousand people die every year in the country due to asbestos related cancer. Citing contradictory position of the Government on the issue, the complainant had alleged that though the mining of asbestos was technically banned by the government, yet it allowed its import and that too from the countries which did not prefer its domestic use. It was also alleged that white asbestos is considered a hazardous chemical substance for environment by a number of countries in the world. However, it is being used in a number of industries in India affecting the workers employed their in. The Commission had given six months time for reports to the concerned authorities.
TWA has pointed out that Union Environment Ministry’s 19 page Vision Statement on Environment and Human Health (Para 4.3.1) on page 12 which reads: “Alternatives to asbestos may be used to the extent possible and use of asbestos may be phased out”. Reference: Environment Ministry’s website: moef.nic.in/divisions/cpoll/envhealth/visenvhealth.pdf.
It is noteworthy that Justice N Dhinakar, the Kerala State Human Rights Commission (KSHRC) has made three recommendations banning use of asbestos roofs in its order dated January 31, 2009. The recommendations are: “
a) The State Government will replace asbestos roofs of all school buildings under its control with country tiles in a phased manner.
b) The Government will take steps to see that the schools run under the private management also replace the asbestos roofs with country tiles by fixing a time frame.
c) The Government should see that in future no new school is allowed to commence its functions with asbestos roofs.”
All State Human Rights Commissions can initiate steps to make their states asbestos free by taking cognisance of the above facts.
Given the hazardous nature of the killer fibers of asbestos, states and citizens should boycott all asbestos based products. TWA appeals to the centre and the states to respond to NHRC's notice at the earliest in the interest of public health of present and future generations because safe and controlled use of all kinds of asbestos is impossible.
For Details: Gopal Krishna, ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA), Mb: 08002263335, 09818089660, E-mail:krishna1715@gmail.com, Web:toxicswatch.blogspot.com
Most of the authorities at Centre and States/UTs fail to give reports to the NHRC on safeguarding exposure to asbestos
New Delhi, June 5th, 2012 Most of the authorities in Centre and Sates/Union Territories have failed to submit requisite reports to the NHRC on safeguards they have put in place relating to exposure to asbestos. Only the States of Mizoram, Nagaland and the National Institute of Occupational Health Ahmedabad have submitted the reports. Therefore, the Commission on the 21st May, 2012 ordered for issuing reminders, returnable in six weeks, to the Chief Secretaries of all States/Union Territories and other concerned authorities at Centre who have failed to submit requisite reports. The Commission had asked them to share with it the information on the action taken by them with regard to the Supreme Court judgment dated the 21st January, 2011 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 260 of 2004 on exposure to asbestos. The Commission, while seeking their responses, had particularly drawn their attention the Supreme Court directions with regard to Para 16 of the Writ Petition, which are as follows: a) Ministry of Labour in the Union of India and Department of Industries and Labour in all the State Government shall ensure that the directions contained in the judgment of this Court in the case of Consumer Education and Research Centre (supra) are strictly adhered to; b) In terms of the above judgment of this Court as well as reasons stated in this judgment, we hereby direct the Union of India and the States to review safeguards in relation to primary as well as secondary exposure to asbestos keeping in mind the information supplied by the respective States in furtherance to the earlier judgment as well as fresh resolution passed by the ILO. The Commission had taken cognizance of a complaint in July, 2011 alleging that about fifty thousand people die every year in the country due to asbestos related cancer. The complainant had sought Commission's intervention for a ban on the use of chrysotile asbestos (white asbestos), which is hazardous for the health of people and causes various incurable diseases. The white asbestos is a fibrous material used for building roofs and walls and various in other forms. Citing contradictory position of the Government on the issue the complainant had alleged that though the mining of asbestos was technically banned by the government, yet it allowed its import and that too from the countries which did not prefer its domestic use. It was also alleged that white asbestos is considered a hazardous chemical substance for environment by a number of countries in the world. However, it is being used in a number of industries in India affecting the workers employed their in. The Commission had given six months time for reports to the concerned authorities. On the 5th March, 2012, they were given six weeks more time when most of them failed to give the requisite reports.
Note: For further details kindly contact National Human Rights Commission, Faridkot House, Copernicus Marg, New Delhi, PIN 110001 Tel.No. 23382742 Fax No. 23384863 E-Mail: covdnhrc@nic.in, ionhrc@nic.in
NHRC issues notices to different Union Ministries, States, Union Territories on the issue of banning use of White Asbestos
Dated: 6th July 2011 The National Human Rights Commission has taken cognizance of a complaint alleging that about fifty thousand people die every year in the country due to Asbestos related cancer. The complainant has sought Commission's intervention for a ban on the use of Chrysotile Asbestos (White Asbestos), which is hazardous for the health of people and causes various incurable diseases. The white Asbestos is a fibrous material used for building roofs and walls and various in other forms. Citing contradictory position of the Government on the issue the complainant Gopal Krishna of Toxics Watch Alliance has alleged that though the mining of Asbestos has been technically banned by the government, but it allows its import and that too from the countries which do not prefer its domestic use. It is also alleged that white Asbestos is considered a hazardous chemical substance for environment by a number of countries in the world. However, it is being used in a number of industries in India affecting the workers employed their in. The complainant has also requested for grant of a compensation package for present and future victims of Asbestos diseases. The Commission has issued notices to the Secretaries of Ministries of Chemical Fertilizers, Environment and Forest, Health and Family Welfare, Industry and Commerce, Labour and Chief Secretaries of all the States/Union Territories calling for status reports within four weeks on the issues raised in the complaint. *********
Note: For further details kindly contact National Human Rights Commission, Faridkot House, Copernicus Marg, New Delhi, PIN 110001 Tel.No. 23382742 Fax No. 23384863 E-Mail: covdnhrc@nic.in, ionhrc@nic.in
NHRC Seeks Reports on Asbestos Exposure from Centre & States
Rio 2012 People's Summit to hold program on Deadly Business of Asbestos Industry
New Delhi, June 10, 2012: Acting on a compliant filed by ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA), in a June release, National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has underlined that most of the authorities at Centre and States/Union Territories have failed to give reports to the NHRC on safeguarding exposure to white asbestos or chrysoyile asbestos. Taking note of this omission, the NHRC had ordered for issuing reminders, returnable in six weeks, to the Chief Secretaries of all States/Union Territories and other concerned authorities at Centre who have failed to submit requisite reports on May 21, 2012.
Earlier, on the 5th March, 2012, NHRC had given six weeks more time when most of them failed to give the requisite reports. A copy of the June 5, 2012 release of NHRC and its original notice of July 6, 2011 is attached. Such callous approach of the governments in India merit criticism
TWA has sought Commission's intervention for a ban on the use of chrysotile asbestos (white asbestos), which is hazardous for the health of people and causes various incurable diseases. The white asbestos is a fibrous material used for building roofs and walls and various in other forms.
Notably, People’s Summit, Rio 2012 is organsing a program on "Deadly Business – Asbestos: Are you the next victim?" on 15 June 2012 in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in the backdrop of epidemic of asbestos related diseases. The invitation letter from the Brazilian organisers of this meeting reads: "Chrysotile Asbestos is a global killer, with over 100,000 occupational death annually." More than 50 countries no longer produce nor use Asbestos, a deadly killer. It refers to "the most vulnerable communities who use and work with asbestos, in India including women and children."
TWA expresses its deep sense of dismay at the failure of central and state governments to submit requisite reports to the NHRC to facilitate remedial measures for the past, present and future victims. The States of Mizoram, Nagaland and the National Institute of Occupational Health Ahmedabad have submitted their reports. These reports should be examined at the earliest for relevant recommendations.
While "Government of India is considering the ban on use of chrysotile asbestos in India to protect the workers and the general population against primary and secondary exposure to Chrysotile form of Asbestos," its indifference towards NHRC's notice is surprising. It has noted that "Asbestosis is yet another occupational disease of the Lungs which is on an increase under similar circumstances warranting concerted efforts of all stake holders to evolve strategies to curb this menace". A concept paper by Union Ministry of Labour revealed this at the two-day 5th India-EU Joint Seminar on “Occupational Safety and Health” on 19th and 20th September, 2011. Reference: http://www.labour.nic.in/lc/Background%20note.pdf
NHRC, while seeking their responses, had particularly drawn their attention the Supreme Court directions with regard to Para 16 of the Writ Petition, which are as follows: a) Ministry of Labour in the Union of India and Department of Industries and Labour in all the State Government shall ensure that the directions contained in the judgment of this Court in the case of Consumer Education and Research Centre (supra) are strictly adhered to; b) In terms of the above judgment of this Court as well as reasons stated in this judgment, we hereby direct the Union of India and the States to review safeguards in relation to primary as well as secondary exposure to asbestos keeping in mind the information supplied by the respective States in furtherance to the earlier judgment as well as fresh resolution passed by the ILO.
The Commission had taken cognizance of TWA's complaint in June, 2011 wherein it estimated that about fifty thousand people die every year in the country due to asbestos related cancer. Citing contradictory position of the Government on the issue, the complainant had alleged that though the mining of asbestos was technically banned by the government, yet it allowed its import and that too from the countries which did not prefer its domestic use. It was also alleged that white asbestos is considered a hazardous chemical substance for environment by a number of countries in the world. However, it is being used in a number of industries in India affecting the workers employed their in. The Commission had given six months time for reports to the concerned authorities.
TWA has pointed out that Union Environment Ministry’s 19 page Vision Statement on Environment and Human Health (Para 4.3.1) on page 12 which reads: “Alternatives to asbestos may be used to the extent possible and use of asbestos may be phased out”. Reference: Environment Ministry’s website: moef.nic.in/divisions/cpoll/envhealth/visenvhealth.pdf.
It is noteworthy that Justice N Dhinakar, the Kerala State Human Rights Commission (KSHRC) has made three recommendations banning use of asbestos roofs in its order dated January 31, 2009. The recommendations are: “
a) The State Government will replace asbestos roofs of all school buildings under its control with country tiles in a phased manner.
b) The Government will take steps to see that the schools run under the private management also replace the asbestos roofs with country tiles by fixing a time frame.
c) The Government should see that in future no new school is allowed to commence its functions with asbestos roofs.”
All State Human Rights Commissions can initiate steps to make their states asbestos free by taking cognisance of the above facts.
Given the hazardous nature of the killer fibers of asbestos, states and citizens should boycott all asbestos based products. TWA appeals to the centre and the states to respond to NHRC's notice at the earliest in the interest of public health of present and future generations because safe and controlled use of all kinds of asbestos is impossible.
For Details: Gopal Krishna, ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA), Mb: 08002263335, 09818089660, E-mail:krishna1715@gmail.com, Web:toxicswatch.blogspot.com
Most of the authorities at Centre and States/UTs fail to give reports to the NHRC on safeguarding exposure to asbestos
New Delhi, June 5th, 2012 Most of the authorities in Centre and Sates/Union Territories have failed to submit requisite reports to the NHRC on safeguards they have put in place relating to exposure to asbestos. Only the States of Mizoram, Nagaland and the National Institute of Occupational Health Ahmedabad have submitted the reports. Therefore, the Commission on the 21st May, 2012 ordered for issuing reminders, returnable in six weeks, to the Chief Secretaries of all States/Union Territories and other concerned authorities at Centre who have failed to submit requisite reports. The Commission had asked them to share with it the information on the action taken by them with regard to the Supreme Court judgment dated the 21st January, 2011 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 260 of 2004 on exposure to asbestos. The Commission, while seeking their responses, had particularly drawn their attention the Supreme Court directions with regard to Para 16 of the Writ Petition, which are as follows: a) Ministry of Labour in the Union of India and Department of Industries and Labour in all the State Government shall ensure that the directions contained in the judgment of this Court in the case of Consumer Education and Research Centre (supra) are strictly adhered to; b) In terms of the above judgment of this Court as well as reasons stated in this judgment, we hereby direct the Union of India and the States to review safeguards in relation to primary as well as secondary exposure to asbestos keeping in mind the information supplied by the respective States in furtherance to the earlier judgment as well as fresh resolution passed by the ILO. The Commission had taken cognizance of a complaint in July, 2011 alleging that about fifty thousand people die every year in the country due to asbestos related cancer. The complainant had sought Commission's intervention for a ban on the use of chrysotile asbestos (white asbestos), which is hazardous for the health of people and causes various incurable diseases. The white asbestos is a fibrous material used for building roofs and walls and various in other forms. Citing contradictory position of the Government on the issue the complainant had alleged that though the mining of asbestos was technically banned by the government, yet it allowed its import and that too from the countries which did not prefer its domestic use. It was also alleged that white asbestos is considered a hazardous chemical substance for environment by a number of countries in the world. However, it is being used in a number of industries in India affecting the workers employed their in. The Commission had given six months time for reports to the concerned authorities. On the 5th March, 2012, they were given six weeks more time when most of them failed to give the requisite reports.
Note: For further details kindly contact National Human Rights Commission, Faridkot House, Copernicus Marg, New Delhi, PIN 110001 Tel.No. 23382742 Fax No. 23384863 E-Mail: covdnhrc@nic.in, ionhrc@nic.in
NHRC issues notices to different Union Ministries, States, Union Territories on the issue of banning use of White Asbestos
Dated: 6th July 2011 The National Human Rights Commission has taken cognizance of a complaint alleging that about fifty thousand people die every year in the country due to Asbestos related cancer. The complainant has sought Commission's intervention for a ban on the use of Chrysotile Asbestos (White Asbestos), which is hazardous for the health of people and causes various incurable diseases. The white Asbestos is a fibrous material used for building roofs and walls and various in other forms. Citing contradictory position of the Government on the issue the complainant Gopal Krishna of Toxics Watch Alliance has alleged that though the mining of Asbestos has been technically banned by the government, but it allows its import and that too from the countries which do not prefer its domestic use. It is also alleged that white Asbestos is considered a hazardous chemical substance for environment by a number of countries in the world. However, it is being used in a number of industries in India affecting the workers employed their in. The complainant has also requested for grant of a compensation package for present and future victims of Asbestos diseases. The Commission has issued notices to the Secretaries of Ministries of Chemical Fertilizers, Environment and Forest, Health and Family Welfare, Industry and Commerce, Labour and Chief Secretaries of all the States/Union Territories calling for status reports within four weeks on the issues raised in the complaint. *********
Note: For further details kindly contact National Human Rights Commission, Faridkot House, Copernicus Marg, New Delhi, PIN 110001 Tel.No. 23382742 Fax No. 23384863 E-Mail: covdnhrc@nic.in, ionhrc@nic.in
Wednesday, June 6, 2012
RIO + 20 : WORKSHOP "A WORLD WITHOUT ASBESTOS IS POSSIBLE"
Date: 15/6/2012
Where: Aterro do Flamengo - Tent 1 - organizers: FIOCRUZ/CEBES/ABRASCO
Time: 13-18:00
Tentative List of Speakers:
Linda Reinstein - USA - A utilização das redes e mídias sociais para a luta global anti -amianto
Laurie Kazan Allen - Reino Unido - panorama internacional da luta anti-amianto
Olga Speranskaya - O amianto na Russia
Alexandra Caterbow- WECF - Convençāo de Rotterdam e a inclusāo da Crisotila para PIC
Fernanda Giannasi - A luta anti-amianto no Brasil
Hermano Castro e Patrícia Ribeiro - Panorama epidemiológico no Brasil e no Mundo.
A luta- anti-amianto nos tribunais
Depoimento das lutas vítimas do amianto (RJ,SP,PR e BA)
Fórum de Bom Jesus da Serra - moradores
Thursday, May 24, 2012
Stop Asbestos Cement Plant in Bargarh, Odisha
To
Shri Naveen Patnaik
Chief Minister
Government of Odisha
Bhubneshwar
Through Chief Secretary, Government of Odisha
Subject-Stop Asbestos Cement Plant in Bargarh, Odisha
Sir,
This is to draw your urgent attention towards the villagers’ protest against the proposed hazardous asbestos cement roofing factory at Naagaon-Lebidi villages, Sohella Block, Bargarh district, Odisha. The company M/s Viswakarma Roofings Ltd. intends to establish 150,000 Tonnes Per Annum of Asbestos Cement Sheets Manufacturing Project at Bargarh in state of Odisha. The proposal is to establish 0.15 MTPA Asbestos Cement Sheet Plant. The site includes Nuagan, Kendupali, Lebidi Mauza and several other villages.
I am an environmental health researcher. I have worked with national and international organizations working on environmental and occupational health. I am an applicant in the Supreme Court in the hazardous wastes/shipbreaking case and against asbestos fibers in the National Human Rights Commission, New Delhi.
I am writing on behalf of the New Delhi based Ban Asbestos Network of India (BANI) which has been working to speared awareness about the hazardous impact of asbestos fibers since 2002 has learnt that several hundreds of people, including women and children, participated in protest demonstrations against the proposed Asbestos Cement Sheet factory on May 22, 2012.
I have come to know villagers are resisting the efforts of the Vishwakarma Roofings Ltd. The ongoing protests commenced from the date of public hearing in September, 2011. The attached minutes of the public hearing reveal the same.
It is noteworthy that a member of BANI, ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA) is pursuing a case against asbestos fibers in the NHRC.
Both BANI and TWA express their support for the efforts of Jan Paribesh Suraksha Parishad (JPSP) to resist the plan to set up hazardous chrysotile asbestos (white asbestos) plant in Bargarh.
It has reliably been learnt that villagers will not allow the setting up of the asbestos cement sheet factory at any cost.
I submit that villagers are quite angry when they witnessed the construction work for the hazardous asbestos factory in the vicinity of more than 10 villages within a 2 km radius, including water bodies, schools, agricultural fields and a government food warehouse.
I submit that there was a rally against the proposed toxic plant that commenced from the National Highway 6, Dus Mile Chowk, 7 Km from Sohela Block, Bargarh district and culminated at the project site.
I submit that JPSP has informed me about the protest against the disastrous consequences for the villagers of Naagaon-Lebidi, Sohela Block, Bargarh district, Odisha.
I wish to inform you that some 55 countries have already banned asbestos of all kinds including white asbestos that is proposed to be used for manufacturing asbestos fiber based roofs. There is a compelling logic to initiate the process of banning asbestos manufacturing, trade and use in Odisha as well.
I submit that the State Government ought to take note of ten crucial national and international developments with regard to hazards from asbestos of all kinds including white asbestos with documentary proof:
1) Judgment of the Italian Criminal Court dated February 12, 2012 convicting owners of an asbestos company
2) Vision Statement on Environment and Human Health of Ministry of Environment & Forests
3) Notice of the National Human Rights Commission dated July 6, 2011 sent to Chief Secretary, Odisha Government
4) New Delhi Declaration Seeking Elimination of all forms of Asbestos including White Asbestos from India, March 2011
5) Government of India’s decision at UN’s 5th Conference of the Parties (COP5) to the UN’s Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade held in Geneva during June 20-24, 2011 wherein it agreed to the inclusion of chrysotile asbestos (white asbestos) in the list of hazardous chemicals paving the way for its ‘phase out’
6) Order of the Kerala Human Rights Commission dated January 31, 2009 on ‘asbestos roofs’,
7) Health Management Plan for Mesothalmia, Lung cancer and Asbestosis related problems in asbestos industries (Term of Reference of Experts Appraisal Committee, Industrial Projects),
8) Factsheet of World Health Organisation (WHO) and ILO Resolution
9) Union Ministry of Labour's Concept Paper on Plan to Ban Asbestos
10) NHRC Member's concern for use of carcinogenic asbestos roof by Union Rural Development Ministry in Indira Awas Yojna
I submit that these developments will help comprehend the matter of human rights violations from the proposed hazardous white asbestos fiber cement sheet projects in Bargarh.
I submit that European asbestos billionaires Mr Stephan Schmidheiny and Mr Baron Luis de Cartier have been fined and sentenced to 16 years gaol by an Italian criminal court for deliberately failing to warn workers, families and residents about the dangers of asbestos. Reference:http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-02-14/billionaires-sentenced-to-16-years-gaol-for/3828540 (1)
I wish to draw your attention towards the Union Environment Ministry’s 19 page Vision Statement on Environment and Human Health (Para 4.3.1) on page 12 which reads: “Alternatives to asbestos may be used to the extent possible and use of asbestos may be phased out”. Reference: Environment Ministry’s website: moef.nic.in/divisions/cpoll/envhealth/visenvhealth.pdf. (2)
I submit that the National Human Rights Commission has taken cognizance of various incurable diseases caused by white asbestos and the request for grant of a compensation package for present and future victims of Asbestos diseases. The Commission has issued notice to Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar. NHRC Notice attached. (3)
I submit that the Annual Report of NHRC 2003-2004 refers to a Report entitled “Asbestos – Health and Environment – an in-depth Study “submitted by the Institute of Public Health Engineers, India. The study underlines that safe and controlled use of asbestos is not possible. I submit that NHRC has passed an order in Case No: 693/30/97-98 recommending that the asbestos sheets roofing be replaced with roofing made up of some other material that would not be harmful.
I submit that the New Delhi Declaration Seeking Elimination of all forms of Asbestos including Chrysotile from India was adopted and endorsed by world renowned eminent scientists and doctors in March 24, 2011. The declaration is attached. (4)
I wish to inform you that the Government of India’s delegation at the UN Conference in Geneva agreed to the listing of chrysotile asbestos in the Annex III of the Rotterdam Convention which is the Prior Informed Consent (PIC) list of hazardous substances on June 22, 2011. The turnaround came at a contact group meeting which was set up for discussion on chrysotile asbestos also known as white asbestos as they member groups of the convention could not agree upon a consensus. However, when India announced its stand it was applauded and it received a standing ovation at the plenary. The UN’s Chemical Review Committee had recommended the listing of white asbestos on the grounds of WHO findings that asbestos was a hazardous substance harmful to human health and environment; it had also stated that PIC was especially important for developing countries which have weak legal and institutional structures for addressing hazardous materials. The deliberations are available at www.pic.int (5)
I submit that Justice N Dhinakar, the Kerala State Human Rights Commission (KSHRC) made three recommendations banning use of asbestos roofs in its order dated January 31, 2009. The recommendations are: “
a) The State Government will replace asbestos roofs of all school buildings under its control with country tiles in a phased manner.
b) The Government will take steps to see that the schools run under the private management also replace the asbestos roofs with country tiles by fixing a time frame.
c) The Government should see that in future no new school is allowed to commence its functions with asbestos roofs.”(6)
I submit that these recommendations are relevant for Odisha as well and it is natural to expect that the State Human Rights Commission will also take cognisance of it.
It is germane to note that Terms of Reference (TOR) that was awarded by the Experts Appraisal Committee, Industrial Project, Union Ministry of Environment & Forests to the project proponents for white asbestos based roofing factories state that they should prepare a “Health Management Plan for Mesothalmia, Lung cancer and Asbestosis related problems in asbestos industries.” Till date this has not been done. (7)
This underlines that the opposition of the villagers is quite justified on the ground that the proposed hazardous white asbestos fiber cement sheet project causes incurable fatal diseases.
I wish to inform you that the World Health Organization (WHO) re-iterates that the most efficient way to eliminate asbestos-related diseases is to stop the use of all types of asbestos and specifically states that its strategy is particularly targeted at countries still using chrysotile asbestos. The factsheet notes that “more than 107 000 people die each year from asbestos-related lung cancer, mesothelioma and asbestosis resulting from occupational exposure.” The relevant factsheet is asbestos available at: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs343/en/index.html The ILO resolution seeking elimination of chrysotile asbestos is attached. (8)
It is not surprising that "The Government of India is considering the ban on use of chrysotile asbestos in India to protect the workers and the general population against primary and secondary exposure to Chrysotile form of Asbestos." It has noted that "Asbestosis is yet another occupational disease of the Lungs which is on an increase under similar circumstances warranting concerted efforts of all stake holders to evolve strategies to curb this menace". A concept paper by Union Ministry of Labour revealed this at the two-day 5th India-EU Joint Seminar on “Occupational Safety and Health” on 19th and 20th September, 2011. Reference: http://www.labour.nic.in/lc/Background%20note.pdf (9)
I wish to draw your attention towards the fact that asbestos cement based building materials are being used in the Union Rural Development Ministry’s Indira Awas Yojna, this will have grave public health consequences. It is sad that central government’s definition of roofing material includes asbestos cement sheet along with Reinforced Brick Concrete and timber etc as per Union Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation. I submit that unmindful of the impending health crisis, the asbestos cement manufacturers are celebrating thrust given by the central government on rural housing through Indira Awaas Yojana because asbestos cement product sector derives sizeable portion of its demand from rural housing sector and remaining demand from industrial sheds. Central government’s Rs 10, 000 crore worth annual housing flagship scheme, Indira Awaas Yojana endangers the rural poor as its is using carcinogenic asbestos sheets to keep the cost below the ceiling of Rs 45,000 per house under the scheme. The National Human Rights Commission member, Shri Satyabrata Pal, a retired 1972 batch IFS officer has raised questions on the hazards as per a news report (Country’s flagship housing scheme turning out to be a debt trap, Iftikhar Gilani, Dec 26, 2011, DNA). (10)
Your immediate intervention can stop the crisis from assuming serious proportion.
It is due these concerns that asbestos of all kinds is banned in 55 countries. In India, mining of all kinds of asbestos is technically banned too besides trade in asbestos waste but its trade, manufacturing and use is yet to be banned. A considered step in Odisha would pave the way for all the states to follow.
It is deeply saddening to note that despite bitter opposition from villagers, their views and concerns are being ignored by the State Pollution Control Board which is to blatantly disregarding all the seven issues raised above including the Vision Statement on Environment and Human Health of the Union Environment Ministry with regard to asbestos.
I wish to inform you that villagers of Bargarh will make any sacrifice to stop the killer asbestos plant amidst their locality, which is akin to a ticking time bomb. In the light of the above referenced facts and the Vision Statement on Environment and Human Health of Union Environment ministry and NHRC notice in particular, we request you to put a moratorium on white asbestos based industrial projects in Odisha to safeguard the human rights of present future generations because asbestos fibers are lethal through its life cycle and even after its end of life. This action will enhance the prestige of the Commission and the State.
I wish to inform you that villagers of Chainpur-Bishunpur in Muzaffarpur, Bihar have stopped the asbestos plant. I submit that asbestos danger is lurking for the villagers of Bargarh and the State Government can set a healthy precedent by stopping it.
I can share all the relevant reference documents at the earliest to apprise you of the hazardous environment that is emerging due to the setting up of such universally established toxic plants that poses indiscriminate threat to residents of these villages.
Thanking You
Yours Sincerely
Gopal Krishna
Ban Asbestos Network of India (BANI)
ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA), Member, BANI
New Delhi
Phone: +91-11-2651781, Fax: +91-11-26517814
Mb: 9818089660
Web: banasbestosindia.blogspot.com, toxiscwatch.blogspot.com
Cc
Union Finance Minister, Government of India
Union Health Minister, Government of India
Union Commerce Minister, Government of India
Secretary, Union Ministry of Labour
Secretary, Union Ministry of Environment & Forests
Smt. Mira Mehrishi, Additional Secretary, Union Ministry of Environment & Forests
Chairperson, Odisha State Pollution Control Board
District Magistrate, Bargarh, Odisha
Superintendent of Police, Bargarh, Odisha
Shri Amitabh Mitra, Jan Paribesh Suraksha Parishad (JPSP), Bargarh, Odisha
Shri Naveen Patnaik
Chief Minister
Government of Odisha
Bhubneshwar
Through Chief Secretary, Government of Odisha
Subject-Stop Asbestos Cement Plant in Bargarh, Odisha
Sir,
This is to draw your urgent attention towards the villagers’ protest against the proposed hazardous asbestos cement roofing factory at Naagaon-Lebidi villages, Sohella Block, Bargarh district, Odisha. The company M/s Viswakarma Roofings Ltd. intends to establish 150,000 Tonnes Per Annum of Asbestos Cement Sheets Manufacturing Project at Bargarh in state of Odisha. The proposal is to establish 0.15 MTPA Asbestos Cement Sheet Plant. The site includes Nuagan, Kendupali, Lebidi Mauza and several other villages.
I am an environmental health researcher. I have worked with national and international organizations working on environmental and occupational health. I am an applicant in the Supreme Court in the hazardous wastes/shipbreaking case and against asbestos fibers in the National Human Rights Commission, New Delhi.
I am writing on behalf of the New Delhi based Ban Asbestos Network of India (BANI) which has been working to speared awareness about the hazardous impact of asbestos fibers since 2002 has learnt that several hundreds of people, including women and children, participated in protest demonstrations against the proposed Asbestos Cement Sheet factory on May 22, 2012.
I have come to know villagers are resisting the efforts of the Vishwakarma Roofings Ltd. The ongoing protests commenced from the date of public hearing in September, 2011. The attached minutes of the public hearing reveal the same.
It is noteworthy that a member of BANI, ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA) is pursuing a case against asbestos fibers in the NHRC.
Both BANI and TWA express their support for the efforts of Jan Paribesh Suraksha Parishad (JPSP) to resist the plan to set up hazardous chrysotile asbestos (white asbestos) plant in Bargarh.
It has reliably been learnt that villagers will not allow the setting up of the asbestos cement sheet factory at any cost.
I submit that villagers are quite angry when they witnessed the construction work for the hazardous asbestos factory in the vicinity of more than 10 villages within a 2 km radius, including water bodies, schools, agricultural fields and a government food warehouse.
I submit that there was a rally against the proposed toxic plant that commenced from the National Highway 6, Dus Mile Chowk, 7 Km from Sohela Block, Bargarh district and culminated at the project site.
I submit that JPSP has informed me about the protest against the disastrous consequences for the villagers of Naagaon-Lebidi, Sohela Block, Bargarh district, Odisha.
I wish to inform you that some 55 countries have already banned asbestos of all kinds including white asbestos that is proposed to be used for manufacturing asbestos fiber based roofs. There is a compelling logic to initiate the process of banning asbestos manufacturing, trade and use in Odisha as well.
I submit that the State Government ought to take note of ten crucial national and international developments with regard to hazards from asbestos of all kinds including white asbestos with documentary proof:
1) Judgment of the Italian Criminal Court dated February 12, 2012 convicting owners of an asbestos company
2) Vision Statement on Environment and Human Health of Ministry of Environment & Forests
3) Notice of the National Human Rights Commission dated July 6, 2011 sent to Chief Secretary, Odisha Government
4) New Delhi Declaration Seeking Elimination of all forms of Asbestos including White Asbestos from India, March 2011
5) Government of India’s decision at UN’s 5th Conference of the Parties (COP5) to the UN’s Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade held in Geneva during June 20-24, 2011 wherein it agreed to the inclusion of chrysotile asbestos (white asbestos) in the list of hazardous chemicals paving the way for its ‘phase out’
6) Order of the Kerala Human Rights Commission dated January 31, 2009 on ‘asbestos roofs’,
7) Health Management Plan for Mesothalmia, Lung cancer and Asbestosis related problems in asbestos industries (Term of Reference of Experts Appraisal Committee, Industrial Projects),
8) Factsheet of World Health Organisation (WHO) and ILO Resolution
9) Union Ministry of Labour's Concept Paper on Plan to Ban Asbestos
10) NHRC Member's concern for use of carcinogenic asbestos roof by Union Rural Development Ministry in Indira Awas Yojna
I submit that these developments will help comprehend the matter of human rights violations from the proposed hazardous white asbestos fiber cement sheet projects in Bargarh.
I submit that European asbestos billionaires Mr Stephan Schmidheiny and Mr Baron Luis de Cartier have been fined and sentenced to 16 years gaol by an Italian criminal court for deliberately failing to warn workers, families and residents about the dangers of asbestos. Reference:http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-02-14/billionaires-sentenced-to-16-years-gaol-for/3828540 (1)
I wish to draw your attention towards the Union Environment Ministry’s 19 page Vision Statement on Environment and Human Health (Para 4.3.1) on page 12 which reads: “Alternatives to asbestos may be used to the extent possible and use of asbestos may be phased out”. Reference: Environment Ministry’s website: moef.nic.in/divisions/cpoll/envhealth/visenvhealth.pdf. (2)
I submit that the National Human Rights Commission has taken cognizance of various incurable diseases caused by white asbestos and the request for grant of a compensation package for present and future victims of Asbestos diseases. The Commission has issued notice to Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar. NHRC Notice attached. (3)
I submit that the Annual Report of NHRC 2003-2004 refers to a Report entitled “Asbestos – Health and Environment – an in-depth Study “submitted by the Institute of Public Health Engineers, India. The study underlines that safe and controlled use of asbestos is not possible. I submit that NHRC has passed an order in Case No: 693/30/97-98 recommending that the asbestos sheets roofing be replaced with roofing made up of some other material that would not be harmful.
I submit that the New Delhi Declaration Seeking Elimination of all forms of Asbestos including Chrysotile from India was adopted and endorsed by world renowned eminent scientists and doctors in March 24, 2011. The declaration is attached. (4)
I wish to inform you that the Government of India’s delegation at the UN Conference in Geneva agreed to the listing of chrysotile asbestos in the Annex III of the Rotterdam Convention which is the Prior Informed Consent (PIC) list of hazardous substances on June 22, 2011. The turnaround came at a contact group meeting which was set up for discussion on chrysotile asbestos also known as white asbestos as they member groups of the convention could not agree upon a consensus. However, when India announced its stand it was applauded and it received a standing ovation at the plenary. The UN’s Chemical Review Committee had recommended the listing of white asbestos on the grounds of WHO findings that asbestos was a hazardous substance harmful to human health and environment; it had also stated that PIC was especially important for developing countries which have weak legal and institutional structures for addressing hazardous materials. The deliberations are available at www.pic.int (5)
I submit that Justice N Dhinakar, the Kerala State Human Rights Commission (KSHRC) made three recommendations banning use of asbestos roofs in its order dated January 31, 2009. The recommendations are: “
a) The State Government will replace asbestos roofs of all school buildings under its control with country tiles in a phased manner.
b) The Government will take steps to see that the schools run under the private management also replace the asbestos roofs with country tiles by fixing a time frame.
c) The Government should see that in future no new school is allowed to commence its functions with asbestos roofs.”(6)
I submit that these recommendations are relevant for Odisha as well and it is natural to expect that the State Human Rights Commission will also take cognisance of it.
It is germane to note that Terms of Reference (TOR) that was awarded by the Experts Appraisal Committee, Industrial Project, Union Ministry of Environment & Forests to the project proponents for white asbestos based roofing factories state that they should prepare a “Health Management Plan for Mesothalmia, Lung cancer and Asbestosis related problems in asbestos industries.” Till date this has not been done. (7)
This underlines that the opposition of the villagers is quite justified on the ground that the proposed hazardous white asbestos fiber cement sheet project causes incurable fatal diseases.
I wish to inform you that the World Health Organization (WHO) re-iterates that the most efficient way to eliminate asbestos-related diseases is to stop the use of all types of asbestos and specifically states that its strategy is particularly targeted at countries still using chrysotile asbestos. The factsheet notes that “more than 107 000 people die each year from asbestos-related lung cancer, mesothelioma and asbestosis resulting from occupational exposure.” The relevant factsheet is asbestos available at: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs343/en/index.html The ILO resolution seeking elimination of chrysotile asbestos is attached. (8)
It is not surprising that "The Government of India is considering the ban on use of chrysotile asbestos in India to protect the workers and the general population against primary and secondary exposure to Chrysotile form of Asbestos." It has noted that "Asbestosis is yet another occupational disease of the Lungs which is on an increase under similar circumstances warranting concerted efforts of all stake holders to evolve strategies to curb this menace". A concept paper by Union Ministry of Labour revealed this at the two-day 5th India-EU Joint Seminar on “Occupational Safety and Health” on 19th and 20th September, 2011. Reference: http://www.labour.nic.in/lc/Background%20note.pdf (9)
I wish to draw your attention towards the fact that asbestos cement based building materials are being used in the Union Rural Development Ministry’s Indira Awas Yojna, this will have grave public health consequences. It is sad that central government’s definition of roofing material includes asbestos cement sheet along with Reinforced Brick Concrete and timber etc as per Union Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation. I submit that unmindful of the impending health crisis, the asbestos cement manufacturers are celebrating thrust given by the central government on rural housing through Indira Awaas Yojana because asbestos cement product sector derives sizeable portion of its demand from rural housing sector and remaining demand from industrial sheds. Central government’s Rs 10, 000 crore worth annual housing flagship scheme, Indira Awaas Yojana endangers the rural poor as its is using carcinogenic asbestos sheets to keep the cost below the ceiling of Rs 45,000 per house under the scheme. The National Human Rights Commission member, Shri Satyabrata Pal, a retired 1972 batch IFS officer has raised questions on the hazards as per a news report (Country’s flagship housing scheme turning out to be a debt trap, Iftikhar Gilani, Dec 26, 2011, DNA). (10)
Your immediate intervention can stop the crisis from assuming serious proportion.
It is due these concerns that asbestos of all kinds is banned in 55 countries. In India, mining of all kinds of asbestos is technically banned too besides trade in asbestos waste but its trade, manufacturing and use is yet to be banned. A considered step in Odisha would pave the way for all the states to follow.
It is deeply saddening to note that despite bitter opposition from villagers, their views and concerns are being ignored by the State Pollution Control Board which is to blatantly disregarding all the seven issues raised above including the Vision Statement on Environment and Human Health of the Union Environment Ministry with regard to asbestos.
I wish to inform you that villagers of Bargarh will make any sacrifice to stop the killer asbestos plant amidst their locality, which is akin to a ticking time bomb. In the light of the above referenced facts and the Vision Statement on Environment and Human Health of Union Environment ministry and NHRC notice in particular, we request you to put a moratorium on white asbestos based industrial projects in Odisha to safeguard the human rights of present future generations because asbestos fibers are lethal through its life cycle and even after its end of life. This action will enhance the prestige of the Commission and the State.
I wish to inform you that villagers of Chainpur-Bishunpur in Muzaffarpur, Bihar have stopped the asbestos plant. I submit that asbestos danger is lurking for the villagers of Bargarh and the State Government can set a healthy precedent by stopping it.
I can share all the relevant reference documents at the earliest to apprise you of the hazardous environment that is emerging due to the setting up of such universally established toxic plants that poses indiscriminate threat to residents of these villages.
Thanking You
Yours Sincerely
Gopal Krishna
Ban Asbestos Network of India (BANI)
ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA), Member, BANI
New Delhi
Phone: +91-11-2651781, Fax: +91-11-26517814
Mb: 9818089660
Web: banasbestosindia.blogspot.com, toxiscwatch.blogspot.com
Cc
Union Finance Minister, Government of India
Union Health Minister, Government of India
Union Commerce Minister, Government of India
Secretary, Union Ministry of Labour
Secretary, Union Ministry of Environment & Forests
Smt. Mira Mehrishi, Additional Secretary, Union Ministry of Environment & Forests
Chairperson, Odisha State Pollution Control Board
District Magistrate, Bargarh, Odisha
Superintendent of Police, Bargarh, Odisha
Shri Amitabh Mitra, Jan Paribesh Suraksha Parishad (JPSP), Bargarh, Odisha
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
