THE WORLD DUMPING GROUND; KOKO,NIGERIA WASTE IMPORTS FROM ITALY IN RETROSPECT

In 1987,five vessels with shipments totaling 3,780 tonnes of historic toxic materials of great proportion ever imagined as of the time, left the shore of Pisa in Italy for an unknown destination. As it sailed on the high sea, negotiation was seriously and furiously undertaken.

Djibouti, a small nation in Africa was the initial destination to ‘host ’the un-seemingly harmless cargo, but with precautions and foresight, it declined.

Like many other things in the past, an in road was made with a business man in Nigeria. And ,hence the cargo found its way, unbridled into the waters of Nigeria and in variably dumbed in its back yard.

In all , 8,000 drums of polychlorinated biphenyl sulphate (PCBS), methyl melamine, dimethyl ethyl-acetate formaldehyde which were the world's most hazardous waste were dumped at Koko.

This is the story of one of the greatest dumbing of toxic material in the world.

ABSTRACT


It has been widely said that -"Poverty is the reason people have been lured into accepting substances that otherwise they would not have." This poverty is encouraging waste exports to Africa.In some cases the fees for trade in the hazardous wastes "rivals the African nations' annual gross national product."


One exemplary case took place in Koko,Nigeria in 1987 between Italian and Nigerian businessmen. Italian businessmen shipped toxic waste of several Italian industries to Nigeria for storage in the backyard of a Nigerian businessman, who described them merely as miscellaneous construction materials.

Geographic Background.


Koko,is a small peasant settlement made up of mainly farmers ,fishermen and petty traders.The communtinty is situated in the southeastern part of Nigeria, in the swampy Niger Delta area in present day Detla State,as of the time of the incident however,it was situated in the former State of Bendel.

The soil in the area is extremely porous and marshy and therefore the more reason toxic chemicals like the one under focus is of great cataclysm to the people of that community.This is because the chemical could have easily leaked into the river at any point in time.


TIMELINE


The first shipment was on board the ship M.V. Baruluck, which was addressed to Koko, a village in Southern Nigeria on July 24, 1987. Following this shipment were other cargoes of toxic waste on board M.V. Danix and M.V. Line. These exports emanated from the city of Pisa.

Months later, a scandal over toxic waste was publicized when the barrels of waste began leaking into the surrounding area.


It has been said that Italy produces between "40 and 50 million tons of industrial wastes and 16 million tons of household wastes each year," most of which is believed to be exported to developing countries for disposal.

Hence,in 1987, Italian businessmen Gianfranco Raffaeli and Renato Pent, of the waste broker firms Ecomar and Jelly Wax respectively, signed an illegal agreement with Nigerian businessman, 67-year-old Sunday Nana, to use his property for storage of 18,000 drums of hazardous waste for approximately $100 a month (see JELLYWAX and BARREL cases).Which according to him ,was a request for "piece of land to dump what he claimed was raw materials for his industry".

As stated earlier,the wastes were exported from the port of Pisa, and elsewhere in Italy, to the receiving firm in Nigeria, the Iruekpen Construction Company, owned by Sunday Nana. To cover the tracks of such illicit and dangerous material,the wastes were imported as substances "relating to the building trade, and as residual and allied chemicals."


However,local Nigerian officials discovered the illegal toxic waste stored at the port of Koko. When the story broke in Italy, the Nigerian Embassy in Rome did not even inform the government in Lagos of the scam. That was left to some Nigerian students in Italy who phoned the Lagos daily, The Guardian, to trigger a reaction by President Babangida's regime.

It was then discovered that the waste, which had been stocked at random under the tropical sun, was deadly: "Not only was there PCB, but also asbestos fiber and perhaps dioxin."

Over 100 workers from the Nigerian Port Authority were employed to remove the wastes. The Nigerian government supplied the workers with equipment, protective clothing, and gas masks, but the protective clothing was insufficient and many did not even have gloves to protect their hands. The wastes were more toxic than many had realized and many workers began needing hospitalization with problems ranging from chemical burns, nausea, to paralysis.


Prior to the exposure, there was a conspiracy between the trading company in Italy, S.I. ECOMAR, and its Nigerian agent Raffaelli, an Italian resident, and the Nigerian Pharmaceutical Board. The Nigerian Pharmaceutical Board issued licenses to facilitate the importation of toxics into Nigeria. Inspectors at the port were also part of the conspiracy because they benefitted from the syndicate.

According to Edokpayi in 'Pie of Pisa'the intricate business of disposing of these toxic wastes through small Italian ports is very lucrative,considering that over 35 million tonnes is exported from Italy yearly. Gianfrance Raffaelli like the 'Merchant of Venice'in Shakespeare,acting as the link- man, at Koko (Nigeria) port is known to have made between 20 and 25 million naira from the deals.


AFTERMATH EFFECTS

Meanwhile,the effect,had started taking its tolls before a very long period of time,for instance Dr. Soloman Ogbemi, the senior medical officer at Koko General Hospital, declared that the "seven premature births that occurred within a one two-week period in July were due to the high toxicity of the dumpsite."


The leaking barrels caused the contents to enter the soil. This in turn caused a problem for the entire town of Koko by polluting the ground in which they grew their food and on which the children played. When the barrels were later transported back to Italy it was discovered that they were in such a poor condition that the water surrounding the ship was contaminated with some of the toxic wastes. As a result, the plant and animal vegetation in the water was endangered. The wastes that were sent to Nigeria from Italy not only polluted Koko, Nigeria, but it also polluted the waters outside the port of Livorno, Italy.


Eventually, the Italian government agreed to pay the cost of returning the wastes back to Italy, at least until they could determine the guilty parties. As a result, in July of 1988, two ships, the KARIN B and the DEEPSEA CARRIER, began the process of carrying the wastes from Nigeria back to Italy. While in route back to Italy, the Italian Environment Minister, Giorgio Ruffolo, announced the Italian ports designated to accept the wastes as the Tuscan port of Livorno and either Ravenna or Manfredonia Harbour in the South Adriatic.


The former was to accept the wastes from the KARIN B and the latter was to accept the wastes from the DEEPSEA CARRIER. However, the announcement resulted in protests, strikes and blockades in all three ports in an attempt to prevent the waste from being unloaded. (After its arrival in Italy the KARIN B was refused entry into Livorno when water samples taken from the surrounding area showed traces of toxins leaking from the ship.)


In December of 1988 workers began unloading the KARIN B. The containers of waste were transported to a warehouse until they could be identified, after which they would be repackaged and shipped off to a temporary storage place in the Emilia Romagna area of Italy. In January of 1989 the first wastes left Livorno. The DEEPSEA CARRIER, on the other hand, was still held at bay, with its crew sequestered on board, until August of 1989 when the ship was finally allowed to unload in Livorno.

GOVERNMENT COMPLACENCY


The Nigerian government heard of the toxic wastes after the barrels began leaking into the surrounding environment, creating a public hazard to the people in the area. The discovery of the hazardous waste barrels led to the recalling of the ambassador ofItaly to Nigeria and the seizing of an Italian freighter, the owners of which are now demanding $1 million compensation from the Italian government.

The incident has further resulted in the jailing of at least 54 individuals involved in the transaction, the institution of the death penalty in Nigeria for waste traders, and the banning of hazardous waste exports to developing countries by Italy. The Italian Ministry of the Environment expected to pay $14.3 million for claims on the KARIN.

As a result of this case, several actions were taken. For example, the first act of reconciliation was enacted by the Nigerian government when they reinstated the Nigerian ambassador to Italy two months after he had been recalled. This was followed by more substantial actions such as the one taken by the OKAYS leaders (all of whom are members of the Lome Convention) when they agreed to make it a criminal offense to facilitate the dumping of dangerous waste and urged the developed countries to tighten their controls on exports of such products. All OKAYS member-states were also asked to take the necessary steps to stop dumping and increase legislative safeguards against such practices.


The Nigerian President went even further by proposing a regional system known as "Dumpwatch," designed to monitor dumping activities. However, of all the actions taken to stop the transfer of hazardous wastes the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal appears to be the most important (see BASEL case). The Basel Convention calls for the management "in an environmentally sound manner" of all transboundary shipments of hazardous wastes as well as household wastes. To this end, the Convention sets up a system of checks and balances whereby, prior to the export of such wastes, "the consent of the exporting country, the importing country, and any transboundary countries must be first obtained."

ANY LESSON LEARNT FROM KOKO? NO!


Despite the Koko incident, the potential financial gains from waste dumping may prove to be too tempting for many. In fact, the President of Benin gave a detailed explanation at the Lome negotiations of his country's plans to import toxic waste despite the heavy disapproval of Benin's neighboring states, Nigeria and Togo, arguing it had to do so for survival.


Toxic waste dumping began in the mid-1970's. It is also believed that France was among the principal culprits, using their special relations with francophone Africa as a means of disposing of unwanted waste materials. Occasionally, although rarely, rumors would filter out about toxic waste sites in Africa: for example,"in 1979 it became known that the American company, NedlogTechnology Group, Inc., had offered Sierra Leone $25 million to use its territory for waste disposal."


The President of Sierra Leone eventually had to back out of the deal as a result of mounting pressure. In 1978 there was another case in which hazardous waste from "American armed forces agencies was exported by the Colbert brothers (who have been sent to prison for fraudulent business practices) to Zimbabwe under the name of "cleaning fluids".


Despite these crackdowns by both the industrialized and the less-industrialized countries the trade of hazardous waste continues to go on. In fact, in recent years several contracts have been signed with African states. One of the larger waste ,disposal networks is that "the Italo-Swiss Intercontract-Jelly Wax group, which have tried to negotiate contracts with Guinea-Bissau,Djibouti, and Senegal.


In 1987, Djibouti turned down 2,100 tons of chemical waste that had been shipped from the port of Marina di Carrara. It was after the firm Intercontract signed a huge deal with Guinea-Bissau that the full scale of the toxic waste trade in Africa became apparent. Some Europeans groups began publicisizing such trade.


It took the "Brussels-based lobbying group, Entente Europ‚enne pour l'Environment (EEE), to blow the whistle on the entire deal. Under the contract, Guinea-Bissau would receive up to 500,000 tons of pharmaceutical and industrial waste from Switzerland at a price of $40 per ton."


For impoverished Guinea-Bissau, the prospect of earning up to $20 million seemed very attractive. In reality, Intercontract would gain most from this deal. By dumping the waste in Africa they were sparing themselves the costs of incinerating and recycling its wastes according to Common Market law.

As a dumping ground, Intercontract had chosen a site near the town of Farim which was known for being marshy and porous, thereby facilitating the spread of pollution throughout the entire region. The scandal caused the Guinean authorities to cancel the deal as well as another smaller deal that they had made with the British government.


There was also the ZANOOBIA, the freighter which "wandered for two months after it recovered more than 2,000 tons of toxic waste from Syria, where it had been dumped after being rejected by Djibouti, Venezuela, and Sardinia,while more than 15,000 tons of toxic ash from garbage incinerators in Philadelphia"were dumped in some abandoned mines off of the West African coast of Guinea (see KHAIN case).



The Basel Convention creates a system by which "the notification must contain information about the reason for the export, the means of transportation, the type of wastes, the technical description of the disposal plant, and the contract between the exporter and the disposer. Further, each party to the convention must require that wastes be packaged, labeled, and transported in accordance with the generally accepted rules and standards." The wastes that cannot be disposed of in accordance to the terms of the contract must be returned to the exporting country.

IN RETROSPECT


The Nigerian receivers of the waste did not realize the cost accounting practices of waste. They received the fees but there were certain costs not initially evident. For example, by the time the toxic waste scandal broke out in Nigeria, the barrels had already begun leaking, and causing damage to the soil. Later,during the removal of the barrels, workers insufficiently protected from the fumes and leaks from the barrels. Many became ill; some even fell into comas.


This issue is significant because of the immediate reaction of Nigerian government and the involvement of the international community. According to Arti,the government also served an Italian merchant ship, the M.V.Piave, on June 10 in order to transport the waste back to Italy. The Nigerian Ambassador was recalled. The Minister of Justice and the Attorney General have said the matter will go to the International Court of Justice at The Hague if Italy does not remove the toxic waste.


The government's evacuation plan was met with resistance by local peoples due to cultural and historical reasons. Bala Dan Abu cites Pa Oluwa, who is one of the local elders in Koko, "evacuation can only obliterate our long, ancestral history." Other forms of environmental problems of lesser magnitude have been cited by Oduaran, " rural areas with mining, quarrying, and oil exploration are frequently polluted .... Cement-producing and quarrying plants emit asbestos dust which may lead to asbestosis, a form of cancer."

In April,2008, twenty one years after,94 victims of the infamous Koko toxic waste dump recieved N39.7m compensation from the Nigerian Ports Authority, NPA, Warri, for injuries, pain and frustration suffered during the evacuation of the toxic dump after 21years of hardship.It is believed that the gesture is a demonstration of the donor's 'corporate social responsibility to those who risked their lives through evacuating the infamous toxic waste in Koko Port'.


REFERENCE;


Abu, Bala Dan. "Death, Where's Thy Drum?" Newswatch Nigeria (July 4, 1988).
Abu, Bala Dan. "Koko: To Move or Not to Move" Newswatch Nigeria (July 11, 1988).
Adewale, O. The Nigerian Institute of Advanced Legal Studies,Lagos, 1991.
"Africa: The Waste Basket of The West", Business and Society Review 67 (Fall 1988): 48-50.
"Africa Wages War on Dumpers of Poisonous Waste."New Scientist (June 23, 1989).Ayadike, O. West Africa (June 20, 1988), 1109.
Dufour, Jean-Paul and Denis, Corinne. "The North's Garbage Goes South." World Press Review 35 (November 1988): 30-32.
Edokpayi, Ben. "Pie of Pisa." Newswatch Nigeria (July 4, 1988).
Ekeocha, Okey. "A Cry for Justice -- or Drum Beats of Treason?"
The African Guardian (May 17, 1993).
"Exporting Hazardous Waste. Technology Review 92 (1989).
Federal Environmental Protection Agency, Nigeria. "Achieving Sustainable Development in Nigeria". National Report for the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 1992), 1-12.
Feustel, Sandra. "E.C. Pushes New Rules on Toxic Waste Exports"Europe 282 (December 1988), 32-46.
Glover, John. "Italian Industry Aims To Get Greener, But on Its Own Terms." Chemical Week 14/5 (February 6, 1991);20.
Greenpeace Toxic Trade Update (Washington DC: Greenpeace,various issues).
Douglas Henwood. "Toxic Banking." The Nation 254 (March 9,1992).
Liberatore, Angela, and Lewanski, Rudolph."The Evolution of Italian Environmental Policy." Environment 32 (June1990): 10-13+.
MacKenzie, Deborah. "Would-be Waste Smugglers Face Execution."New Scientist 136 (November 21, 1992): 8.
Murphy, Sean, D. "The Basel Convention on Hazardous Wastes." nvironment 35 (March 1993): 42-44.
Odauran, Akpovire B. "Education Against Environmental Pollution in Nigeria" Convergence 22/4 (1989): 55-60.
"Plan To Clean Up Nigeria Dump." New Scientist 118 (June 30,1988): 38.
Puckett, Jim; Stirling, Andy; and Vallette, Jim. "Preventing the Transboundary Movement of Hazardous Including Nuclear
Wastes in The Mediterranean Region -- A Call For A Legal Instrument Within The Barcelona Convention." Greenpeace International, Waste Trade Campaign (September 14, 1990):1-44.
Paul Ruffins. "Toxic Terrorism Invades Third World Nations." Black Enterprise 19 (November 1988).
Schissel, Howard. "The Deadly Trade: Toxic waste Dumping in Africa." Africa Report 33 (September/October 1988):47-49.
Starr, Douglas. "Shoppers, Shoppers, Everywhere." Audubon 92 (March 1990): 98-103.
"The Norths' Garbage Goes South." World Press Review 35 (1988):30-2.
"The Koko Incident." Journal of National Resources and Environment Law 8 (1992/1993).
Tiersten, Sylvia. "Toxic Waste Poisons the Soil: And Property Deals." Electronic Business 14/22 (November 15, 1988):116, 118.
Vanguard Newspaper,Nigeria: N39 Million Relief for Koko Toxic Waste Victims 21 Years After.4 April 2008.
Vir, Arti K. "Toxic Trade with Africa." Environment and Scienceand Technology 23/1 (1989).