Ban Asbestos Network of India condemns Indian Government’s Double Speak on Asbestos

Canada and Russia led a revolt against the listing of chrysotile asbestos on a major international toxics convention named Rotterdam Convention despite scientific findings showing that it is harmful for human health and the environment. And also despite there being clear obligations under the treaty for such a listing.

The Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee of the Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent (PIC) Procedure for certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade has recommended inclusion of all forms of asbestos to an international list of chemicals subject to trade controls. Convention’s meeting is underway from 17-21 November. If adopted, these chemicals become subject to the Prior Informed Consent (PIC) procedure.

Indian government supported Canada and Russia against the interest of Indian workers and citizens even as Press Trust of India reported on 14 November the plight of workers from Digvijay Cement Company, Gujarat Composite Limited and the A Infrastructure Limited who have fallen victim to asbestos related diseases.

At home the Union Minister of Health and Family Welfare and Parliamentary Affairs Mrs Sushma Swaraj said in the Rajya Sabha on 18 August 2003, “Studies by the National Institute of Occupational Health (NIOH) Ahmedabad have shown than long-term exposure to any type of asbestos can lead to development of asbestosis, lung cancer and mesothelioma”. This statement of the minister manifests the double speak of the Indian government because contrary to what it says within the country it has chosen to be misled by countries Canada and Russia who have a vested interest.
The concerned Indian ministries are committing an anti-national act by selling the health of Indian workers and citizens to the ambassadors of the killer fiber. The Indian ministers and officials representing India at Geneva conference stand accused of ignoring the death and deliberate murder of the workers since they are knowingly subjecting Indians to continuing asbestos exposure.
Indian government must learn from countries like the EU, Chile, Australia, New Zealand, Norway, the United States, Brazil, Argentina, Gambia, Congo, Egypt and Morocco which support the listing of chrysotile asbestos to safeguard their citizen’s health.

Ban Asbestos Network of India (BANI), a coalition of civil society groups supports the proposed listing on the Rotterdam Prior Informed Consent (PIC) Convention because it alerts potential importers that chrysotile asbestos is a known cancer causing agent, which poses a risk even at very low levels.

Government delegates attending this week's PIC Convention meeting in Geneva requested special listing procedures for five forms of asbestos, including chrysotile.

Canada, which produces and exports chrysotile internationally, objected to its listing, along with Russia, and were supported by Ukraine, China, Zimbabwe, India, Indonesia, South Africa and Columbia.

The EU and Chile undertook extensive risk evaluations before banning chrysotile and calling for the treaty listing, and the Convention's scientific review endorsed their findings by consensus.

Apart from the 15 EU member states and Chile, countries supporting the listing of chrysotile asbestos as a dangerous substance included Australia, New Zealand, Norway, the United States, Brazil, Argentina, Gambia, Congo, Egypt and Morocco.

It does not behove a nation of Canada stature to object to the listing of chrysotile to be callous to the human right violation which asbestos exposure entails. Indeed its approach makes a mockery of the Convention's intent which is shared responsibility for health and the environmental protection between exporters and importers of harmful substances.

The PIC Convention's objective is to provide an early warning system and transparent information on chemicals and pesticides that have been banned or restricted by at least two countries in two parts of the world. Once a substance is included on the Convention's Annex III list, governments are asked to indicate whether they will allow or prohibit imports.

Russia's decision to support Canada is counterproductive and contradicts statements by government officials that they are responsible participants in multilateral environmental and trade agreements. Russian government needs to join the international community in backing environmentally sound decisions.

Indian government must represent Indian citizen’s interest instead of representing Canadian corporate interest which it is doing by opposing its listing blatantly disregarded the treaty obligations. It is duplicity of standards and shows how multi crore asbestos industry lobby has influenced government’s stance.