To

Secretary
Ministry of Environment and Forest
Government of India
New Delhi


Sub: Ratify Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs)

Sir,

You must be aware that more than 50 countries in the world have ratified the Convention which comes into force from 17th May, 2004. As per the treaty, twelve POPs - called `dirty dozen' chemical pollutants - aldrin, chlordane, DDT, dieldrin, endrin, heptachlor, mirex, toxaphene, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), hexachlorobenzene, dioxins and furans need to be eliminated from the world. Among the dirty dozen, DDT, PCBs and unintentional POPs – that is, dioxins and furans -- are relevant for India, according to the March 2001 issue of Parivesh, the newsletter of the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB). The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), has called for the enforcement of the control measures apply to the initial list of 12 chemicals, while a POP Review Committee is yet to consider additional chemicals for the POP list on a regular basis to ensure that the treaty is responsive to new scientific findings.

India is a signatory to the Convention after it signed the treaty on 14 May 2002 but it is yet to ratify it. We are concerned to note that the chemical industry in India is going on making profits irrespective of the disastrous toll its chemicals are taking on human life, wildlife and environment. As the world goes towards a cleaner future, the chemical industry in India believes it can continue killing people, wildlife and contaminate our natural resources.

It is revealed from the studies by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) that the workers in these chemical factories are at great risk of liver, lung and brain cancers and skin tumours and the dissolving of bones at the tip of their fingers. As the name POPs implies, once introduced into the environment, either intentionally by industry, as an agrochemical, or unintentionally as a byproduct, these chemicals remain in the environment. These chemicals can be atmospherically transported to sites far distant from the site of initial introduction. These chemicals have very low solubility in water and high solubility in non-aqueous media such as fats and oils. The latter property leads to their high bio-accumulation in fatty tissue. These are readily absorbed in fatty tissue, where concentrations can become magnified by up to 70,000 times the background levels. Fish, predatory birds, mammals, and humans are high up the food chain therefore they absorb the greatest concentrations.

By Sixth Session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee for the Stockholm 6Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, Geneva in June 2002, some fifty countries has already started enforcing their National Implementation Plans, well in advance of their legal obligation to do so. The Global Environment Facility (GEF) has taken steps to support the initiatives. Countries, which are party to the treaty, include Japan, Austria, Bolivia, Botswana, Canada, Czech Republic, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Egypt, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Germany, Ghana, Iceland, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Luxemberg, Marshall Islands, Mexico, Nauru, Netherlands, Norway, Panama, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Samoa, Slovakia, South Africa, Sweden, Trinidad and Tobago, United Arab Emirates and Vietnam

We need not to worry that we have to bear a huge financial burden if we enforce the Convention as the Convention clearly states that the Global Environment Fund will contribute the money and technical assistance necessary to allow all countries to meet their obligations without placing an undue burden on them. The poorer countries that signed the convention, and there are many of them, are not stupid. They would not have signed an agreement that does not protect the interests of their citizens.

There has also been much malicious spreading of misinformation about what the convention says about using DDT to control the mosquitoes that spread malaria. The Convention clearly allows for the use of DDT for such purposes. The enforcement will not be at the cost of human health. A country may ratify and enforce the Convention even if it allows use of DDT as a malaria control measure. Still it is true that the Convention encourages the development of alternatives to the toxic pesticide, but it is clear that such alternatives have to be proven workable, “Viable alternatives to DDT shall pose less risk to human health and the environment, be suitable for disease control based on conditions in the Parties in question and be supported with monitoring data.”

In view of above, we the citizens of India earnestly request you to take necessary steps for ratification of the Convention and its enforcement at your earliest.

With regards