Clemenceau: A Threat to Individual Security

Alok Kumar Gupta, Asst. Professor, National Law University, Jodhpur

Pratyush Kumar, Student, National Law University, Jodhpur

I ndividual security in India is at stake as the French ship Clemenceau proceeds to

India. Greenpeace and three other environmentalist groups filed a case in a French court to
block transfer of the ship to India. Their opposition was on the grounds that Indian shipyard
workers are not properly protected from the hazards of working with asbestos, which can
cause fatal lung diseases. However, Greenpeace eventually lost the case as the French
government successfully convinced the court that the ship was not hazardous while floating
on the seas, hence it was not violating the Basel Convention which bans trade in hazardous
materials like asbestos.

On 31 December 2005, the decommissioned warship began its final voyage to an

Indian breakers yard after the French court held that there were "no serious doubts" about
the legality of its transfer. Built in the 1950s, Clemenceau contains more than normal levels
of blue asbestos, a known carcinogenic agent that was used in the 1950s and 60s as an
insulator and is now being phased out. After being decommissioned in 1997, it had been
sent to Turkey, from where it had to be recalled. Talks with Greece failed and plans to
convert it into an artificial reef were turned down. India, having one of the four surviving ship-
breaking yards, became their final choice. The amount of asbestos on the ship is contested,
ranging from 50-500 tonnes, and France is being tight-lipped about it.

T he carcinogenic effects of asbestos-exposure causes the most painful form of

lung cancer called mesothelioma-asbestos which obtains in India due tp asbestos usage in
various ways and even in domestic appliances. There are 40 countries that have banned its
use and manufacture. Out of two types of asbestos (white and blue) depending on its fibres,
blue has been banned in India since 1995. Studies by the US and Europeans have
confirmed 30 deaths per day due to exposure to white asbestos. The irony is that customs
duty on asbestos was reduced to 15 per cent from 78 per cent in 1995-96, though the WTO
favours the 'safe use' of asbestos.

E arlier, the French company Technopure was contracted to decontaminate the

ship. Later, the Ship Decommissioning Industry Corporation (SDIC), a Panama-registered
private company, was entrusted with the task. Two officials of the company have come to
inform the Monitoring Committee constituted by the Supreme Court of India about the size of
the ship, its structure, and the fact that had a vast amount of cabling containing asbestos
since it had been specially built. They said their company had only partially decontaminated
the ship. According to their estimates, the ship still contained at least 500 tonnes of
asbestos. According to Shree Ram Scrap Vessels Pvt. Ltd., which is to dismantle the ship,
the French government had promised to remove 98 per cent of the asbestos on board and
roughly between 15 tonnes to 25 tonnes was expected to remain when the ship reached
India. However, the pertinent question continues: why India should accept such large
quantities of toxic waste on its soil?

D espite the Supreme Court's directions to regulate and monitor the trade in health
hazardous substances, the Rs 2000 crore asbestos industries have no regulatory apparatus
in place. There are no records as to how many are suffering from asbestos-related illnesses.
According to A.K. Sethi, President of the Asbestos Cement Products Manufacturers
Association, white asbestos is safe because it is mixed with cement in a wet process. The
WTO panel was not convinced and remarked, "When asbestos cement is used for
occupational or domestic purposes, it is usually sanded, crushed or sawn, thus, releasing its
carcinogenic fibres into the environment in the form of dust." Nearly 1.5 lakh tonnes of
asbestos come to India every year. Canada alone exports nearly 90 per cent of its asbestos
- an estimated one lakh tonnes - to India each year. The issue of the French warship has
proved a blessing in disguise as it has opened this debate and corrective action in this
regard by the judiciary.

F rance is a signatory to the Basel Convention of 1989, which bans the trans-
boundary movement of hazardous wastes. France expressed its stand that its regulations do
not apply to "war material", which was reiterated by French courts. A warship is a container
like any other container. What is important is its potential to pollute and threaten life and
security. Consequently, it should not be allowed to enter India. The Monitoring Committee
established by the Supreme Court has also supported this view. The final decision should
take into account the individual's rights to health security and environment. This incident
reflects disrespect for the human security of developing countries by the developed ones.