Supreme Court, WHO, ILO seek elimination of asbestos
NHRC is seized with the case of victims of incurable asbestos related diseases
ToxicsWatch
Alliance (TWA), Ban Asbestos Network of India (BANI) and Occupational Health
India (OHI) welcome the introduction of the bill seeking total ban on use and
import of white chrysotile asbestos in the country that has been re-introduced in
the
Rajya Sabha.
The
White Asbestos (Ban on Use and Import) Bill, 2014, seeking use of safer and
cheaper alternative to white asbestos was introduced on November 28, 2014. Earlier the
Bill was introduced in 2009 “to provide for a total ban on use and import of
white asbestos in the country and to promote the use of safer and cheaper
alternative to white asbestos and for matters connected therewith and
incidental thereto.”
The Statement of
Objects and Reasons of the Bill read: “The white asbestos is highly
carcinogenic even the World Health Organisation has reported that it causes
cancer. It is a rare fibrous material that is used to make rooftops and breaklinings.
More than fifty countries have already banned the use and import of white
asbestos. Even the countries that export it to India prefer not to use it
domestically. But in our country, it is imported without any restriction.
Canada and Russia are the biggest exporters of white asbestos. In 2007, Canada
exported almost Ninety five percent of the white asbestos it mined and out of
it forty-three percent was shipped to India. It is quite surprising that our
country is openly importing huge quantity of a product, which causes cancer.
This is despite the fact that safer and almost cheap alternatives to asbestos
are available in the country. Instead of importing a hazardous material, it
will be better if we spend some money in research and development and use
environment friendly product. In view of the above, there is an urgent need for
a total ban on the import and use of white asbestos and promote the use of
alternative material.” The Bill has been introduced by Vijay Jawaharlal Darda, Member of Parliament.
Taking
cognizance of threats to life and public health more than 50 countries have
banned production, use, manufacture and trade of the hazardous mineral fiber, Asbestos.
These countries are: Algeria, Czech Republic, Iceland, Malta, Seychelles,
Argentina, Denmark, Ireland, Mozambique, Slovakia, Australia, Egypt, Israel,
Netherlands, Slovenia, Austria, Estonia, Italy, New Caledonia, South Africa,
Bahrain, Finland, Japan, Norway, Spain, Belgium, France, Jordan, Oman, Sweden,
Brunei, Gabon, South Korea, Poland, Switzerland, Bulgaria, Germany, Kuwait,
Portugal, Turkey, Chile, Greece, Latvia, Qatar, United Kingdom, Croatia,
Honduras, Lithuania, Romania, Uruguay, Cyprus, Hungary, Luxembourg and Saudi
Arabia. All the 27 countries of European Union have banned it.
Earlier, ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA) had written to the Prime
Minister Narendra Modi on May 21, 2014 submitting that the previous “Government let
down the country when India’s delegation to the sixth meeting of the UN’s
Rotterdam Conference on the Prior Informed Consent (PIC) Procedure for Certain
Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade in Geneva, Switzerland
took an untenable, inconsistent and unscientific position with regard to white
chrysotile asbestos being non-hazardous substance contrary
to domestic laws such as Factories Act, 1948 and India’s Inventory of Hazardous
Chemicals Import in India that lists ‘asbestos’ at serial
no. 26 as one of the 180 hazardous chemicals in international trade which is
imported in India. This inventory was prepared by Central Pollution Control
Board (CPCB), under Union Ministry of Environment & Forests, Govt. of
India. India opposed the listing of chrysotile asbestos
under Annex III of the Rotterdam Convention during the meeting held from 28
April to 10 May 2013 based on an irrelevant, flawed and
conflict of interest ridden study by the National Institute of Occupational
Health, (NIOH), Ahmedabad. Its listing has been recommended by Rotterdam
Convention’s Chemical Review Committee. The Indian delegation was misled by
Ministry of Chemicals. It has made India’s position quite
self-contradictory because how can some substance be designated as hazardous
under national law and non-hazardous under an international law. The new
government must rectify this grave error and support listing of white asbestos in the PIC list of hazardous substances at the
earliest before the Seventh meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the
Rotterdam Convention which is scheduled to be held back‐to‐back with the
meetings of the conferences of the UN’s parties to the Basel and Stockholm
conventions in May 2015.
The continued use of lung cancer causing white chrysotile asbestos
is a legacy of the Soviet era has been promoted by companies close to the Congress
party. There are established substitutes of these killer fibers of asbestos which need to be adopted to prevent incurable diseases
but preventable deaths.
TWA has written letters to Jagat Prakash
Nadda, Union Minister of Health & Family Welfare and to Bandaru Dattatreya, Union
Minister of Labour and Employment on November 10, 2014 and November 18, 2014 respectively
drawing their urgent attention towards the attached document of International Labour
Organization (ILO) and World Health Orgainsation (WHO) seeking elimination of asbestos
related diseases.”
It
wrote, “In our country, the past usage and the continued usage of the roofing
sheets made of cancer causing fibers is an anti-public health legacy of
previous governments because all kinds of asbestos including white asbestos
causes incurable diseases like lung cancer, asbestosis and mesothelioma.
The alternatives of asbestos sheets are ideally suited for roofing
applications.”
It
submitted that government set up a 13 member Advisory Committee on January 23,
2012 to incorporate the ILO resolution of 2006 in the matter of asbestos as per
Hon'ble Supreme Court's order of 1995 and 2011 under the Chairmanship of A C
Pandey, Joint Secretary, Union Ministry of Labour but as of November 17, 2014,
the Advisory Committee has not submitted its report despite the fact that more
than 2 years have passed since it was entrusted the task.
It
submitted that Supreme Court in its judgment in the above mentioned case, dated
January 21, 2011at paragraph 14 reads as under:
“....In the earlier judgment of this Court in the case of Consumer
Education and Research Centre (supra), hazards arising out of primary use of asbestos
were primarily dealt with, but certainly secondary exposure also needs to be
examined by the Court. In that judgment, the Court had noticed that it would,
thus, be clear that diseases occurred wherever the exposure to the toxic or
carcinogenic agent occurs, regardless of the country, type of industry, job
title, job assignment or location of exposure. The diseases will follow the
trail of the exposure and extend the chain of the carcinogenic risk beyond the
work place. In that judgment, the Court had also directed that a review by the
Union and the States shall be made after every ten years and also as and when
the ILO gives directions in this behalf consistent with its recommendations or
conventions. Admittedly, 15 years has expired since the issuance of the
directions by this Court. The ILO also made certain specific directions vide
its resolution of 2006 adopted in the 95th session of the International Labour
Conference. It introduced a ban on all mining, manufacture, recycling and use
of all forms of asbestos. As already noticed, serious doubts have been raised
as to whether `controlled use' can be effectively implemented even with regard
to secondary exposure. These are circumstances which fully require the
concerned quarters/authorities in the Government of India as well as the State
Governments to examine/review the matter in accordance with law, objectively,
to achieve the greater health care of the poor strata of the country who are
directly or indirectly engaged in mining or manufacturing activities of asbestos
and/or allied products.”
The
Supreme Court in its judgment dated January 21, 2011 in Writ Petition (Civil)
No.260 of 2004 referred to its directions of January 27, 1995 in the Writ
Petition (Civil) No. 206 of 1986 that are required to be strictly adhered to
including fresh ILO resolution on Asbestos dated June 14, 2006.
Owing to growing public awareness
about the hazards of asbestos, consumption of asbestos dropped by 39% from 2012
to 2013 in India but this is hardly enough to save us from the hitherto
unacknowledged imminent public health crisis. India's asbestos consumption in
2013 was 302,668 tons. In 2012, it was 493,086 tons.
Dr Barry Castleman, the noted author of Asbestos: Medical and Legal Aspects
has underlined that one person dies from mesothelioma for every 170 tons of asbestos
consumed. WHO estimates we have 107,000 deaths worldwide per year from
occupational exposure to asbestos. If non occupational exposure is added it
reaches a figure of about 120,000 deaths. Average world consumption/year 30-60
years ago was -- looks like 3/2 of what it is now (2 million metric tons/year).
Give India its share of that based on its share of global consumption. At
300,000 tons in 2013, that's about 18,000 deaths (15% of 120,000). Dr
Castleman's work was quoted by Supreme Court of India in its judgment dated
January 27, 1995.
If the government can pay heed to
the decision taken by some 55 countries which have banned asbestos of all
kinds, it can ensure compliance with the resolution of WHO that has recommended
elimination of asbestos for eliminating asbestos related diseases.
This decision would honor the letter
and spirit of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India's judgment dated January 27, 1995
directing central and state governments to update their rules and laws in the
light of fresh ILO's resolution. ILO has made specific directions vide its
Resolution of 2006 introducing a ban on all mining, manufacture, recycling and
use of all forms of asbestos.
Notably, National Human Rights
Commission (NHRC), New Delhi is pursuing is a case (NHRC Case
No.2951/30/0/2011) seeking compliance with the Supreme Court's order in the
backdrop of an epidemic of asbestos related incurable lung diseases.
It is germane to note that Secretary,
Medical Education & Research, Chandigarh Administration has informed NHRC
that "a. White Asbestos (Chrysotile Asbestos) is implicated in so many
studies with the following diseases:-Mesothelioma (Cancer of Pleura), Lung
Cancer, Peritoneal Cancer, Asbestosis, And also consider as cause of following
cancers:- Ovarian Cancer, Laryngeal Cancer, Other Cancer, b. Diseases are
produced in the person involved in Asbestos Industry." It states that
"No. of cancer deaths due to asbestos requires further large scale study
from India" It informed, "It is definitely harmful material, causing
cancer and other related diseases."
It has come to light 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"
at page no. 28 of its concept paper presented by the central government at the
two-day 5th India-EU Joint Seminar on "Occupational Safety and
Health" during 19-20 September, 2011.
Dr H N Saiyed, former Director,
National Institute of Occupational Health (NIOH), Ahmedabad has stated that
paying compensation to the victims of asbestos related diseases is a long
process. He added, asbestos does not have a threshold limit. The best way to
stop the diseases is to stop its use. Politicians are hiding behind
absence of data which is not being collected. They shared this at conference organized
by Maulana Azad Medical College, New Delhi organised by Centre for Occupational
and Environmental Health in partnership with Drexel University, School of
Public Health, Collegium Ramazzini, central ministries of Government of India
and Heart of England, NHS Foundation Trust.
At the conference Dr. R.B. Raidas,
Deputy Director General, Directorate General of Factory Advice Service &
Labour Institutes. (DGFASLI) has revealed that 36 out of 1000 workers have been
found to be suffering from asbestos related diseases. He revealed that DGFASLI
had studied some 8, 000 workers and found that some 228 workers were exposed.
Notably, the Working Group of a
Planning Commission on Occupational Safety and Health for the Xth Five Year
Plan at the workplace in its 159 page report dated September 2001, the Working
Group noted that “The workers are also exposed to a host of hazardous
substances, which have a potential to cause serious occupational diseases such
as asbestosis…” It has recorded that various studies conducted by the Central
Labour Institute have revealed substantial prevalence of occupational health
disorders amongst the workers such as Asbestosis. The prevalence rate for
Asbestosis was reported to be 7.25%. It has been acknowledged that “At the same
time the number of occupational diseases reported is very meager…This makes it
evident that early identification of occupational diseases is required. It has
recommended that “To meet these requirements, measures are needed for
diagnostic facilities and appropriate training in the field of occupational
health. Occupational health hazards and diseases to the workmen employed in asbestos
industries are of great concern to the industries, Govt. and the public. The
Honorable Supreme Court of India in its judgement dated 27th January, 1995
relating to the Public Interest Litigation No.206 of 1986 had given several
directions concerning the protective measures to be taken against the hazards
of exposure to asbestos at workplaces such as mining and manufacturing
activities. In the light of Supreme Court directives, it is proposed to launch
a comprehensive programme for the protection of the health of the workers
engaged in hazardous industries with adequate mechanisms for monitoring of work
environment and diagnosis and control of disease.”
It is noteworthy that Dow Chemicals
Company has set aside $2.2 billion in compensation fund to address future asbestos-related
liabilities arising out of acquisition of Union Carbide Corporation and its
Indian investments in 1999. Many manufacturers of asbestos-containing products
have gone bankrupt in USA as a result of asbestos litigation.
It is relevant to note that World
Bank has a policy against asbestos since 1991. "The Bank increasingly
prefers to avoid financing asbestos use...Thus, at any mention of asbestos in
Bank-assisted projects, the Task Manager needs to exercise special care."
(World Bank’s Environmental Assessment Sourcebook, Vol. 3, World Bank Technical
Paper #154) The guideline says: “The onus is on proponents to show the
unavailability of alternatives.”
Although India has technically
banned asbestos mining, Russia, the world's biggest asbestos producer remains
India's biggest supplier of raw asbestos. India remains the world's biggest asbestos
importer. India is consuming 15 % of the total world asbestos production, as
per US Geological Survey estimates.
Notably, Ukraine has decided to
prolong anti-dumping duties on imports of asbestos-cement corrugated sheets
from Russia for an additional five years.
Given incontrovertible evidence, the
government ought to consider recommendations to take preventive steps by ensure
elimination of use of all kinds of asbestos as per the recommendations of the
Court, ILO and WHO.
There is an immediate need to create a register of asbestos workers and their
health records as per Court's decision and conduct an audit of the current
status of the victims of asbestos related diseases from the government hospital
records in the country and make it mandatory for medical colleges to provide
training for doctors. This is required so that they can diagnose diseases
caused by occupational, non-occupational and environmental exposures to killer
fibers and substances.
For Details: Gopal Krishna, ToxicsWatch
Alliance (TWA), Mb: 08227816731, 09818089660, E-mail:gopalkrishna1715@gmail.com, Web: www.toxicswatch.org
