*Note*: Pdf version of the BANI-TWA Letter is attached.


*Ban Asbestos Network of India (BANI)
ToxicsWatchAlliance (TWA) *



To

Chief Secretary
Government of Gujarat
Gandhinagar

Date: September 18, 2017

Subject: Like Japan, make Gujarat asbestos free to save residents,
consumers, workers and children from exposure to carcinogenic asbestos fibers

Sir,

With reference to the above mentioned subject and the recent visit of Shri
Shinzo Abe and his wife Smt Akie Abe to Gujarat accompanied by our Hon’ble
Prime Minister Shri PM Narendra Modi, we wish to bring the following facts
to your attention for immediate remedial action amidst unprecedented but
unacknowledged environmental and occupational health crisis in Gujarat:

1.      In 2002 a total ban on asbestos was announced in Japan, following
many years of failed attempt to undertake safe and controlled use. In 2004,
the Government of Japan began phasing out the use of asbestos with the
introduction of a partial ban; a total ban was promised by 2008. Japan’s
Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare has announced  total prohibition on
production,  import,  transfer,  provision  or  use  of  asbestos  or  any
material  containing  more than 0.1% asbestos by weight. Reference:
https://www.jisha.or.jp/english/pdf/Total_Ban_on_Asbestos_in_Japan-01.pdf

2.      As per Constitution of India, health is a state subject; therefore
similar initiative is required by States like Gujarat. Like Japanese
Government, Gujarat and other states of India too should announce that “We
requests that enterprises importing machinery or other products into India
confirm that the packing, gaskets, etc. of such products contain no
asbestos, based on supporting documents or analytical results before
importing such products.

3.      In a reply Joint Secretary, Labour and Employment Department,
Government of Gujarat has submitted the Action Taken Report furnished by
the Director Industrial Safety & Health, Gujarat State. In this reply it is
stated that “Asbestosis is declared as notifiable occupational diseases in
Third Schedule under section 89 and 90 of the Factories Act. The workers
working in the registered factories are eligible for compensation either
under the Employees Compensation Act, 1923 or under the Employees State
Insurance Act.”

4.      This reply reveals that “22 workers of Gujarat Composite Ltd,
Kaligam, Ahmedabad, who were suspected victims of asbestosis were sent for
medical check-up to National Institute of Occupational Health. Out of them,
following two workers were confirmed for Asbestosis by N.I.O.H.: (1) Shri
Hazarilal Manraj and (2) Shri Sahejram B Yadav.”  The relevant attached
document shows asbestos victims certified by NIOH, Ahmedabad are not being
given compensation as per Hon’ble Court's order.

5.      The reply discloses that “Letters dated 24/12/2002, 16/10/2006 and
19/1/2007 were issued to the Gujarat Composite Ltd. to pay compensation of
Rs 1 lac to the above two victims as per the direction of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court. Gujarat Composite Ltd. has denied to pay compensation to the
above workers as the company has challenged the report of N.I.O.H. This
fact is mentioned in the affidavit made before the Hon’ble Supreme Court
that the Gujarat Composite Ltd. has not paid the compensation to the
victims as per the directions given in the Writ Petition (C) No. 206/1986.
Thus, the State Government has taken all the steps required for the
protection of workers from Asbestosis in factories of Gujarat State.”  It
may be noted that Gujarat Composite Ltd (formerly named Digvijay Cement
Company) appears to be attempting to hide behind myriad corporate veils by
changing names and by outsourcing its work (to agencies like Apurva Vinimay
and Infrastructure Division).

6.      This reply does not disclose that there is a case of 62 workers
pending in the Gujarat Human Rights Commission wherein 23 workers have been
medically examined at the direction of the State Human Rights Commission
but their report has not been shared.

7.      This reply submits that Government of Gujarat has adopted the ILO
Convention on Asbestos (Convention 162) of 1986. It has ignored the ILO
Resolution of June 14, 2006, Its clause 2 reads: The ILO Asbestos
Convention, 1986 (No. 162), provides for the measures to be taken for the
prevention and control of, and protection of workers against, health
hazards due to occupational exposure to asbestos. Key provisions of
Convention No. 162 concern: – replacement of asbestos or of certain types
of asbestos or products containing asbestos with other materials or
products evaluated as less harmful, – total or partial prohibition of the
use of asbestos or of certain types of asbestos or products containing
asbestos in certain work processes, – measures to prevent or control the
release of asbestos dust into the air and to ensure that the exposure
limits or other exposure criteria are complied with and also to reduce
exposure to as low a level as is reasonably practicable.  Its clause 4 in
paragraph 3 reads: “The Resolution also underlined that the ILO Convention
on Safety in the Use of Asbestos, No. 162, should not be used to provide a
justification for, or endorsement of, the continued use of asbestos.”

8.      This Resolution concerning asbestos was adopted by the
International Labour Conference at its 95th Session in 2006 calls for “the
elimination of the future use of asbestos and the identification and proper
management of asbestos currently in place as the most effective means to
protect workers from asbestos exposure and to prevent future
asbestos-related diseases and deaths”.

9.      In his reply Joint Secretary, Labour and Employment Department,
Government of Gujarat has enclosed the notification of Union Ministry of
Labour and Employment constituting an Advisory Committee in pursuance of
the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court.

10.  There are four terms of reference (TOR) of this Advisory Committee.
Two of these TORs deal with ‘ILO guidelines’ and ‘fresh resolution passed
by ILO”. The reply does not recognize that the ‘fresh resolution passed by
ILO’ refers to the above mentioned June 2006 resolution.

11.  Director Industrial Safety & Health, Gujarat State has filed the
‘Compliance Report of Para 16 of Directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 260 of 2004. This document submits that “Use of
Crocidolite and product containing this fiber is prohibited in the State as
per the guide line of the ILO convention 162 for Asbestos. This report does
not reveal how Hon’ble Court’s direction regarding ‘fresh resolution passed
by ILO” seeking elimination of future use of asbestos is being complied
with.

12.  In a separate evasive reply, Senior Environment Engineer, Gujarat
Pollution Control Board has failed to reveal the status of asbestos related
diseases in the asbestos based factories in the State and the procurement
of asbestos based products by the State Government and the residents of the
State. It does concede that “Asbestos” is identified as having hazardous
properties with regard to health effects but its reply is highly
unsatisfactory given the fact that Gujarat is emerging as the asbestos
disease capital of India. In fact the Writ Petition (Civil) No. 206 of 1986
in which the Hon’ble Supreme Court gave the directions with regard to
adverse impact of asbestos industry in 1995 was filed due to cases of
asbestos victims in Gujarat.

13.  Even this somewhat lackadaisical letter which confines itself to the
Asbestos containing material management at Bhavnagar’s Alang Ship Breaking
Yard generated during shipbreaking activity, it has not disclosed the
findings of the study by National Institute of Occupational Health (NIOH),
Ahmedabad undertaken in compliance of the instructions of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court constituted Technical Experts Committee. The same was filed
in the Hon’ble Court revealing how 16 % of the workers on the Alang beach
involved in ship breaking are exposed to asbestos fibers.

14.  It is noteworthy that the UN Special Rapporteur who visited Alang,
Gujarat took note of the adverse effects of the movement and dumping of
toxic and dangerous products and wastes on the enjoyment of human rights.
He noted, “most workers, but reportedly also a number of yard owners, are
not aware of the serious life-threatening work-related diseases which may
result from long-term exposure to toxic and hazardous substances and
materials present on end-of-life ships. In particular, it appears that the
majority of the workforce and the local population do not know the adverse
consequences of prolonged exposure to asbestos dusts and fibres and are not
familiar with the precautions that need to be taken to handle
asbestos-containing materials.” Almost all the workers are migrant workers
from UP, Bihar, Jharkahnd and Odisha. There is no documentation of the
deaths and diseases due to exposures to asbestos fibers of these workers
but lack of documentation does not mean absence of occupational health
crisis in Alang.

15.  It has come to light from the Office Memorandum dated May 2011 that
Ministry of Environment & Forests (MoEF)’s Standing Monitoring Committee
(SMC) on Shipbreaking has suggested that monitoring of asbestos in ambient
air at shipbreaking yards on Alang beach “shall be commissioned by GMB for
carrying out the same by a reputed institute like NIOH, as a onetime
study.” The facts is Asbestos cannot be handled safely or in a controlled
manner. Therefore, International Labour Organisation’s resolution of June
2006 and World Health Organisation’s resolution of 2005 seek elimination of
future use of asbestos. Indian workers in general and migrant workers of
Alang should not be made to handle asbestos under any situation.

16.  The above mentioned reply does not reveal the health status of the
workers at the asbestos cement sheet plant in Kachchh in Gujarat operated
by Ramco Industries. It is totally silent about the health impact of
asbestos units like Charminar Asbestos, Royal Asbestos, Supreme Asbestos
Trading Company,  Eagle Asbestos Pvt Ltd, Shree Khodiyar Asbestos Company,
Shiv Shakti Enterprises, Royal Asbestos and several others. The reply of
Gujarat Government has failed to report whether Gujarat State has the
environmental and occupational health infrastructure in place to diagnose
asbestos related diseases.

In the context of these facts we submit that State Government should ensure
decontamination of asbestos from the old schools and ensure that no
asbestos roofs or any asbestos material is used in any school or public or
private building in Gujarat.


We submit that Gujarat Government should take steps to ensure that only
non-asbestos building material and water supply pipes etc are procured. A
register of asbestos laden buildings and victims of asbestos related
diseases should be created. A compensation fund for the victims of primary
and secondary exposure must be established.


We submit that substitutes for asbestos based products are not limited to
products that simply replace asbestos with another material (e.g., PVA and
cellulose in fiber-cement roofing sheet).  There are also a number of
wholly different products that can replace the asbestos products. It is
noteworthy that asbestos of all kinds including white chrysotile asbestos
is banned in some 60 countries.


While asbestos mining is technically banned in our country, in a shocking
case of inconsistency India continues to import asbestos from asbestos
producing countries like Russia, Brazil Kazakhstan and China. Trade in
asbestos waste (dust and fiber) is also banned.  Now that Brazil’s Federal
Supreme Court has declared use of asbestos as unconstitutional, it is most
likely that after Canada which used to be a supplier of asbestos to India
even Brazil too will stop being supplier to India.


We submit that by letter dated 9th July, 1986  from Union Ministry of
Steel, Mines & Coal, Government of India with reference no.
7/23/84-AM-III/AM-VI there is a stay on grant of new mining lease for
asbestos mineral and renewal of the leases. Reiterating the same in June
1993, central government stopped the renewal of existing mining leases of
asbestos. The mining activity was banned by Union Ministry of Mines.  As a
result at present no permission is being given for new mining lease of
asbestos mineral and no lease is being renewed. At present no lease of
asbestos mineral is approved/or in force in the country.


It is strange that while mining of asbestos is banned in the country due to
adverse health impact, the same is being imported from Russia, Kazakhstan,
Kyrgyzstan and Zimbabwe. It high time governments stopped practicing such
untenable policies displaying manifest double standards.


Given the fact that these days what Gujarat thinks today, rest of India
thinks tomorrow, it is hoped that rest India will follow the example.


In view of the above mentioned facts, we demand that all the asbestos based
companies should be asked to switch non-asbestos materials in the light of
the fact that some 60 countries have banned all kinds of asbestos including
white chrysotile asbestos mineral fibers that causes incurable lung cancer
according to World Health Organisation (WHO). This will go a long way in
combating fatal diseases caused corporate crimes and in making Gujarat the
first state in the country to adopt zero-tolerance policy towards these
killer mineral fibers.


We will have happy to share required documents in this regard.

Thanking you in anticipation

Warm Regards
Dr Gopal Krishna

Ban Asbestos Network of India (BANI)
ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA)
Mb: 08227816731, 09818089660
[email protected]
Web: www.asbestosfreeindoa.org,  www.toxicswatch.org

Cc

Hon’ble Chief Minister, Government of Gujarat

Hon’ble Union Minister of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India

Hon’ble Union Minister of Commerce & Industry, Government of India

Hon’ble Union Minister of Environment, Forest, Climate Change, Science &
Technology and Earth Sciences, Government of India



"We may admire what he does, but we despise what he is."-referring to
humans who act mechanically on instructions-------Wilhelm von Humboldt, 1792



--

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send an email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Attachment: BANI TWA Letter to Gujarat Government September 18, 2017.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document

Reply via email to