1. Business and human rights 2 case studies India and Ivory Coast Sciences Po – 24 mars 2013 Amnesty International France

2. India, 1984 Intervention Sciences Po – 24 mars 2013  Shortly before midnight on the 2 December 1984 approximately 54 pounds of methyl isocyanate (MIC) and other products leaked into the atmosphere from Union Carbide’s pesticide plant in Bhopal  Between 7,000 and 10,000 women, men and children died in the immediate aftermath of the leak, and a further. 15,000 died in the following months and years  More than 25 years later, the site has not been cleaned up  more than 100,000 people continue to suffer from health problems without the medical care they need, and survivors are still awaiting fair compensation and full redress for their suffering. © Raveendran/AFP/GettyImages

3. Human rights consequences  Right to health (women)  Right to a clean and healthy environment  Right to work  Most of those affected were very poor, and the effects of the gas leak caused them to lose their principal or only source of income  Many families lost their main wage earners.  Livestock owned by families died.  Chronic illness and mental distress affected the capacity of many to work and earn their livelihoods.  Women often bore the additional burden, sleeping very little due to an increased workload alongside household duties, childcare and care for relatives whose health had been impaired by the gas leak.  Right to an effective remedy Intervention à Sciences Po – 24 mars 2013

4. Côte d’Ivoire, 2006  20th of August in the morning, inhabitants of Abidjan wakes up :  headaches  Skin irritations  Breath problems  Medical centers overwelhmed (100.000 people consulted medical centers)  15 or 17 people deceaded

5.  In late 2005 Trafigura decided to buy large amounts of unrefined petroleum called coker naphtha from PMI Trading Ltd, which is the commercial arm of Mexico’s state-owned petroleum company, PEMEX. Trafigura intended to use the coker naphtha as a cheap blendstock for fuels. They decided to refine the oil themselves  Trafigura is the world’s third largest independent oil trader. It handles every element involved in the sourcing and trading of crude oil, petroleum products, …for industrial consumers (BP, Total, Shell, Chevron..)  Trafigura Beheer BV is the group holding company, incorporated in the Netherlands. Trafigura Ltd. is based in London and acts as the coordinating entity for a substantial proportion of the group’s oil operations. Puma Energy Côte d’Ivoire is Trafigura’s wholly owned subsidiary in Côte d’Ivoire Londres : siège opérationnel Amsterdam: adresse fiscale Lucerne : siège social How the waste was created

6. The journey of the waste: Probo Koala More than 500m3 of waste higtly toxic was stored It was owned by a company based in the Marshall Island sailed under the Panamanian flag Trafigura time- chartered (a form of lease The Probo Koala was under the control of its master, Captain Chertov – from the Ukraine A Greek-based company, Prime Marine Management, appears to have played the role of management company for the ship at the time of the event A Greek-based company, Prime Marine Management, appears to have played the role of management company for the ship at the time of the event A Greek-based company, Prime Marine Management, appears to have played the role of management company for the ship at the time of the event A Greek-based company, appears to have played the role of management company for the ship at the time of the event

7. Dumping in Abidjan  Trafigura finds a sub- contractor compagnie Tommy  Tommy accepted to « discharge » slops and not to treat it…  The Compagnie Tommy received its licence to operate one month before the dumping (at the time where the boat was refused in Amsterdam)

8. Human rights consequences  Right to food, environment, health  Right to life, to work  Right to information  Right to an effective remedy

9. Amnesty International’s analysis Some transnational corporations are involved in human rights abuses and violations. However, they are not subjects of international law. They have a much power than individuals and populations but they determine their lives they have a much stronger legal protection : they often use complex legal arrangements (Parent companies, subsidiaries, etc.) that make them opaque and it is difficult to identify those who truly control the operations States fail to protect victims of harmful actions of transnational corporations Rights’ holders do not have access to essential information