In this investigation, Gideon Sarpong delves into the intricacies of the European Commission’s (EC) fishery policies, focusing on the Commission’s actions, or lack thereof, in West Africa. This complex web encompasses critical issues such as flag of convenience, the targeting and export of over exploited small pelagic fish by EU registered vessels flying the flag of Cameroon and the persistent challenge of IUU (Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated) fishing practices in West Africa.

BISSAU, Guinea-Bissau — Off the coast of West Africa, from Guinea Bissau to Mauritania, the sighting of the Pilot Whale vessel is a commonplace occurrence. This fishing ship, stretching 96 meters in length, is nearly as extensive as a 100-meter track.

This colossal vessel diligently hauls in significant quantities of small pelagic fish, particularly sardinella, mackerel, and sardines – that form the lifeblood of artisanal fishers in the region.

What is striking is the flag it flies – the vibrant green, red, and yellow emblem of Cameroon.

However, beyond this flag, there is very little that connects the Pilot Whale to Cameroon. In fact, this vessel, also known as Mikhail Verbitskiy, is just one example of many vessels uncovered during this investigation owned and operated by European-based companies accused of participating in IUU related activities while cleverly exploiting the concept of a “flag of convenience.”

In 2020, the Environmental Justice Foundation (EJF), an international organisation committed to monitoring economic and environmental abuses, designated Cameroon’s flag as a “flag of convenience.”

According to marine experts, this label is a tool used by unscrupulous operators to escape accountability for illegal fishing, human rights violations, and other crimes through the manipulation of vessel registrations.

EJF’s findings also revealed a disconcerting fact: more than half (55%) of the vessels in Cameroon’s fleet had been added in the last five years. Even more noteworthy, these new vessels constituted 90% of the fleet’s total tonnage, with 94% of these newcomers under foreign, non-Cameroonian ownership. Nearly all of them operated outside of Cameroon’s waters.

The “Red Card” and EC’s ‘Hypocritical’ Response

This concerning state of affairs led to the issuance of a “Red Card,” by the European Commission in January 2023. Central to this punitive action was the claim of “weak flag state control” which contributed to illegal fishing practices on an international scale.

In issuing the Red Card to Cameroon, the EC announced that, “Member States shall refuse the importation of fishery products from Cameroon even when accompanied by catch certificates,” effectively banning fish imports from the country. This measure took effect immediately following the Red Card’s issuance in January 2023.

In a surprising twist, the investigation uncovered a disquieting reality. Twelve vessels, owned, managed, or associated with companies tied to the European Union, continue to raise the flag of Cameroon.

What’s even more striking is, an analysis of trade data from the European Market Observatory for fisheries and aquaculture (EUMOFA) platform revealed that nearly €10 million worth of fish had entered the EU from Cameroon between January 2023 and September 2023, despite the ban imposed by the European Commission.

Astonishingly, the EC has yet to take any substantive actions against these companies and the continuous flow of fish from Cameroon into the EU market.

An official of the EU IUU Fishing Coalition stressed that these fishing vessels are able to take advantage of what the European Commission perceives as “Cameroon’s lax fisheries controls, while financial proceeds remain within the EU.”

Beatrice Gorez, the coordinator for the Coalition for Fair Fisheries Arrangements, a consortium of organizations committed to shedding light on the impacts of EU-African fisheries agreements, poignantly asks, “Should the European Union not also seek to target these European based companies?”

Unmasking EU Companies and the Cameroonian Illusion

In a disturbing revelation, the Ocean Whale Fishing Company, founded in 2016, has emerged as a shadowy player in the African fishing industry. Operating a fleet of five fishing vessels across the continent, Ocean Whale’s practices have raised eyebrows, as it exploits regulatory gaps and threatens West Africa’s small pelagic fish stocks, a lifeline for local artisanal fishers.

The company which owns the Pilot Whale purports to be a legitimate entity, officially registered in Malta under the registration number C76874. However, the investigation reveals that the company’s operations transcend borders, exposing an unsettling discrepancy between its registration and the scope of its activities.

What adds a layer of intrigue to this unfolding story is the peculiar choice of flags for its five industrial-sized vessels: the Right Whale, Pilot Whale, Sei Whale, Grey Whale, and the Crystal Hope. Despite operating well outside the boundaries of Cameroon, these vessels proudly fly the Cameroonian flag, sparking questions about the motivation behind such a choice.

The heart of this controversy lies in Ocean Whale’s voracious pursuit of small pelagic fish, a resource in grave peril in West African waters according to scientists. Among these fish stocks, sardinella holds a special place, cherished for its role as a traditional food source for West African communities.

Not only is it affordable and critical to food security in places like Guinea-Bissau and Mauritania, but it also provides essential animal protein, micronutrients, and fatty acids for millions across the region.

AIS data analysed exposed Ocean Whale’s predatory fishing practices within the Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ) of Mauritania, Guinea-Bissau, Angola, and Namibia. These vessels plunder the very heart of West Africa’s maritime resources, disregarding scientific concerns about sustainability.

In October 2023, the Joint Scientific Committee, tasked with overseeing the implementation of the EU-Mauritania fisheries agreement issued a report that amounted to an indictment of EU fishing fleets in the West African region.

The report noted that the EU fleet fishing for small pelagic in West Africa, particularly the East European vessels, continue to “disregard their obligations to embark scientific observers on board,” while they fish unsustainably.

The small pelagic fish, known for their migratory patterns, traverse the EEZs of several West African states, creating a complex web of overfishing and exploitation.

Food and Agricultural Organisation data spanning several years, paints a grim picture of sardinella overexploitation in the regions where Ocean Whale Company operates. This alarming trend puts the delicate marine ecosystem on the brink of collapse, jeopardizing both local livelihoods and regional food security.

Fisheries expert Beatrice Gorez, a prominent voice in this investigation, raises a pertinent concern: “This is really a black spot in the European policy, because at the moment there is very little in terms of legislative tools for the EU to act against these vessels where the beneficial owners are still European but are taking the flag of another country.”

She further emphasized the need for the EC to take “decisive measures against EU-based individuals and companies that own or manage vessels engaged in unsustainable fishing practices in foreign territories.”

Gorez’s plea is underscored by the fact that in Mauritania, Guinea-Bissau and other West Africa states, there is a glaring “absence of proper regional management for small pelagic fish,” leaving the door open for “exploitative practices.” In her view, EU vessels, whether EU-flagged or under the Cameroon flag, should be prohibited from accessing these vulnerable waters.

As this investigation delves deeper, a disturbing pattern emerges, shedding light on the extent of the use of Cameroon’s flag as a “flag of convenience” by unscrupulous fishing operators.

In addition to Ocean Whale, data from the Global Fishing Watch (GFW) uncovered seven more fishing vessels that operate under the Cameroon flag while conducting their activities far beyond the nation’s territorial waters.

These vessels, identified as the Marshal Krylov, Marshal Vasilevskiy, Marshal Novikov, Vega (also Known As Skagen), Sveaborg, Helsingfors, and Frederickshamn (alternatively known as Fredrikshamn), have raised concerns about the exploitation of the Cameroonian flag for nefarious purposes.

The practice of using flags of convenience allows these operators to evade scrutiny and exploit regulatory gaps, creating a significant challenge for international efforts to monitor and regulate fishing activities said Beatrice Gorez.

The investigation unearthed a Latvian connection within this perplexing web of operations. The vessels Marshal Krylov, Marshal Vasilevskiy, and Marshal Novikov are currently owned by the Latvian company BALTREIDS (Oceanic Fisheries Nb). The origins of BALTREIDS trace back to the Soviet Union, further adding to the complexity of the situation.

It’s worth noting that BALTREIDS, like Ocean Whale, focuses on small pelagic fish in West African waters, particularly in the Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ) of countries like Mauritania. This overlaps with accusations of past IUU fishing-related activities in West Africa. Such allegations point to a disturbing trend of disregard for environmental and regulatory norms in these critical fishing grounds.

Satellite data from Equasis provides insight into the recent movements of the MARSHAL KRYLOV and MARSHAL VASILEVSKIY. Their last port call was recorded in Mauritania in October 2023, indicating their ongoing presence and activities in West African waters.

The remaining ships, Sveaborg, Helsingfors, and Fredrikshamn, are listed as being owned by Camelford, Mont Albert, and Langwarrin, respectively, all of which are companies based in Cyprus, according to GFW data. The last vessel, Vega, was previously owned by Bovina Limited, also a Cyprus-based entity, but is presently controlled by Pescado in Saint Vincent and the Grenadines.

Ocean Whale Company and other involved entities failed to respond to our requests for comment.

Dr. Aristide Takoukam, a dedicated conservationist and the founder of the African Marine Mammal Conservation Organization (AMMCO), characterized the actions of these large fishing vessels operating in the EZZ of West Africa as having “detrimental and destructive economic ramifications.” He pointed out that the intrusion of some large foreign vessels into areas designated for local fishermen leads to “conflicts, as these vessels target the primary livelihood of artisanal fishermen, thereby jeopardizing food security.”

SFPAs & Export of overfished Small Pelagic to Europe

The EU currently operates several Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreements (SFPAs) or bilateral fishing agreement that allows EU vessels to fish in the EEZ of third countries. It currently holds 11 active agreements with countries across Africa including Mauritania and Guinea-Bissau which sets out fish access limits in exchange for financial contribution.

All European vessels, whether operating under SFPAs or private agreements, are subject to the stringent regulations outlined in the SMEFF (Sustainable Management of External Fishing Fleets) framework. This framework mandates sustainable fishing practices.

However, the situation takes a curious turn when it comes to Cameroon-flagged trawlers. These vessels can potentially exceed the EU-imposed limits without being required to offload their catches in Mauritania or Guinea-Bissau.

A report by IUU Watch reveals a concerning trend among vessel owners who opt for Flags of Convenience. Such choices appear to prioritize gaining access to a multitude of countries’ EEZs with little regard for sustainable fishing practices and accountability.

The report noted: “In the case of EU vessels, abusive reflagging may occur to circumvent the exclusivity clause set out in official EU access agreements with non-EU countries (SFPAs). According to this exclusivity clause, EU flagged fishing vessels are not permitted to operate in the waters of the non-EU country in which an SFPA is in force unless they hold a fishing authorisation which has been issued in accordance with that agreement.”

“This practice undermines the very essence of the SMEFF regulations, endangering marine ecosystems and the livelihoods of local communities,” said an EU official speaking on condition of anonymity.

The investigation also exposed a disconcerting paradox in the EC’s import policies. Despite a ban on importing fishery products from Cameroon, close to €10 million worth of these products found their way into various EU countries by September 2023.

This unsettling data, drawn from the EUMOFA platform, drew scrutiny from the EC, which contested the figure. The Commission admitted that fishery products from Cameroon entered the union in 2023, albeit in very small quantities. However, when investigators requested for the data to substantiate their claim, an official from the EC failed to provide it.

The EC’s argument hinged on the claim that these imports fell outside the scope of their “catch certification scheme,” citing examples like “oysters and ornamental fish” which it argued was “mainly imported by France and Belgium.”

Further analysis of fishery export data from EUMOFA revealed another startling revelation. Fish worth over €150 million comprising overfished species like small pelagic had entered the EU from Mauritania and Guinea Bissau as at September 2023.

In response to this investigation, the EC’s spokesperson invoked Article 17 of the IUU (Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated) Regulation, which empowers EU Member States to implement verification procedures when importing fishery products.

The spokesperson argued that, “the Commission is “supporting the effective implementation of the catch certification scheme by the Member States through the development of IT CATCH, an IT system aiming at digitalising catch certification data and harmonising procedures.

An audit of the current EU CATCH controls showed that the “measures in place to combat illegal fishing are only partly effective,” with the reduced effectiveness attributed to the inconsistent application of inspections and penalties by Member States.

Government officials in both Mauritania and Guinea-Bissau did not immediately respond to a message requesting comment.

Voices of struggle amidst ecological decline, Path Forward

The far-reaching implications of this ecological crisis extend well beyond the ocean’s shores, permeating the lives of local communities.

During a meeting with EU parliamentarians in June 2023, Antónia Adama Djaló, Vice President of the African Confederation of Artisanal Fisheries Organisations, made a compelling argument. She emphasized, “All too often, our decision-makers and their partners fail to take action and neglect our needs.”

“On paper, our governments and the international community express support for us, however, their actions frequently prioritize the interests of sectors promising significant short-term financial gains, such as industrial fishing, mining, gas exploitation, and coastal tourism” she said.

“This threatens the future of our communities. The time for words is over.”

In the heart of these hardships are the individuals who directly depend on the sea for their livelihoods, and their voices speak volumes about the challenges they face.

Abdoulaye Kaba, a 35-year-old resident of Bissau, expressed his profound frustration, revealing, “The biggest challenge has been the last decade. We only get a handful of catch after toiling for several hours at sea.”

He emphasized that the once-lucrative profession of artisanal fishing had lost its economic appeal, a stark testament to the magnitude of the crisis.

For local fishmongers, predominantly women, the struggle is no less dire. Juliet Efemena, a fish processor in her 30s, articulated her anguish, saying, “It gets worse and worse every year. All our fish is stolen by the big vessels. We do not know what to do.”

Their poignant words paint a picture of despair as they grapple with the relentless encroachment of industrial fishing on their traditional way of life.

Guinea Bissau’s plight in the face of this declining fish stock is underscored by its disheartening performance in the 2021 IUU Fishing Index. The country found itself among the ten worst-performing nations, failing to uphold critical transparency and discrimination clauses within its SFPAs with the European Commission. This does not only reflect systemic deficiencies in the management of its fisheries but also poses a grave threat to the well-being of its citizens.

Fisheries expert Beatrice Gorez outlines a potential path forward through the implementation of the ministerial statement by the Organization of African, Caribbean, and Pacific States. This statement calls on countries involved to “collect information about beneficial owners of the vessels they flag in the country.”

By taking this step, nations can foster greater accountability and sustainability in the fishing industry, a move long overdue she argued.

However, her critique of the European Commission’s current transparency efforts is uncompromising. She characterizes them as “opaque and cosmetic,” stressing that the crucial initial step in countering Flags of Convenience is the creation of a “European register of beneficial owners for fishing companies that is publicly accessible.”

Juliet Efemena and fishmongers like her, whose lives are intricately linked to the sea, may not be well-versed in the complexities of the broader fisheries policies, but their message is crystal clear. In her words, “we simply need our fish to provide for our families.”

The urgency of their appeal serves as a stark reminder of the need for immediate and decisive action to protect both their traditional way of life and the fragile marine ecosystem on which it depends.

Report by Gideon Sarpong, Pulitzer Ocean Reporting Fellow.

The post The Dark Seas of Deception:Unmasking EU fisheries in West Africa’s troubled waters appeared first on iWatch Africa.

DIBOMBARI, Cameroon — “We are going through hell,” the haunting words of Marie Noel resonate with a mix of despair and fortitude. Marie, an activist in her 50s hailing from the village of Souza near Dibombari Socapalm Plantation, paints a somber portrait of her community’s plight. Amidst the cruel grip of hardship, they’ve been driven to the brink, forced to scavenge “Socapalm fruits and nuts” in a desperate bid to quell their gnawing hunger.

In 2006, Société Camerounaise de Palmeraies (Socapalm), a subsidiary of plantation giant, Socfin, embarked on an ambitious endeavor – the cultivation of palm plantations within Dibombari’s lush rainforest expanse in Cameroon. Yet, beneath the veneer of progress lies a tapestry of troubling accusations. Allegations of forcible land displacement, pollution of vital water sources, the decimation of delicate ecosystems, and the sacrilegious intrusion into ancestral lands cast a dark shadow over the company’s operations.

A three-month investigation conducted by Gideon Sarpong and Robert Abunaw puts the spotlight on these unsettling truths. At the core of this narrative looms a protracted legal clash waged in French courts – Sherpa et al. vs Socfin. This ten-year legal drama, ostensibly conceived to quell the quagmire of land conflicts, ecological turmoil, and the cries of the aggrieved, paradoxically seems to amplify the existing travails of these marginalized communities. Thousands, bereft of their means of livelihood, have been forced into the murky realm of petty criminality within the very bowels of Socapalm’s sprawling plantations – a bitter struggle for survival in the face of adversity.

Marie Noel placed the blame squarely on the government of Cameroon and Socfin, accusing the state of leasing all their precious farmlands to the multinational plantation company, and its local subsidiaries.

In her words, this decision has left the neighboring villagers with “nothing, as all their lands have been locked up in a 60-year lease to Socapalm.”

Despite all the controversies, the Socapalm plantation site situated in Dibombari secured a Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) certification in 2022. This certification is widely considered a mark of sustainable and environmentally conscious production, indicating that the site adheres to the lowest possible environmental impact standards.

However, a review of a July 2023 EarthWorm Foundation (EF) report, commissioned by none other than Socfin, casts a long shadow over the company concerning its Dibombari operations. The report confirmed accusations of severe improprieties, including the denial of livelihoods and land displacements, sexual harassment of local communities, water pollution resulting in a lack of access to clean drinking water, and the encroachment of sacred sites by the company’s sprawling plantations.

These findings, which are consistent with our own reporting, raise significant concerns about the RSPO certification granted to Socapalm’s Dibombari site. With documented instances of several cases of abuse, many are left wondering how the company managed to obtain its RSPO certification despite seemingly falling short of meeting crucial international regulations.

Mr. Emmanuel Elong, the president of SYNAPARCAM, a Cameroonian association defending the indigenous rights of local communities, expressed deep bewilderment over the continued granting of RSPO certifications to Socapalm.

“In the face of overwhelming evidence of misconduct and questionable practices, there are mounting questions about the legitimacy and effectiveness of the RSPO certification process,” he argued.

In response to this investigation, RSPO contented that “Socapalm Dibombari’s operating unit underwent an audit by the independent third-party certification body, BSI Services Malaysia Sdn. Bhd, who granted certification.”

RSPO further explained that it has “reviewed the EF report against the audit conducted by BSI and will advise BSI to review and verify the findings of the EF investigation. At their discretion, BSI will further investigate/verify those reports/issues/allegations via an additional audit or during its annual surveillance audit.”

The implications of these findings shed light on the ongoing challenges faced by the affected communities, raising urgent questions about the responsibility of both corporate entities and the government to protect the rights and well-being of their citizens.

Laura Bourgeois, Advocacy and Litigation officer for Sherpa, an international NGO dedicated to advocacy and litigation, notes: “The recurring problems we hear from community leaders on the frontline is that community members, stakeholders, are not included in the process and that the certification initiatives make the problems even worse.”

A Decade of Legal Strife and Its Unfolding Impact

Socfin in August 2023 released an action plan to address the findings of Earthworm’s report.

However, considering the company’s track record in Cameroon, skepticism arises among many regarding their commitment to follow through on these claims.

A representative for Socapalm declined to comment on this investigation, pointing to information available on Socfin’s official website.

In 2013, Sherpa initiated mediation with Bolloré, the majority owner of Socfin, to find resolutions to the persistent issues plaguing the plantations and their surroundings. This dialogue culminated in an action plan, where Bolloré pledged to leverage their influence to tackle these problems.

Yet, despite the agreed-upon plan, Bolloré failed to fulfill its commitments, prompting Sherpa and other organizations to initiate legal proceedings against the French multinational. A decade-long courtroom saga ensued, adding a further layer of complexity to the challenges endured by communities ensnared in Socapalm’s operational embrace.

“The non-implementation of the action plan agreed upon in 2013 confirms it is an absolute necessity, when possible, to have mandatory legislation in the field of business and human rights,” asserts Laura Bourgeois. She adds: “Otherwise, soft mechanisms mean that communities remain dependent upon the goodwill of companies. When mandatory legislation does not seem like an option, it seems appropriate to consider legal avenues to harden soft law.”

This legal battle in the French courts to compel the execution of the action plan, and to ensure the delivery of promised remedies, has aggravated the already dire challenges faced by some communities within the operational sphere of Socapalm.

In Kilombo, a village that is situated at the heart of Socapalm Kienke plantation in Cameroon, Yengue Jean’s frustration with the company is palpable. She characterized the company as “irresponsible” and went on to reveal that a borehole, ostensibly installed to benefit the village, was “primarily utilized to irrigate the adjacent Socapalm nursery.”

Jean lamented, “The residents are now compelled to depend on a nearby stream tainted with pollutants,” while sorrowfully noting, “Our once thriving forests have vanished, leaving us without the vital resources to sustain our traditional hunting practices.”

Deforestation and the new European Union (EU) Law

Startling findings from Global Witness showcase the unsettling consequence of industrial palm and rubber plantations across the expanse of West and Central Africa, witnessing the loss of nearly 52,000 hectares of ecologically rainforest since the turn of the century—equivalent to an expanse 16 times the size of Brussels.

A 2021 study led by Cameroonian researcher Professor Tchindjang Mesmin also revealed that palm oil cultivation in the dense forest regions of Cameroon has emerged as the principal catalyst behind deforestation since the year 1990.

In a sharp critique, Mr. Elong blamed the government of Cameroon for its perceived failure to tackle crucial issues, alleging that the administration displays “worrisome indications of corruption,”, especially in the enforcement of retrocession agreements between Socfin and the State.

Cameroon’s Minister of Environment and Protection of Nature, Pierre Hélé did not respond to our requests for comment.

In June 2023, the EU introduced regulations on deforested products to address the challenge of rubber and oil plantation-driven deforestation,

The EU remains the biggest export destination for palm oil and rubber cultivation from West Africa. Data from the Observatory of Economic Complexity shows that the EU imported over $500 million worth of natural rubber from West Africa in 2020 making natural rubber the EU’s most significant import from West Africa in terms of rainforest destruction.

The effect has been the loss of critical rainforests, with a damning impact on local communities, biodiversity, and the environment.

Dr. Addo Koranteng, Senior Research Fellow at the Institute of Research Innovation and Development in Ghana lauded the EU’s legislative action against deforestation.

Nonetheless, his commendation is accompanied by a stark warning: “The expansion of rubber plantations must be halted as these rubber-producing trees compete with other forest trees for the already depleted forest land.”

Dr. Koranteng’s concerns are underscored by an inconvenient truth: “As world market prices surge and global demand exacerbate, the extent of deforestation from these commodities will keep on increasing,” he explained.

Recent research compounds the urgency of the situation. Estimates project a need for an astounding 4.3 to 8.5 million hectares of new plantations to meet the mounting demand for natural rubber by the year 2024. Experts are ringing alarm bells, cautioning that this trajectory, if left unchecked, will unleash a cataclysmic toll on precious forests around the world.

So far, our investigation has revealed a notable absence: Neither Socfin nor its Cameroon-based subsidiaries currently have made any commitment to the High Carbon Stock Approach (HCSA), the de-facto standard for zero deforestation in the sector.

Greenpeace has sounded a dire warning, asserting that Socfin’s steadfast refusal to adopt a zero-deforestation policy poses an ominous and substantial threat to the forests of Cameroon, within which the company operates.

Socfin did not respond to email inquiries seeking comment.

Way Forward

A decade-long saga of legal battles in French courts has so far yielded little solace for the numerous villagers residing in proximity to Socapalm plantations.

For these villagers whose ancestral lands have been lost to the expansive reach of Socapalm’s plantations, the passage of time has failed to bring about the restitution they so desperately seek.

“The plight we face is beyond words – a dire and miserable reality,” said villagers from Bikondo and Lendi.

There is however a glimmer of hope as legal practitioner, Agboranyor Jeniffer, with a wealth of expertise in Cameroon’s Common Law and Administrative Court, believes there might be a viable solution on the horizon.

Peering into the intricacies of Prime Ministerial Decree No. 2022/5074PM, she points out a potential avenue: the possibility of initiating legal action against the Government of Cameroon. She cites Section 2(3) of Law No. 2006/022, enacted on December 29, 2006, which lays down the framework for the organization and operation of administrative courts in Cameroon.

“Under this legal framework, the court’s jurisdiction extends to pivotal matters including, but not limited to; claims for compensation due to losses caused by administrative actions and disputes centered around state-owned land,” she explained.

Jeniffer’s analysis offers a flicker of optimism for those who have long grappled with the repercussions of Socapalm’s operations.

As the legal landscape continues to evolve, these insights may hold the potential to redress grievances, foster justice, and pave the way for meaningful change in the lives of the affected communities.

Reporting by Gideon Sarpong and Robert Abunaw. Writing and editing by Gideon Sarpong.

The post Whispers of Injustice: Socfin’s decade of legal battle echoing in communities across Cameroon appeared first on iWatch Africa.

“Truth is that the rubbish is too much. Sometimes we are not even able to breathe. We can’t do anything about it,” said Hassan, who moved from Tamale in the Northern Region of Ghana to Accra over a decade ago.

Working as a scrap dealer in Ghana can sometimes be a rewarding venture despite its associated health risks. As scrap dealer, one can earn a daily average income of over GHC100 (17USD). This figure is quite high by Ghanaian standards where current daily minimum wage is GH¢ 12.53 (2USD).

Hassan, is among the hundreds of young men and women who travel from the northern part of Ghana to the capital city of Accra in search of jobs each year. He now spends his days sifting through e-waste that finds its way to the dump site, smashing old television sets, refrigerators and air conditioners in search of valuable parts to recover copper.

 He sometimes burns insulated cables although he insists – “that is now the job of the younger guys” at the site as he points in their direction.

According to the environmental watchdog organization, the Basel Action Network(BAN), an estimated that 352,474 metric tonnes of electronic waste (an equivalent of 2.5 billion smart phones) is illegally shipped from the EU to developing countries each year. The report noted that African countries such as Ghana, Nigeria and Tanzania were among the countries most targeted by Europe’s e-waste exporters.

The Agbogbloshie dump is as a result of the world’s increasing demand for electronic equipment as consumers continually upgrade their devices and discard older ones. These discarded electronics mainly from Europe and the United States often labeled as second-hand products are delivered in huge containers and end up on the shores of developing countries.

A four-month investigation by Gideon Sarpong based on interviews with dozens of environmental experts, import and export businessmen, government officials and review of environmental reports has revealed that despite the illegality of shipment of  electronic waste from the European Union (EU) to Africa, 64% of the EU’s e-waste end up on the continent each year.

The report shows that several e-waste recycling organisations in the UK have previously been engaged in illegal shipment of e-waste to Africa, where as port officials in Europe generally turn a blind eye to these shipments.

The investigation also shows that the EU’s recent  Guideline on the Transboundary Movement of WEEE led by Germany introduces a “Repairable Loophole” which risks undermining gains of the Basel Convention.

It also revealed that harmful refrigerants found in discarded cooling appliances has the capacity to warm the atmosphere thousands of times greater than carbon dioxide, having already accounted for around 10% of global CO2 emissions. 

EU turns a blind eye to shipment of e-waste to Africa an Impact, impact on climate

Anthony Kemi, a Nigerian based in Florence, Italy is one of the many e-waste exporters based in Europe who collects discarded cooling appliances particularly fridges and ship to parts of Africa.

Despite cargo inspections by port officials in Italy it remains to be seen how this has effectively prevented the export of these discarded electronic appliances.

“I have never had any issue at the Livorno port in shipping discarded fridges to Nigeria,” Anthony disclosed. “As long as I make the requisite payments to the shipping authorities, I am fine.”

E-waste is deemed a hazardous waste by the EU due to toxic parts containing substances such as mercury, lead and flame retardants. The EU’s Waste Shipment Regulation (WSR) forbids the export of Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) to non-EU countries; nevertheless, the evidence shows otherwise as 350,000 metric tonnes of e-waste leave the EU to developing countries annually.

Mr. Kofi Agyarko, Director of Renewable Energy and Climate Change at the Energy Commission in Ghana has described actions by the EU as “global hypocrisy.”

“If those things (e-waste) were valuable like gold, diamond that our brothers and sisters are smuggling to Africa, would they close their eyes.”

 “If those things (e-waste) were valuable like gold, diamond that our brothers and sisters are smuggling to Africa, would they close their eyes,” he asked.

Mr. Agyarko also revealed that between 2013 and 2014 when Ghana started confiscating used fridges and air conditioners at its ports, “not less than 1500 kilograms of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) were recorded within a year and they all came from Europe.”

“The Europeans see e-waste as a problem because it is a burden on them. So, if you want to engage in the export, they will just close their eyes for you to take them away. After all, if you’re taking out garbage away from my house why should I fight you,” he argued.

Refrigerant gases have the capacity to warm the atmosphere – measured as global warming potential – is thousands of times greater than carbon dioxide, with some being up to 13,850 times more potent.

Industry experts say these harmful refrigerants are still widespread and increasing rapidly due to a global surge in demand for air conditioning, sluggish innovation from industry and inadequate legislation around their disposal.

According to Project Drawdown, a nonprofit that analyses climate solutions roughly 90% of refrigerant emissions occur at equipment’s end of life usually taking place in areas like Agbogbloshie and Kariakoo in Tanzania.

“The industry as a whole has had a huge impact on global warming,” says Clare Perry, senior campaigner at the Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA), a non-profit that investigates and campaigns against environmental abuse.

She says taken together refrigerant emissions have accounted for close to 11% of total warming emissions to date.

Shipment of e-waste to Africa by Recycling plants in the UK

Meanwhile, while Anthony collects his discarded cooling appliances from private households and ships to parts of Africa on a small scale, there is a bigger industrial practice in Europe where corporations and recycling organisations collect e-waste from user-friendly collection centers under the guise of recycling but ship these to Africa.

Environcom, UK’s largest waste collector has been previously accused by the Ghanaian government of shipping discarded fridges to Ghana after Ghana had instituted a ban on all e-waste into the country.

Several other UK government approved e-waste recycling organisations including; Bury St Edmunds Household Waste Recycling Site, Ipswich Household Waste Recy-cling Centre, Dawsholm Recycling Centre and Renfrewshire Recycling Centre have all been previously exposed for engaging in the illegal shipment of e-waste to several developing countries such as Ghana, Nigeria and Tanzania.

According to an investigation by BAN, these drop-off locations that are designed to aid consumers find a proper WEEE recycler were rather found to be shipping e-waste to several African countries. This was revealed with the aid of GPS trackers hidden in e-waste items presented for recycling.

“They go round to collect money to destroy or recycle these appliances but rather and re-package and send them to Ghana for money,” said Mr. Agyarko, Director of Renewable Energy at Ghana’s Energy Commission.

“Most of the cooling appliances that are to be disposed of are laden with CFCs and these organisations find it appropriate to dump them on the shores of Ghana and Africa. So that we will suffer from the environmental problems from the CFCs and die,” he added.

A 2016 study focused on the impact of e-waste on scrap dealers and residents at Agbogbloshie found a significant increase blood lead levels among both e-waste and non-e-waste workers at the site.

The report also called for an “increase in public awareness about the effects of exposure to lead from e-waste recycling.”

Meanwhile, Chris Smith, the National Intelligence Manager at UK’s Environment Agency has admitted that, the BAN investigation enabled the Agency to “quickly and efficiently close down four illegal waste operators who exported the electrical waste.”

The United Kingdom was found to be the most egregious violator of illegal shipments of hazardous consumer electronic scrap to vulnerable populations like Ghana, Nigeria and Tanzania according to the report.

Other countries that also allowed such e-waste exports to developing countries include: Germany, Italy, Ireland, Poland, and Spain.

Jim Puckett, Executive Director of BAN, said the illegal shipments perpetuated an EU waste management regime “on the backs of the poor and vulnerable”.

“Weaker economies and communities are being exploited by richer one’s who are now intent on pressing for cradle to cradle and waste is food while turning a blind-eye to the fact that ‘recycling’ and ‘re-use’ and now “circular economy” are increasingly being mis-appropriated as green passwords to a global waste circus and horror show,” he explained.

“This flies in the face of EU claims to make continuous efforts to implement a circular economy which can only responsibly exist by eliminating … leakage from the system,” said Mr. Puckett.

Europe Undermines the Basel Convention 

In 1995, the Basel BAN Amendment was introduced by the Basel Convention Parties to prohibit the member states of the OECD, the EU and Liechtenstein from exporting hazardous waste to other countries.

Despite Europe’s previous success in placing the Ban Amendment into binding legislation even before its entry into international legal force, many experts believe that the introduction of a “Repairable Loophole” in 2019 risks undermining the Basel Convention.

The loophole contained in the Guideline on the Transboundary Movement of WEEE allows anyone to simply claim used electronic waste as ‘repairable’ and export it completely outside of the rules and obligations of the Basel Convention.

“No importing country would even be asked if it would like to receive container loads of broken e-waste destined for ‘repair’” says Jim Puckett.

The Guideline will guide unscrupulous traders to export all manner of hazardous broken or untested consumer electronics outside of the control procedures of the Basel Convention.

In a May, 2019 statement by Jim Puckett, he argued that “the Guideline will guide unscrupulous traders to export all manner of hazardous broken or untested consumer electronics outside of the control procedures of the Basel Convention simply by making a claim of “export for repair.”

“One can but fear that these efforts led by Germany, are a harbinger of Europe renouncing its leadership role in human rights and the environment.”

Germany’s Basel Convention representative at the Federal Environment Agency did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Ghana effort to deal with e-waste

So far in Ghana, lawmakers have introduced the Electronic Waste Control and Management law which aims to prevent Ghana from being used as a dumping ground for e-waste.

Ghana is by far one of the countries in the world most targeted and impacted by EU and US e-waste exporters.

The law introduced in 2016 has successfully reduced the importation of used cooling appliances to a minimum of 2 percent according to an Energy Commission survey. This was also confirmed by the Executive Secretary of the Importers and Exporters Association of Ghana, Samson Asaki Awingobit who also admitted that, the ban on used cooling appliances have significantly affected the livelihoods of importers.

“People who were into importation of second-hand fridges have all lost their jobs,” he disclosed.

Although the influx of used cooling appliances has significantly reduced across Ghana’s borders, the situation is still “not satisfactory,” according to the Energy Commission.

“Before we began the war, the used appliances market controlled over 80 percent market share. Until we hit zero, I will not say we have won but with 98 percent success, I will say we have made an enviable progress,” says Mr. Agyarko.

Ghana’s e-waste law also created a tax scheme named eco-levy imposed on electric and electronic equipment (EEE) coming into the country. The eco-levy is mainly to support the construction of e-waste recycling plants across the country.

In August 2018, President Akufo-Addo announced the commencement of the construction of a recycling e-waste management facility at Agbogbloshie with funds generated from the eco levy.

Checks at Agbogbloshie as at July, 2021, three years later indicate that work has not commenced.

Member of Parliament for the area, Nii Lante Vanderpuye expressed his disappointment that nothing has been done so far.

“Well, it is sad that this is the case. It was a project that was started with the NDC government, the John Mahama administration in 2016. Down the line five years now, nothing much has been done. I have rather seen the site being used as a dumping place for the Accra landing beach project. They virtually cutting the debris and dump it there,” the MP said.

Agbogbloshie E-Waste Site Demolished, and Way Forward

One month following my interview with Hassan Tampani in July 2021, the government forcefully evicted the over 4000 scrap dealers from the scrap yard at Agbobloshie.

Hassan, lost all his property during the eviction due to what he claims to be a “very short government notice of eviction.” With no support and compensation from the state and an alternative source of livelihood, his only option is to rebuild his scrap business at a new site.

 “The minister didn’t inform us that we were part of the eviction. We didn’t know about the eviction until about two days to the removal. He has not paid us anything. The minister is a very wicked man…,”said Hassan.

He added: “the scrap dealers have now contributed to buy a new land at Teacher Mante in the Eastern Region of Ghana.”

Hassan now hopes that a 50-acre land at Teacher Mante obtained at a cost of GHS 1 million cedis ($166,000) will soon be developed so he can restart his scrap business.

There is however a growing concern among some Ghanaians that the open burning of residual unrepairable fractions which led to significant pollution of water bodies and the environment at Agbogbloshie will be repeated at the new site.

Henry Kokofu, the Executive Director of the Environmental Protection Agency has however insisted that plans are in place to prevent the new site designated for the Scrap Dealers Association from being polluted by e-waste.

For Mr. Agyarko, the solution is a straightforward one and warns of dire consequences if no action is taken. The EU and particularly Britain must do more to, “prevent the export of e-waste into developing countries. The earlier they turn on a new leaf the better for us all.” Otherwise, “this whole talk about Paris agreement- agenda 1.5-degree Celsius temperature reduction becomes a fleeting slogan,” he said.

There are no boundaries in the atmosphere. The pollution doesn’t require visa nor resident permit.

“There are no boundaries in the atmosphere. The pollution doesn’t require visa nor resident permit. So, if you think that you can clean one part of the planet and pollute the other part of the planet and you think that you are living in a clean environment, that is a hoax.”

———————————————

Reporting and writing by Gideon Sarpong. Daniel Abugre Anyorigya (Ghana) and Leslie Olonyi (Kenya) contributed to the report.

This article was developed with the support of the Money Trail Project (www.money-trail.org).

The post Garbage Out, Garbage In: How Europe’s e-waste problem is a burden on Africa appeared first on iWatch Africa.

This shows that despite the urgent need to transition to a net zero carbon world; climate financing policies particularly the ‘Carbon Border Adjustment’ mechanism must allow for a broad consultation and engagement with people whose livelihoods would be significantly impacted by the policy.

What is the proposed Carbon Border Adjustment (CBA) mechanism by the European Commission (EC)?

The CBA is an import tax on non-EU countries designed to ensure that European companies do not have competitive disadvantages compared to companies from countries with lax climate regulations, and to reduce the risk of carbon leakage. In her mission letter to Commissioner for the Economy Paolo Gentiloni, EC President Ursula von der Leyen also noted that another objective of the CBA is to allow the EU reduce greenhouse gases (GHGs) released into the Earth’s atmosphere, whilst ensuring that domestic efforts do not simply serve to drive production and GHGs emissions elsewhere.

While the core objective of the CBA will ultimately help countries transition to a decarbonised world, there are certain socio-economic risks and social justice questions pertaining to least developed countries (LDCs) that must be addressed.

It is in the interest of the EC that the CBA does not result in lower exports to the EU from LDCs. That would have a potentially negative impact on climate-vulnerable low-income countries which are already debt distressed as result of COVID-19, and will likely need years to recover from the pandemic.

The following consideration would help the EC introduce a CBA policy that is equitable, fair and progressive.

Commitments to the Paris Agreement

The commitment by developed countries to jointly mobilise $100 billion in climate finance by 2020 to support developing countries is at the heart of the Paris Agreement. The EC, in their design of the CBA should demonstrate regard for international commitments in the area of climate action and finance, taking into account that the accord recognises that countries have differentiated responsibilities.

Developing countries have so far lamented that developed countries are not living up to the agreements reached at COP16 in Cancún, and the formalised goal of mobilising jointly USD 100 billion per year by 2020. The Independent Expert Group on Climate Finance has also noted in their 2020 report that the $100 billion target by 2020 has not been reached.

In 2020, Oxfam Climate Finance report noted that the terms on which developed countries are currently meeting the $100bn goal are highly questionable insisting that LDCs and Small Island Developing States (SIDS) are receiving too little of the finance provided.

“Too much is being provided in the form of loans and other non-grant instruments, including to LDCs and SIDS. The world’s poorest countries and communities should not be forced to take out loans to protect themselves from the excess carbon emissions of rich countries,” the report stated.

This, according to Oxfam is harming the economies of LDCs by contributing to rising – and in many countries, unsustainable – debt levels.

As at the last quarter of 2020, 54% of low-income countries were deemed to be in debt distress or at high risk of debt distress; a trend which has continued into 2021.

The European Commission should assess its international commitment to the Paris Accord and improve its share of climate finance to LDCs. Any burden imposed on trade in the form of the CBA which fails to account for the negligible contribution of LDCs to the climate crisis will further plunge these regions into poverty risking the collapse of many of such economies.

The world’s poorest countries should not have to forgo life-saving aid to pay the costs of a climate crisis not of their making.

Climate Debt

Historically, between the period of 1751 to 2019, the EU has contributed about 22% of the total CO2 emissions, trailing the United States which is responsible for 25% of historical emissions due largely to industrialisation and population growth.

The situation is entirely different in Sub-Saharan Africa which has contributed only 3 per cent to global emissions during the period although it remains the most vulnerable to climate change.

This means that the proposed CBA by the EC which seeks to prevent carbon leakage and protect EU based companies must also necessarily be economically just and should not disproportionately impact climate-vulnerable countries that have historically done less harm to the environment.

A CBA that fails to account for climate debt and its potential impact on LDCs could rob developing countries of finance for health, education and other critical development goals.

Preferential Market Access – the European Union “Everything But Arms” Initiative

In 2001, the Everything But Arms (EBA) initiative was introduced under the EU’s GSP scheme, granting LDCs duty- and quota-free access for almost all products. The Carbon Border Adjustment mechanism would apply to goods from all countries, even the Least Developed Countries that currently benefit from duty free entry in Europe under this same initiative.

A loss of access to EU’s preferential market by LDCs coupled with the constrained fiscal space as a result of COVID-19 could result in lower exports to the EU, with potential negative impacts on jobs if flanking measures as part of a just transition are not in place.

The Path Forward: CBA Exemption for LDCs

To design a carbon tax policy which will not have a disproportionate impact on people living in poverty, the EC could consider the following;

• Granting a Carbon Border Adjustment exemption to countries administering equivalent carbon taxes.
• LDCs whose national policies, practices or regulations have led to reduced GHG emissions aligning with the Paris accord goals should receive an exemption.
• Exempting LDCs from a CBA or returning all proceeds from the CBA applied on imports from developing countries to those countries to meet their own budgetary constraints in meeting mitigation and adaptation targets.

This was first published by the European University Institute, based in Florence, Italy

Gideon Sarpong is a Policy Leader Fellow at the School of Transnational Governance, European University Institute, Florence, Italy. He is a co-founder of iWatch Africa. His research interests include climate finance, ocean climate policy and internet governance.

The post EC proposed Carbon Border Adjustment mechanism: Key considerations for Least Developed Countries appeared first on iWatch Africa.