ECOCIDE
Twenty years after Probo Koala, Africa still grapples with ‘waste colonialism’Twenty years after toxic waste from the cargo ship Probo Koala was dumped across Abidjan in Côte d'Ivoire, the disaster remains an open wound for many victims and a symbol of wealthy countries sending unwanted waste to Africa.
Issued on: 19/08/2026 - RFI
The Probo Koala carried the toxic waste that was dumped around Abidjan in August 2006. The ship is pictured arriving in Tallinn on 27 September 2006, just over a month after the illegal dumping. AFP - RAIGO PAJULA
On 19 August 2006, more than 500 tonnes of harmful substances unloaded from the ship were dumped at 18 sites around Côte d'Ivoire's economic capital. The fumes spread a foul smell across parts of the city, killing 17 people according to the official toll and leaving tens of thousands suffering symptoms of poisoning.
Akouédo, a village of the Ebrié people in the Cocody district, was among the places affected.
The night the waste arrived is still vivid for William Akessé, who was 26 at the time and is now spokesperson for the village chief.
"That night, my wife had had a caesarean section," Akessé said. "I had only just returned from the hospital with her, and it was that very same night that the waste was dumped. We couldn’t even breathe – the stench was terrible. My child died."
Contested settlement
The disaster eventually led to an agreement between the Ivorian government and Trafigura, the commodities trading company implicated in the case.
In 2007, Trafigura agreed to pay €152 million to help clean up affected sites and compensate victims. In return, legal proceedings brought against the company in Côte d’Ivoire were withdrawn.
For victims’ organisations, however, the settlement remains deeply controversial.
On 19 August 2006, more than 500 tonnes of harmful substances unloaded from the ship were dumped at 18 sites around Côte d'Ivoire's economic capital. The fumes spread a foul smell across parts of the city, killing 17 people according to the official toll and leaving tens of thousands suffering symptoms of poisoning.
Akouédo, a village of the Ebrié people in the Cocody district, was among the places affected.
The night the waste arrived is still vivid for William Akessé, who was 26 at the time and is now spokesperson for the village chief.
"That night, my wife had had a caesarean section," Akessé said. "I had only just returned from the hospital with her, and it was that very same night that the waste was dumped. We couldn’t even breathe – the stench was terrible. My child died."
Contested settlement
The disaster eventually led to an agreement between the Ivorian government and Trafigura, the commodities trading company implicated in the case.
In 2007, Trafigura agreed to pay €152 million to help clean up affected sites and compensate victims. In return, legal proceedings brought against the company in Côte d’Ivoire were withdrawn.
For victims’ organisations, however, the settlement remains deeply controversial.
Denis Yao Pipira, president of the Federation of Associations of Victims of Toxic Waste in Côte d’Ivoire, shows the sacks of contaminated soil. (Photo : N. Navarro/RFI)
The agreement prevented victims from pursuing the company through Ivorian courts, said Denis Yao Pipira, who represents victims' associations.
"What the government did was sign an agreement that grants Trafigura immunity," Pipira said. "That made it difficult for us to take legal action against Trafigura. It was not possible to do so in our courts. The government simply took a few banknotes and then abandoned the victims."
Legal efforts later continued outside Côte d'Ivoire.
In the Netherlands, Trafigura was ordered by the Court of Cassation to compensate victims. In 2023, the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights ruled that Côte d'Ivoire's compensation arrangements were insufficient and ordered the creation of a fund to repair the harm caused.
Victims are still waiting for that fund.
The Ivorian authorities maintain that all polluted sites have been fully cleaned up since 2015.
Trafigura could face two million-euro fine for Côte d'Ivoire toxic waste
The agreement prevented victims from pursuing the company through Ivorian courts, said Denis Yao Pipira, who represents victims' associations.
"What the government did was sign an agreement that grants Trafigura immunity," Pipira said. "That made it difficult for us to take legal action against Trafigura. It was not possible to do so in our courts. The government simply took a few banknotes and then abandoned the victims."
Legal efforts later continued outside Côte d'Ivoire.
In the Netherlands, Trafigura was ordered by the Court of Cassation to compensate victims. In 2023, the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights ruled that Côte d'Ivoire's compensation arrangements were insufficient and ordered the creation of a fund to repair the harm caused.
Victims are still waiting for that fund.
The Ivorian authorities maintain that all polluted sites have been fully cleaned up since 2015.
Trafigura could face two million-euro fine for Côte d'Ivoire toxic waste
Ongoing cost
Two decades after the Probo Koala disaster, environmental organisations say the underlying problem has not disappeared.
They describe it as "waste colonialism" – the practice of wealthier countries or companies sending waste to poorer countries where disposal and treatment are cheaper, even when those countries may not have the infrastructure to manage it safely.
In the Probo Koala case, Amnesty International said Trafigura declined to dispose of the toxic liquids in the Netherlands, where the ship had stopped before sailing to Côte d'Ivoire, because the operation would have cost about $620,000.
Instead, it contracted the Ivorian company Tommy, which offered to handle the material for just $17,000. Some of the waste was subsequently dumped in and around Abidjan.
NGOs say poorer communities often bear the consequences, particularly people living near landfill sites or working in waste collection and recycling.
“Our environments, our communities and workers in the informal waste sector are forced to bear a burden that is not theirs,” the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives and Break Free From Plastic said in May.
A woman and her child walk past employees of a company attempting to clean up the area affected by the toxic waste spill from the Probo Koala, near Abidjan. AFP / Issouf Sanogo
Changing waste streams
The nature of waste arriving in Africa has changed over the years. Electronic waste, textiles and plastics are now among the most common categories.
The flow increased after 2018 when China banned imports of many categories of solid waste. Until then, the country had received almost half of the world's waste.
Western countries, still lacking enough processing and recycling capacity, began looking for alternative destinations, particularly in Asia and Africa.
Ghana, Nigeria and Kenya are regularly cited among African countries receiving large quantities of imported waste, including textiles.
Much of the second-hand clothing sent to Africa is resold in major markets such as Kantamanto in Accra, providing jobs and affordable clothing.
But a significant share cannot be used.
Greenpeace estimated that 30 to 40 percent of second-hand clothing imported into Kenya in 2019 was worthless because garments were damaged, badly stained or unsuitable for local weather and customs.
Those clothes can end up in landfill sites, waterways or on streets, adding pressure to waste-management systems.
Changing waste streams
The nature of waste arriving in Africa has changed over the years. Electronic waste, textiles and plastics are now among the most common categories.
The flow increased after 2018 when China banned imports of many categories of solid waste. Until then, the country had received almost half of the world's waste.
Western countries, still lacking enough processing and recycling capacity, began looking for alternative destinations, particularly in Asia and Africa.
Ghana, Nigeria and Kenya are regularly cited among African countries receiving large quantities of imported waste, including textiles.
Much of the second-hand clothing sent to Africa is resold in major markets such as Kantamanto in Accra, providing jobs and affordable clothing.
But a significant share cannot be used.
Greenpeace estimated that 30 to 40 percent of second-hand clothing imported into Kenya in 2019 was worthless because garments were damaged, badly stained or unsuitable for local weather and customs.
Those clothes can end up in landfill sites, waterways or on streets, adding pressure to waste-management systems.
New restrictions
Growing criticism of such practices has led to tighter regulation.
The European Union adopted new waste shipment rules in 2024, including tougher restrictions on plastic waste exports.
From 21 November 2026, EU countries will generally be prohibited from exporting plastic waste to states that are not members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), unless the receiving country has been granted an exemption.
Countries seeking exemptions will have to show that they can process imported waste in an environmentally sound way.
The rules are intended to reduce the risk that European waste is exported to countries without adequate facilities, while encouraging more recycling and treatment closer to where the waste is produced.
Waste treatment and recycling have also become important economic sectors in some African countries, supporting businesses and workers.
Egypt, Mauritius, Morocco, Niger, Tunisia and Togo are among the African states seeking exemptions that would allow them to continue importing certain plastic waste from the EU.
This article was adapted from the original version in French by RFI's Abdoul Aziz Diallo and Tangi Bihan
No comments:
Post a Comment