French health expert refuses Legion d'Honneur
Annie Thébaud-Mony demands prosecution of "industrial crimes"
London Olympic finalists lined up to gratefully accept their medals over the past fortnight.
And none of them openly criticised Rio Tinto, which had supplied all the metals for the coveted gongs. See: Olympic protestors carpeted for "green wash" demo
In contrast, a leading French health researcher has refused to accept her country's most renowned civil award, the Legion d'Honneur.
This, she says, is because the French courts fail to "condemn those responsible for industrial crimes to the true degree of their responsibility, so that prevention may one day become a reality".
Citing asbestos in particular, Annie Thébaud-Mony declares it would be "almost indecent" to accept the honour, so long as there is "a very big indifference...to the death of workers and to environmental damage."
Public health researcher refusal to take award in protest against 'Industrial Crimes' welcomed
Nuclear and construction industry among the most risky
Anti-asbestos campaigner denounces 'collateral damage of progress' world over
11 August 2012
New Delhi - ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA) and Ban Asbestos Network of India (BANI) welcome the refusal of Annie Thébaud-Mony director of research at France's National Institute for Health and Medical Research to accept the "Legion d'Honneur" (Legion of Honour), one of the highest honors bestowed by the French government.
She wants the government to "challenge the impunity that until now has protected those who carry out industrial crimes." The French government had announced that Annie was to become a knight in the Légion d'Honneur.
Annie refers to industrial sectors like nuclear and construction as among the most risky. She is the author of ‘Nuclear Servitude: Subcontracting and Health in the French Civil Nuclear Industry' published last year.
In the book she asks, "What kind of public health policy, what kind of institutional vigilance, will allow us to effectively protect the health of the ‘temporary and subcontracted' operators who will be performing - for French society as a whole - the tasks required for managing this [nuclear] waste?"
These very questions are relevant for the Prime Minister of India too who is zealously promoting nuclear power to solve the energy problem.
Annie is the co-founder of Ban Asbestos France which led the successful campaign seeking a ban on asbestos, making France the first country in the world to ban asbestos. Since then more than 55 countries have banned it. India's reluctance to immediately ban has been a cause of concern for her.
She was in India during the successful campaign against the Le Clemenceau, the asbestos laden hazardous end- of-life French ship. TWA had given a testimony to the Supreme Court's Monitoring Committee (SCMC) on Hazardous Wastes along with her highlighting the plight of worker's health in the shipbreaking industry at Alang beach in 'vibrant' Gujarat.
She had disputed the French Ambassador's misrepresentation of facts regarding French law on trade in hazardous wastes in her testimony to SCMC. She was in India to meet victims of asbestos related diseases last year too.
In her 31 July 2012 letter of refusal to the French Minister of Equality of the Territories and Housing, she wrote, "After thirty years of research I cannot help but note that working conditions continue to deteriorate, that awareness of the health disaster that is asbestos has not led to a strategy to counter the epidemic of work-related and environmental cancers, that hazardous jobs are sub-contracted and undertaken by the poorest and most precarious workers, salaried or independent, labouring in industry, agriculture, services or the public sector."
She categorically stated, "...the recognition that I wish for would be to see the French courts condemn those responsible for industrial crimes to the true degree of their responsibility, so that prevention may one day become a reality. For all these reasons, Madam Minister, I reiterate my thanks, but ask that you accept my refusal to be decorated with the Legion of Honour."
She further wrote, "Lets stop the truly false controversies about low dose health effects. Public policies, including criminal policy must become protective against the deliberate endangerment of life."
She says, "We all contribute our time, intelligence and experience to aid in the emergence of that which is invisible, that which has been known as the ‘collateral damage of progress'' ', both in France and beyond the borders of the developed world."
She says it would be "almost indecent" to accept the honor while there is "a very big indifference...to the death of workers and to environmental damage."
Responding to the refusal, Madame Cécile Duflot, Minister of Equality of the Territories and Housing in a statement issued said that she had "profound respect for Thébaud-Mony's determined and disinterested engagement," and said that her reasons to refuse the medal were exactly the ones for which she deserved it.
Public health researchers and scientists in India too should reveal the impact of industrial crimes and expose the government's deliberate failure in protecting the health of workers and citizens.
Contact: Gopal Krishna, ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA)-BANI
Annie Thébaud-Mony's letter
To: Madame Cécile Duflot
Minister of Equality of the Territories and Housing,
Hotel de Castries
72 rue de Varenne - 75 007 Paris
31 July 2012
In your letter of the 20th of July, 2012, you informed me formally of my nomination to the Legion of Honour and mentioned that you were the originator of this nomination. I am moved by your attention, and wish to thank you for honouring me for my contributions both as a citizen and professionally. However, - all the while conscious of the meaning of your choice - I cannot accept this honour and will provide you with an explanation in this letter.
Professionally, for the past thirty years, I have conducted research in public health, on the health of workers, and on social inequalities in health, in particular in the field of cancer. The institutional recognition that I could have expected concerned not only the evolution of my own career, but also the recruitment of young researchers in my field, given the utmost urgency of this research agenda. In my personal case, I was blocked from promotion for the last ten years of my career. I was never promoted to the first class standing of director of research.
Of even more concern, many brilliant young researchers with whom I have worked have had institutional doors closed to them due to lack of support from my unit directors, and live, still today - despite the quality of their work- in professionally precarious positions. As to the scientific programme that we have built over the past ten years at Seine Saint Denis on occupational cancer, which is renowned nationally and internationally for the high quality of its scientific work, it remains in a precarious position even though it has institutional support . I have been, over all these years, the only tenured investigator.
While assuring the continuity of the research programme and trying, as much as possible to create stable employment for the young researchers, I had to constantly seek funding - an activity that may be described as "scientific begging", - all the while resisting any form of conflict of interest in conducting publicly funded research.
Finally, given that research in public health is designed to lead to action, I have conducted my own work with the hope of seeing that our research leads to a transformation of working conditions and the implementation of prevention programmes.
After thirty years of research I cannot help but note that working conditions continue to deteriorate, that awareness of the health disaster that is asbestos has not led to a strategy to counter the epidemic of work-related and environmental cancers, that hazardous jobs are sub-contracted and undertaken by the poorest and most precarious workers, salaried or independent, labouring in industry, agriculture, services or the public sector.
These workers are subjected to an accumulation of physical, organizational, or psychological risks, in the context of a terrible indifference. It is the responsibility of public health researchers to sound the alarm, which I have tried to do through my scientific work, but also in my civic engagement in networks for the defense of the fundamental rights to life, health and dignity.
Because these engagements are inscribed in collective action I cannot accept an individual recognition directed at me personally, even though I understand that you have, through my nomination, recognized the importance of the collective mobilizations of which I am a part.
I have, over thirty years, participated in different networks in struggle against the health effects of industrial hazards. These networks are made up of activists, be they researchers, workers, farmers, journalists, lawyers, physicians or others... Each of us deserves recognition for our accomplishments as defenders of the public interest.
This includes the associations which have struggled for fifteen years at Aulnay-sous-bois for the dismantlement - in compliance with prevention standards - of an asbestos processing factory which has contaminated the environs, killed former students at the local school, former workers and those living in the surrounding neighbourhood.
The same need for recognition is true for the union members at France Telecom, Peugeot and Renault, who struggle for the recognition of industrial cancers or work related suicide and the ex workers of Amisol - the first, in the 1970's to denounce the use of asbestos in French factories - who continue to struggle for the right to a post-employment follow-up of the workers exposed to carcinogens.
So it is with workers exposed to chemicals, sub-contractors working in nuclear facilities, seasonally employed agricultural workers or families who are victims of lead poisoning... We all contribute our time, intelligence and experience to aid in the emergence of that which is invisible, that which has been known as the ‘collateral damage of progress'' ', both in France and beyond the borders of the developed world.
We would like to talk with you, Madam minister, about the recognition that we are awaiting. We would like to be taken seriously when we speak about deterioration of working conditions, as mentioned above, about the ongoing drama of work accidents and occupational disease, but also about the impasses on environmental issues related to asbestos, pesticides, nuclear waste or chemicals... Lets stop the truly false controversies about low dose health effects.
Public policies, including criminal policy must become protective against the deliberate endangerment of life. You have recently expressed your desire, in the National Assembly, to write laws that are "more equitable, more effective and more sustainable." As the Minister of Equality of the Territories and Housing, you have the power not only to increase the number of housing units but also to adopt legislative measures for healthy housing, and you may also act against the impunity that is protecting those responsible for industrial crimes.
In memory of Henri Pézerat who was pioneered social commitment in which I take part today and in the name of the association that bears his name , the recognition that I wish for would be to see the French courts condemn those responsible for industrial crimes to the true degree of their responsibility, so that prevention may one day become a reality.
For all these reasons, Madam Minister, I reiterate my thanks, but ask that you accept my refusal to be decorated with the Legion of Honour. With the Association that I preside, I am at your disposal, to inform you about our activities and about the problems about which we hope to solicit you.
Please accept, Madam Minister, the expression of my gratitude and respect.