Human rights court is to hear asbestos case
‘Men not informed of danger’
About 20 former dockyard workers suffering from the effects of asbestos inhalation have taken their battle for compensation to the European Court of Human Rights, which has given the government four months to reply. They are joined by the family of another worker who died from cancer caused by asbestos.
The workers claim the Maltese government, which owned the Malta Shipyards between 1968 and 2003, failed to fulfil its “positive obligations” to protect their life against the cancer-causing fibre and inform them they were exposed to any danger.
They had been “constantly, heavily exposed” to asbestos when working at the dry docks, their lawyer Juliette Galea argues. The material was stocked in storerooms while ships containing asbestos regularly came in for repairs. This involved breaking apart fibre casing, releasing asbestos particles into the air in the process.
Once the repairs were completed, the mechanical parts had to be again encased in asbestos. Not only were the particles inhaled but they settled on the clothing they carried back home, affecting their families.
The men said they now suffer respiratory problems and areas of calcification on the lungs, known as plaques. One of them died in 2009 from mesothelioma – an aggressive cancer caused by asbestos – and his compensation case is being followed by his family.
Asbestos is a mineral fibre used in construction materials for insulation and as a fire retardant, especially in ships. The fibres are too small to be visible but if inhaled can accumulate in the lungs.
The symptoms of mesothelioma or asbestosis – irreversible lung scarring – do not show up until many years after exposure.
The men turned to the ECHR after three Maltese judges sitting in the constitutional court upheld previous judgments which said their request for damages should have been filed in a civil court and not a constitutional one.
Among other things, the complainants failed to use all the legal remedies available to them, the appeals court ruled, turning down their request for moral damages which they made on the basis of another ECHR judgment. The European court has now accepted to hear the case and the Maltese government has four months in which to submit its replies on whether it was aware of the risk associated with exposure and whether measures listed in international treaties were implemented.
The government must say whether the employees were warned about the risks and whether it fulfilled its “positive obligation” to protect their lives.
The court has also requested the government to give its position, and possibly proposals, about an out-of-court settlement.
In their application, the men pointed out that the link between asbestos and respiratory disease was documented as early as 1938 and the link between the fibre and the cancer was established in the early 1960s.
At that time, Malta became a member of the International Labour Organisation and World Health Organisation, which had both raised awareness about the danger of asbestos since the 1950s. This meant that information about asbestos was available and that the authorities should have known of the danger.
However, they “were neither informed nor protected from the dangers of asbestos in any way”, they said.
The first available information about the fatal consequences of asbestos, which was not “publicly disseminated”, was a 1989 judgment that established the Malta Shipyard’s responsibility for Joseph Pellicano’s death from mesothelioma in 1979.
No action was taken after the judgment and the employees were told that “adequate ventilation” and cloth masks would protect them, they said.
After a number of their colleagues passed away, the men ran a number of medical tests including X-rays that revealed a “considerable presence” of asbestos in their lungs which had formed plaques.
This suggested there was a “strong probability” that there were fibres in their stomach lining and other digestive organs while also making them more prone to mesothelioma.
Popular Stories
Old buses, drivers to return
Former Judge Ray Pace found dead
Updated: Minister apologises for...
Three new Nationalist MPs elected –...
Where’s Everybody staff is given notice
Updated - Director of Prisons submits...
Update 4 - Eddie Fenech Adami stable...
Revealed...the face of a Maltese woman...
Update 3 - Woman trapped as car crashes...
In Discussion
Old buses, drivers to return
Updated: Minister apologises for...
Updated - Director of Prisons submits...
Enemalta seeking minimum five year gas...
Protected birds shot and trapped as...
Mario de Marco, Zammit Dimech concede,...
PN postpones salaries as financial...
Updated - PM's offer to Opposition MPs...
No appeals board for first part of power...
7 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
gordon brown
Nov 25th 2012, 14:17
Gordon Brown , I worked in Portsmouth Royal Naval Dockyard as an apprentice 1962-67 I was diagnosed with pleural plaques in 2007 . in 2010 I was diagnosed with diffuse pleural thickening , the law says that pleural plaques are non compensatible but nothing about diffuse pleural thickening . Why are pleural plaques classed the same as DPT . NO CURE , NO COMPENSATION , NO HOPE .
Dennis Thompson
Jul 31st 2012, 04:00
Lack of knowledge and /or safety measures decades ago cannot be used as a defence now. Men need to work. If a task is refused dismissal will follow. Employers must protect employees . It is their responsibility . Back in the 70s I worked in a military underground tunnel system in Holland. In World War 2 the German Armed Forces had occupied these ancient tunnels and had installed air venting and heating systems. . NATO occupied them in the 60s/70s. On upgrade of the systems an extensive amount of asbestos was found to be installed and subsequently disturbed on refurbishment. All 800 plus regular occupants AND all other users over the past 10 years had to be traced and and underwent regular medical treatments for the next 2 years. I don't know if anybody contracted cancer induced by asbestosis . The point i am making is the positive response taken by the employers (military arm of 6 countries) showed they accepted the seriousness and their responsibility despite the danger being installed long ago by another occupying army. Don't worsen their plight by making genuine claimants BEG for compensation through international courts.... someone in government should make an executive decision over and above red tape. No Maltese tax payer will begrudge these ill men a fair compensation.
Joseph O'Neil
Jul 30th 2012, 22:40
My name is Joseph O'Neil, retired for almost 10 years, having worked in the shipyards and heavy engineering works on Clydeside.
Since I retired, I have been involved on a voluntary basis, with Clydebank Asbestos Group, working to assist those with asbestos related conditions to gain the compensation they are entitled to.
It was with some regret that I read your article and the fact that the Government of Malta would force some citizens to take the extreme step of taking their cases to the ECHR.
I have extra sorrow in respect of having a family connection with Malta, and would have expected more compassion from an Island that won a place in the heart of the free world during the conflict during the war.
Time to say to the Government and the Judiciary, that comimg into contact with asbestos is both deadly and fatal. Is Malta going to fall into the trap of those other capitalist regimes and favour the employers and their insurers, or will that Government and Judiciary remember why they got the George Cross,
It was receieved not just for bravery, but also a belief in justice and truth.
Time to support the vicims of asbestos and their families
robert hill
Jul 30th 2012, 20:19
i worked on many asbestos removal projects in the dry docks (for a uk based company.we were instructed to keep the warning signage to a minimum(if at all)the waste was stored in very poor store areas.there were no actual warning signs on any of the ships we worked on,unless we put them in place
Kenneth Galea
Jul 30th 2012, 10:19
Yes it is true that workers were not informed of the danger posed by asbestos. My father worked at the shipyards all his life, he is now retired. He has asbestos in his lungs, it is like a time bomb ticking in your body. Others even passed away with cancer in the lungs due to asbestos.
I am pleased to note that the human rights court intervened in this matter. This is a deadly disease.
Peter Murray
Jul 30th 2012, 09:46
Who knows if we will hear cases such as this damge to health in the future relating to mobile phone usage and the inductrial size masts.antennae that accompanies their use on private property.As we have had the "TOBACCO MOMENT"and now we are having the "ASBESTOS MOMENT" and as with mobile phones, and in these two classic cases, .we were informed for many years-again b so-called "experts" that that they were harmless.Profit over prevention rules.
Mr Zeppi Borg
Jul 30th 2012, 10:39
As you called as an ASBESTOS MOMENT and you said that this is happening now, you are totally wrong. The so called ASBESTOS MOMENT has started in the early 1990's.
Please choose the reason of your report below: