Veolia’s response to Valentina Azarov’s blog post

22 May 2013

Business & Human Rights Resource Centre invited Veoliato respond to the followingitem:

-[PDF] “Backtracking on Responsibility: French Court Absolves Veolia for Unlawful Railway Construction in Occupied Territory”, Valentina Azarov, Rights as Usual, 1 May 2013

Veolia sent us the following response:

“Thank you for giving Veolia the opportunity to respond to the article by Valentina Azarov, which takes a critical view of the recent ruling by the Versailles Court of Appeal confirming that Veolia was not violating international law by its involvement in the Jerusalem tramway. We take a different view of the Versailles Court unequivocal ruling, which upholds the earlier view of the Nanterre Court (“Tribunal de Grande Instance”) about the legality of Veolia’s conduct, as well as of the purpose and benefits of the tramway. Ms. Azarov’s article also contains several inaccuracies that we are happy to address, as there is considerable misinformation in circulation regarding this issue.

As the leading environmental service company, we have a strong interest in responsible corporate conduct and are committed to the principles of the UNGC. We are not only committed to the principles, but participate actively in various workshops of the Global Compact. We have engaged with many socially conscious investors, in the United States, the United Kingdom and the Nordic countries in particular, and have valuable ongoing discussions about the reality of our activities in the area. The exchange of information and regular engagement with publications such as yours is most appreciated.

1) Regarding the legal proceedings:

As you know, The Tribunal de Grande Instance de Nanterre delivered a judgment on 30May 2011 in proceedings brought by the Association France-Palestine Solidarité and the Palestinian Liberation Organisation against Veolia and Alstom. The Tribunal decisively rejected claims that Veolia's participation in the construction and operation of the JLRT infringes international law or any applicable ethical codes of conduct. The Tribunal held that:

  • there has been no breach of Articles 49 or 53 of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 12 August 1949;
  • there has been no breach of Articles 23 or 46 of the Hague Regulations of 18October 1907;
  • there has been no violation of relevant provisions of the Hague Regulations, Hague Convention or Geneva Conventions; and
  • Veolia has not been in breach of any provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, reflected in its own Code of Ethics.

The AFPS appealed this ruling and has lost again. In its judgement of March 22nd, the Appeals Court of Versailles upheld the Nanterre Court’s decision in a clear and unequivocal ruling that neither Veolia nor Alstom were breaching international law or the rules of the UNGlobal Compact by executing their contracts for the construction and operation of the Jerusalem tramway.

The French courts have now considered at length the legal arguments of the PLO and AFPS.Both judicial decisions are the fruits of a genuine legal, not a political, analysis of international law as applied to actual facts, and a great deal of time and effort has been invested by the French judicial system to allow interested parties to have their cases heard in a neutral forum. All allegations of Veolia having breached international law and calls for a boycott of Veolia’s services, should be considered in the light of these decisions based on positive law rather than on political views.

2) Regarding the purpose of the tramway and the benefits to the Palestinian population:

Ms. Azarov’s describes the purpose of the tramway and of the contract to operate it, as being to “facilitate the establishment of Israel’s illegal settlements in occupied territory and the movement of Israeli Jewish settlers between Israel and their residences in occupied territory”.

This is a political statement and view that we cannot agree with, just as we strongly reject her assertion that the “service neither benefits the Palestinian population nor purports to do so”.

It is worth remembering that the Jerusalem Light Rail Transit (JLRT) project came into being following the Oslo Peace Accords in 1993, when there was a prospect of a peaceful settlement to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It was intended to improve the mobility and economic development of the local population, and tosignificantly improve journey times between the center of Jerusalem and the Arab areas north of Jerusalem.

Veolia Transport was one of several European and American companies which answered the international tender launched in 2000 for the project by the State of Israel with the Jerusalem Public Transportation Administration (JPTA). The route along which the tramway was to run was designed and selected by the Israeli authorities.

The JLRT opened to the public on 19 August 2011, many years later than scheduled because of innumerable problems having nothing to do with Veolia, and unfortunately in a seriously worsened regional context.

It is now functioning, carrying ordinary people, Israelis and Arabs, Jews and Muslims, men and women,young and old, from one place to the other, in a non-discriminatory fashion. Over 100, 000 people now take the tramway each day, 2.6 million riders a month since the beginning of the year!

Along the 14 kilometres of the route which serves 23 stations, 7 are situated in or close by Arab neighbourhoods (more than 50,000 residents).

All tramway stop indicationsand instructions are written in Hebrew and Arabic.

Despite the polemics and the politicization of the issue, the polls carried out before operations began, and the passenger satisfaction surveyscarried out afterwards, have consistently shown that the Arab populations along the route welcome this new means of transportation and use it. People from all communities see the benefit of the tramway in their daily lives, with residents of the Arab neighborhoods of Shu’afat, Sheikh Jarrah and Beit Hanina expressing higher than average levels of support, willingness to recommend, and the view that the tramway shortens their travel time to the city center.

3) Regarding the supposed damage to Veolia’s business and reputation:

As part of its disinformation campaign against Veolia, the BDS movement has repeatedly portrayed every contract loss by Veolia as a result of its successful efforts, a statement which is then regularly picked up by other defenders of the Palestinian cause, and finds its way into Ms. Azarov’s post. On the other hand, the rulings of the French Courts rejecting the accusations of illegality are rarely picked up, Ms. Azarov’s article (however critical) being an exception.

In reality, we are not aware of any contracts that have been lost as a result of Veolia’s involvement in the Jerusalem tramway, despite these claims. All over the world, we win and lose contracts in a competitive bidding process that focuses primarily on the price and quality of the service we can offer locally.

In Europe, public authorities are bound by EU procurement law, and by domestic laws such as the UK Local Government Act 1988, to ensure that contracts are put out to competitive tender on a fair, transparent and non-discriminatory basis. Public authorities are not entitled to refuse to deal with businesses based on political considerations, and BDS campaigners who encourage public bodies to refrain from doing business with Veolia because of alleged “international rights violations” (especially after the Tribunal's clear and unequivocal ruling) are in fact inciting them to breach UK and EU law. Similarly in the US, several municipalities have explicitly refused to be drawn into such polemics or the Arab-Israeli conflict.

We remain available to provide you with any further information you may need. Most importantly, we hope to have shown you that many of the critics levelled against Veolia are untrue, and that our company is acting in a socially responsible way, even in the difficult context of the Israel-Palestine conflict.”