WILLEMSTAD – The Public Prosecution Service (OM) has decided to criminally prosecute the company Eternit in connection with the deaths of three individuals resulting from long-term exposure to asbestos. The case will be brought before the court, marking a significant legal step in holding companies accountable for workplace health hazards.
According to the OM, Eternit knowingly exposed employees and others to deadly health risks by violating its duty of care. The charges stem from prolonged and systematic asbestos exposure, which led to fatal illnesses in the victims. The prosecution argues that Eternit acted deliberately and negligently, placing individuals in unsafe environments.
Origin of the Case
The case was initiated following a criminal complaint filed in late 2019 by the Asbestos Victims Committee, a foundation advocating for individuals who developed illnesses due to asbestos exposure. The complaint triggered a years-long investigation that focused on the roles and responsibilities of individuals and legal entities connected to Eternit. The investigation was described as complex, both factually and legally.
Fatal Consequences
The prosecution involves the deaths of three people:
Two former employees who worked at Eternit facilities for many years and were exposed to asbestos fibers on the job.
The partner of one of the employees, who was exposed through contaminated work clothing brought home.
The OM holds Eternit criminally liable for all three deaths, stating that the company intentionally subjected them to dangerous conditions, with fatal consequences.
Responsibility in Hazardous Work Environments
The OM emphasized that companies working with hazardous materials, such as asbestos, bear a heavy legal and ethical responsibility to protect their workers. Asbestos fibers, once inhaled, can become deeply embedded in the lungs and cause fatal diseases such as mesothelioma, peritoneal cancer, and asbestosis.
In light of the severity of the offenses and the conclusions drawn from the investigation, the OM believes that criminal prosecution is both appropriate and necessary.
This case could set a precedent for corporate accountability in occupational health and safety, especially in industries dealing with toxic materials. A trial date has yet to be announced.
