The first big court case regarding an ecological disaster in the legal history of France comes to a conclusion on Wednesday with a judgement that should pronounce who was responsible for the black tide caused by the shipwreck of the Maltese-flagged tanker Erika in December 199, and which should also fix the amount of damages that should be paid to the victims.
One hundred and one civil parties are demanding indemnity amounting to e1,000 million. These include animal rights defenders, ecological associations, local cooperatives, mayors and hoteliers, and residents.
As a result of that disaster, holiday villages remained deserted, vegetables were inedible, fishing was suspended, around 150,000 birds died engulfed in the tar, swimming was forbidden, the economy of three regions was wrecked for a number of years as 20,000 tonnes of highly-polluting fuel were cleaned from 400 km of coast.
The damage was so great that, at a certain point, the victims held back from testifying before the Paris tribunal for fear they would revive memories and keep people from flocking back to the regions that have suffered so much.
The accused numbered 15, both moral and important people, who all claimed to be innocent. They took four months to explain their role in the drama, caused when the 25-year-old tanker, caught in a storm in the Gulf of Biscay, broke in two on 12 December 1999.
To delve into the complex chain of responsibilities, the court had to immerse itself in the complex world of maritime commerce, offshore companies, Indian crews and dockyards in Montenegro.
But the responsibility of the ship register country, Malta, has remained in the shadows, for Malta was not among the accused.
Despite no less than 48 experts or witnesses, a number of questions have remained unanswered.
Did French oil company Total knowingly take on a risk when it hired, for just one voyage, this old, corroded ship, to transport oil to Italy?
Did Italian ship-owner Giuseppe Savarese, hired by Antonio Pollara, neglect the upkeep of Erika due to financial difficulties?
Why did the ship classification company, the Italian Rina, paid by the ship-owner, give the ship a navigation certificate?
Was the captain, who did not turn up for the court case, obeying orders when he withdrew an SOS call, only to launch a second one when it was too late?
The four members of the rescue effort testified it was because of the ambiguous attitude of the captain and also because they lacked technical means that the rescue was so late.
The first oil company in the world to be arraigned and charged with responsibility for a maritime catastrophe, Total risks being fined a maximum of e375,000 but the civil parties are waiting with their claims of e12,600 million in damages.
Before this can be done, however, Judge Jean-Baptiste Parlos and his two assessors must see how they can go around the international conventions, which state that a lessor cannot be brought for trial.