Why two new complaints will be filed in the illegally treated bottled water case

“A financial negotiation must not put an end to investigations into a fraud of international scale.” While the Epinal court announced a few days ago the signing of a public interest judicial agreement (CJIP), supposed to allow Nestlé to escape a possible trial in this case, in exchange for the payment of a fine of 2 million euros, the NGO Foodwatch is filing a complaint again, and is requesting the rapid appointment of an investigating judgeas well as “exemplary sanctions”, according to information from franceinfo and the World.

These are two new complaints, this time with civil action, filed with the Paris judicial court, to shed light on the responsibility of manufacturers in this vast case of consumer deception, but also on the lack of transparency of the State in this case. Indeed, as revealed The World and the investigation unit of Radio France in January 2024, the government had been informed in 2021, by the Nestlé company itself, during a meeting organized at Bercy with the office of Agnès Pannier-Runacher, at the time Minister of Industry, of the implementation of illicit treatments intended to purify water sources contaminated by bacteria and pesticides.

After playing the game of negotiation with the industrialist, the government had decided to grant, during an interministerial meeting in February 2023, an exemption to the Nestlé group so that it could continue to use microfilters prohibited by the regulations on natural mineral waters, supposed to be naturally free of any form of contamination. This decision had been taken by the government despite the contrary advice of its administrations. According to documents that The World and Radio France were able to consult, the national agency for food safety (ANSES) had warned the government that Nestlé could request such exemptions in order to continue bottling its waters, but that the granting of such an exemption would not be “not acceptable”, and that this could expose France to the risk of European litigation.

In an audit published this summer, the European Commission also pointed out the “serious shortcomings” of France this affair, and underlined, not only the “inadequate collaboration within the competent authorities” but also “the lack of immediate follow-up measures“to ensure that industrialists”remedy non-conformities“. In short: the authorities’ laissez-faire attitude towards industrialists.

According to Foodwatch, “the pollution of the sources exploited by Nestlé should not have led to the use of prohibited treatments, but to interrupting the distribution of mineral water, and to informing the courts and consumers.” The NGO, which explains that it has “refused Nestlé money” within the framework of the CJIP, “cannot bring itself to bury the massive fraud affair which has affected the whole world for decades, in particular the famous Perrier”before specifying that “Impunity is unacceptable, a financial deal sealed in Epinal must not put an end to investigations into a fraud of international magnitude“.

If the NGO insists on the case of the “famous” Perrier brand, this is because the financial agreement sealed on September 10 only concerns Nestlé Waters Supply Est, that is to say the brands Vittel, Hépar and Contrex, which was confirmed, at World and to Franceinfo, the prosecutor of Epinal Frédéric Nahon. Like The World and Radio France revealed last January that the director of ARS Occitanie, Didier Jaffre, did not, unlike his counterpart in the east, report the facts to the courts, as required by article 40 of the code of criminal procedure, according to which any administration or agent of the State has the obligation to report any crime or offence that comes to their attention.

However, as Foodwatch points out, “The scandal of illegal filtrations also affects the Perrier brand and the catchments located in the Gard“The situation within the Perrier factory is perhaps even the most worrying, since last April, nearly 3 million bottles of the brand had to be destroyed due to, according to the prefecture, of “a risk to consumer health” following “an episode of contamination by germs indicating contamination of fecal origin”. According to the Foodwatch complaint, it is still possible “questioning the health risk” for consumers,”both on water that is no longer treated and on water that is still treated, given the extent of the contamination to which it is subject.”

In its second complaint, Foodwatch also returns to the charge against the Alma group, at the origin of this whole affair. It was indeed on the basis of the report of an employee of the Alma group that the DGCCRF had discovered, in 2020, the use of prohibited filters. The exploitation of the group’s customer lists had then revealed that other manufacturers in the sector, notably Nestlé, had used non-compliant purification processes.

In order to support its complaint, the NGO Foodwatch was able to attach invoices, purchase orders, photos and also email exchanges, which Franceinfo was able to consult, and which prove the use of these prohibited treatments, in particular the injection of CO2 intended to carbonate water.exception”, but also the use of iron sulfate, traditionally used to eliminate arsenic in wastewater. The Alma group, which we contacted in January, had nevertheless assured us that it did not use “no non-compliant treatment on any of its brands”. He now speaks to the World and Franceinfo, “old and isolated facts”and states that “there “The health and food safety of our waters has never been called into question.”

For his part, the Cusset prosecutor, in charge of the preliminary investigation opened against the Alma company, questioned by Le Monde and Franceinfo concerning the possible opening of a judicial investigation, has not yet been able to answer us.