OECD Secretariat and Members of the Working Party on Responsible Business Conduct,
- agentorangechild
- Jul 16
- 4 min read
Updated: Jul 17
Subject: Formal Complaint – Violations of Procedural Rights Under OECD Guidelines (Case 36 – Transferred to Netherlands NCP)
Dear OECD Secretariat and Members of the Working Party on Responsible Business Conduct,
I am writing to formally notify you of multiple procedural breaches and violations of my rights as a complainant under the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, relating to Case 36 – a matter I have now transferred to the Netherlands NCP due to obstruction, bias, and bad faith conduct by the Australian National Contact Point (AusNCP) and its Independent Examiner, Mr John Southalan.
Background and Timeline of Violations:
3 July 2025: I emailed the AusNCP excluding the US, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand from taking the lead on this case due to clear conflicts of interest, historical denial, and failure to enforce corporate accountability in TCDD-related harm.
4 July 2025: I formally excluded Germany for the same reasons, citing the existing stalled NCP case against Bayer and lack of meaningful enforcement.
Despite this clear position, Mr Southalan attempted to suggest transferring the case to the United States — directly ignoring my written instructions and the legitimacy of my concerns.
Over the following weeks, Mr Southalan dragged the process out, sending what he called “transparency updates” — which were, in fact, copy-paste emails falsely implying timely coordination. For example:
He sent identical emails, weeks apart, stating he had “contacted the US and Germany,” when in fact he had already been told they were excluded.
This pattern of deliberate stalling and misrepresentation continued while he avoided acknowledging my evidence, the legal urgency of the matter, or the breaches outlined under the Stockholm Convention and OECD Guidelines.
On 11 July 2025, due to this clear obstruction and bad faith, I formally transferred Case 36 to the Netherlands NCP myself.
I notified both the Netherlands NCP and the OECD Secretariat.
I provided my full evidence package, including international law citations, medical records, and documented correspondence with the AusNCP.
Procedural Breaches and Violations of My Rights:
Under the OECD Procedural Guidance and your “Core Criteria for Functional Equivalence,” the AusNCP has violated:
Transparency – by issuing misleading status updates and failing to disclose accurate timelines of coordination.
Equitability – by failing to engage in good faith, ignoring my legal position, and attempting to shift the case to jurisdictions I had already excluded.
Impartiality – by showing preference to jurisdictions known for historical denial and inaction regarding TCDD harm.
Predictability – by delaying the process for weeks while pretending to “gather responses” already ruled out by me and by the evidence.
Request for OECD Intervention:
I am now requesting:
A formal review of the AusNCP’s conduct in Case 36, including Mr Southalan’s correspondence, delays, and conflict of interest.
Confirmation that the Netherlands NCP will retain jurisdiction over this case moving forward.
Oversight from the OECD Secretariat and Working Party to ensure no further obstruction by parties previously excluded.
This is a case involving systemic, multi-decade transnational harm to children from dioxin exposure, and the Guidelines were violated not only by the enterprises involved, but also by the AusNCP process itself.
Every word of my correspondence is documented and timestamped. I acted in good faith throughout. The obstruction I’ve faced is now formally recorded as part of an ICC submission for crimes against humanity.
The emails sent to Mr John Southalan on 3 July 2025 (excluding the US, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand) and 4 July 2025 (excluding Germany) are attached to this message and publicly timestamped in my website blog.
Thank you for your immediate attention to this matter. I am available to provide all supporting documentation upon request.
Warm Agent Orange Burns regards,
Danielle Stevens
Australia 🇦🇺
We will always be a child of a Vietnam Veteran
4/07/2025 sent
Dear Mr Southalan,
Thank you again for your ongoing coordination of Complaint 36.
Upon further investigation, I wish to formally update my position regarding the selection of a lead National Contact Point (NCP).
I no longer support Germany as a potential lead for this complaint.
In April 2024, six civil society organisations submitted an OECD complaint against Bayer AG to the German NCP, raising serious allegations of human rights abuses, environmental degradation, and systemic harm across Latin America. Over a year later, the German NCP has failed to issue even an admissibility decision.
This inaction raises serious concerns regarding Germany’s capacity or willingness to confront multinational corporate actors — particularly in relation to Bayer, a central subject of my own complaint.
Given that Bayer is again named in this case, and that Germany has yet to act on a similar complaint from well-respected international NGOs, I believe it would be procedurally and ethically inappropriate for the German NCP to lead this matter.
Therefore, I formally reaffirm:
• Australia, the United States, Canada, and New Zealand are conflicted and cannot lead.
• Germany is now disqualified on grounds of existing delay, conflict, and procedural failure.
• The Netherlands remains the only neutral, capable, and appropriate coordinating NCP for this case.
Thank you for your continued attention. Please consider this position as formally on record in regard to the next step of coordination.
Warm Agent Orange Burns regards,
Danielle Stevens
We will always be a child of a Vietnam Veteran
A formal complaint has been lodged with the International Criminal Court for Crimes against Humanity. The final submission is 1st of July 2025
All correspondence can be included in legal proceedings.
B
Commentaires