A Maersk shareholder proposal regarding transportation of arms to Israel was not adopted in today’s AP Moller Maersk AGM [annual general meeting] after the Danish carrier assured its compliance with “regulations”.
The proposal called for “comprehensive documentation of Maersk’s human rights due diligence processes… with a focus on the transportation of high-risk shipments such as arms and military equipment to conflict zones”.
One shareholder said: “It is my belief that we as shareholders have a responsibility to ensure that our shares do not facilitate the shipment of arms or military cargo used in conflicts and wars where international conventions are being violated. We hold this responsibility not just as conscientious shareholders but also to shield the company from potential compliance risk.”
Over 70 global civil organisations—including Amnesty International, Oxfam, and ActionAid—had rallied behind the proposal.
But there was “clearly not enough stock held by those who want change”, according to one analyst, as the proposal was rejected by some 98% of shareholders in this afternoon’s meeting.
“One needs a large stake to be influential in those matters. It’s always the same, the good proposals (green, ethical behaviour, etc) always get rejected because they’re not investment-friendly,” they said.
Maersk CEO, Vincent Clerc, maintained throughout the AGM that Maersk has “a strict policy not to ship any weapons or ammunition to active conflict zones”.
The proposal that the shipping company “must stop transporting arms to Israel as long as there is a war going on in Gaza” was therefore not supported by the board of directors “as the premises for the proposal is not correct as the company is not transporting arms to Israel”.
Mr Clerc acknowledged that “the line between what [Maersk] will accept to transport, might not coincide with the wishes of everybody”, but assured that it was compliant with “laws and regulations”.
He explained that the board’s definition of “what is a weapon and what is not a weapon” is based on US and EU regulations, UN resolutions and conventions and “other applicable laws and standards”.
“We have to follow a certain classification and a certain code in order to figure out where we draw that line,” he said.
“We have been transporting military related cargo within the rules and regulations. It has been true for many years, and it is also in full compliance with the acceptance policies that I mentioned before. So yes, we are moving military equipment,” Mr Clerc added.
One shareholder asked: “Do you as a board understand the legal and reputational risks that you are exposing shareholders to by continuing to deny your involvement in shipping military equipment to Israel, despite numerous investigations corroborating these claims?”
The carrier again highlighted its compliance with “rules and regulations”.
Board chairman, Robert Maersk Uggla, labelled these allegations as “quite outrageous”.
“I actually find it quite unacceptable to say that we are contributing to genocide. On the contrary, the colleagues of Maersk do their utmost to support some of these conflict areas with relief cargo from multiple aid organizations,” he said.
An item proposing additional due diligence reporting was also not accepted.
“Since we already provide the disclosures and we continuously are improving as we prepare for our CSDDD [corporate sustainability due diligence directive], we do not see the need for additional disclosure requirements to be instituted through the AGM… in short we don’t need to disclose more, it’s already regulated in CSDDD.” Mr Clerc explained.
