Adil Project

8/4/2019 Adil Project

1/26

1. What caused the gas leak?

Shortly after the gas release, Union Carbide launched an aggressive effort to identify the cause. An initialinvestigation by Union Carbide experts showed that a large volume of water had apparently beenintroduced into the methylisocyanate (MIC) tank. This caused a chemical reaction that forced thepressure release valve to open and allowed the gas to leak. A committee of experts working on behalf ofthe Indian government conducted its own investigation and reached the same conclusion. Anindependent investigation by engineering consulting firm Arthur D. Little determined that the water couldonly have been introduced into the tank deliberately, since process safety systems -- in place andoperational -- would have prevented water from entering the tank by accident.

Back to Top

2. Who could have sabotaged plant operations and caused the gas leak?

Investigations suggest that only an employee with the appropriate skills and knowledge of the site couldhave tampered with the tank. An independent investigation by the engineering consulting firm Arthur D.Little determined that the water could only have been introduced into the tank deliberately, since processsafety systems -- in place and operational -- would have prevented water from entering the tank byaccident.

Back to Top

3. If sabotage is the suspected cause, why was this person not brought to justice?

The Indian authorities are well aware of the identity of the employee and the nature of the evidenceagainst him. Indian authorities refused to pursue this individual because they, as litigants, were notinterested in proving that anyone other than Union Carbide was to blame for the tragedy.

Back to Top

4. Why has Carbide never disclosed the name of the employee that sabotaged the plant?

Union Carbide never publicly disclosed the name of the employee because it would serve no usefulpurpose; UC is not a governmental body and has no authority to arrest or charge anyone. However,the Indian Government, through its Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), had access to the sameinformation as did Union Carbide. The CBI was well aware of the identity of the employee and the natureof the evidence against him. Indian authorities refused to pursue this individual because they, as litigants,were not interested in proving that anyone other than Union Carbide was to blame for the tragedy. Thefact that employee sabotage caused the disaster under existing law would have exculpated UnionCarbide. You may be interested to note that the CBI subjected the UCIL employee who found the localpressure indicator was missing on the morning after the incident (a key factor in UC's sabotage theory) tosix days of interrogation to get him to change his story. That effort was unsuccessful.

Back to Top

5. Were the valves on the MIC tanks at the plant "faulty"?

No. In fact, documented evidence gathered after the incident showed that the valve close to the plant'swater-washing operation was closed and leak-tight. Furthermore, process safety systems -- in place andoperational -- would have prevented water from entering the tank by accident.

Back to Top

6. Were there safety concerns at the plant before the tragedy?


2/26

No. In 1982, a technical team from Union Carbide visited the Bhopal plant to conduct a routine processsafety review, and identified some safety issues to be addressed by the plant. The plant addressed all ofthose issues well before the December 1984 gas leak. None of them had anything to do with the incident.

Back to Top

7. Why didnt the plants safety systems contain the leak?

Based on several investigations, the safety systems in place could not have prevented a chemicalreaction of this magnitude from causing a leak. In designing the plant's safety systems, a chemicalreaction of this magnitude was not factored in for two reasons:

1. The tank's gas storage system was designed to automatically prevent such a large amount of waterfrom being inadvertently introduced into the system; and

2. Process safety systems -- in place and operational -- would have prevented water from entering thetank by accident. The system design did not, however, account for the deliberate introduction of a largevolume of water by an employee.

Back to Top

8. How do you respond to concerns expressed about the technologies used at the plant prior tothe incident?

Most of the attacks on the Bhopal plant's operation were made before the investigations were completeand often by people searching for a quick explanation for a terrible disaster. Critics' suggestions that threecertain technologies may have been in use are incorrect. Two of the technologies (a carbon monoxideprocess and a MIC-to-Sevin process) were never used at the plant. A naphthol process developed byUnion Carbide India Limited (UCIL) was shut down permanently in 1982, two years before the incident.None of them had anything to do with the incident. Employee sabotage not faulty design or operation was the cause of the tragedy.

Back to Top

9. Who owned the Bhopal plant at the time of the incident and who owns it now?

The Bhopal plant was owned and operated by Union Carbide India Limited (UCIL), an Indian company inwhich Union Carbide Corporation held just over half of the stock. Indian financial institutions andthousands of private investors in India held the rest of the stock. In 1994, Union Carbide sold its entireinterest in UCIL to Mcleod Russel India Limited, which renamed the company Eveready Industries India,Limited (Eveready Industries). In 1998, the Madhya Pradesh State Government, which owns and hadbeen leasing the property to Eveready, took over the facility and assumed all accountability for the site,including the completion of any additional remediation.

Back to Top

10. Did Union Carbide India Limited abandon the Bhopal plant after the gas leak?

No. UCIL, an Indian company, managed and operated the Bhopal plant on a day-to-day basis at the timeof the gas leak. After the incident, UCIL completed one of the most single important remediation activities- the transformation and removal of tens of thousands of pounds of MIC from the plant. In the yearsfollowing the tragedy, the Indian government severely restricted access to the site. UCIL was only able toundertake additional clean-up work in the years just prior to the sale, and spent some $2 million on thateffort. The central and state government authorities in India approved, monitored and directed every stepof the clean-up work.
http://www.mp.gov.in/bgtrrdmp/default.htmhttp://www.mp.gov.in/bgtrrdmp/default.htm


3/26

We understand that, after the sale of UCIL stock in 1994, Eveready Industries continued the clean-upwork at the site until 1998. That year, the Madhya Pradesh State Government, which owns and had beenleasing the property to Eveready, took over the facility and assumed all accountability for the site,including the completion of any additional remediation. In 2004, a Public Interest Litigation was filed and iscurrently before the State of Madhya Pradesh High Court in Jabalpur. One of the claims made in thelitigation -- against the Union of India, the State of Madhya Pradesh and private companies allegedlyresponsible -- seeks remediation of the plant site. However, according to media reports, court-ordered

remediation efforts directed at the government entities have proceeded slowly. For example, the mediareported in 2007 that the Supreme Court of India had directed the central and state governments to payfor collection of waste on the site and to have it landfilled or incinerated, as appropriate. While some ofthe waste has been landfilled, public interest groups and the State of Gujarat, where the wasteincineration facility is located, have challenged the incineration. Proposals made by private companieshave similarly been questioned or rejected.

Back to Top

11. What did Union Carbide do to assist Bhopal victims after the gas leak?

Immediately following the gas release, Union Carbide Corporation began providing aid to the victims andestablished a process to resolve their claims. Among the many efforts Union Carbide took to address the

situation were:

Organizing a team of top medical experts to help identify the best treatment options and work withthe local medical community;

Providing substantial amounts of medical equipment, supplies and expertise to the victims;

Openly sharing all its information on methylisocyanate (MIC) with the Government of India,including all published and unpublished toxicity studies available at the time;

Dispatching a team of technical MIC experts to Bhopal on the day after the tragedy, which carriedMIC studies that were widely shared with medical and scientific personnel in Bhopal;

Establishing a $100 million charitable trust fund to build a hospital for victims, and

Offering a $2.2 million grant to establish a vocational-technical center in Bhopal to provide localjobs.

In 1989, Union Carbide and UCIL entered into a $470 million legal settlement with the Indian Governmentthat settled all claims arising from the incident. The Indian Supreme Court affirmed the settlement anddescribed it as "just, equitable and reasonable." Union Carbide and UCIL promptly paid the money to theGovernment of India. (Please see "The Incident, Response and Settlement" section of this website foradditional information on UCC's efforts and contributions.)

An India media report in September 2006 stated that the "registrar in the office of WelfareCommissioner... said all cases of initial compensation claims by victims of the 1984 Bhopal gas tragedyhave been cleared With the clearance of initial compensation claims and revision petitions, no case ispending"

Back to Top

12. How do you respond to assertions that Union Carbide would not share all its toxicologicalinformation on methylisocyanate (MIC) after the tragedy due to propriety concerns?

This is a widespread misconception and is just not true. Union Carbide immediately accepted moralresponsibility for the tragedy and gave all toxicity information on the chemicals involved in themanufacture of MIC to the Government of India immediately following the incident. Additionally, thegovernment seized plant records after the tragedy and these also would have included all suchinformation on MIC. On the day of the tragedy, Union Carbide dispatched a team of technical MIC


4/26

experts, who carried MIC studies that were shared with medical and scientific personnel in Bhopal. UCexperts provided all published and unpublished studies available at that time on MIC toxicity.

Back to Top

13. Were the environmental standards at the Bhopal plant inferior to those at Union Carbide's U.S.operations?

No. To the contrary, the Bhopal plant design had the benefit of knowledge acquired from the operation of

older chemical facilities. For example, as compared to other similar plants, Environmental Impact

Assessment ratings for the Bhopal plant show favorable ratings in wastewater disposal and carbon

monoxide emissions and, essentially, the same ratings as other similar plants for potential effects on

human health. Bhopal gas tragedyBhopal tragedy v/s London Olympics: Dow sponsorship on dock London, Aug 8: A new controversy has been emerged over Dow Chemical Company's sponsorship for the London Olympics 2012 as the

company was being blamed for the deadly 1984 Bhopal gas tragedy.The campaigners, who are fighting for almost 5,000 victims of ...

Find More Articles On: bhopal gas tragedy| olympics |london|britain

Bhopal Gas victims' outfits oppose Carbide plant demolitionBhopal, May 27: Bhopal gas victims' organisations have strongly opposed the proposed demolition of the defunct Union Carbide plant here

which killed thousands and maimed lak...

Find More Articles On: bhopal gas tragedy|jairam ramesh|protest

CBI to be asked to push for early hearing in Bhopal case: Govt New Delhi, May 12: Admitting that it has moved on Bhopal gas disaster issue in view of public outcry, the Government today said it will ask

CBI to seek early hearing in a Bh...

Find More Articles On: bhopal gas tragedy| new delhi|supreme court|cbi
http://news.oneindia.in/2011/08/08/bhopal-tragedy-dow-s-sponsorship-london-olympics-row.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/08/08/bhopal-tragedy-dow-s-sponsorship-london-olympics-row.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=olympicshttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=londonhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=londonhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=londonhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=britainhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=britainhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/05/27/bhopalgas-victims-outfits-oppose-carbide-plantdemolition-aid0126.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=jairam-rameshhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=jairam-rameshhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=protesthttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=protesthttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=protesthttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/05/12/cbito-be-asked-to-push-for-early-hearing-in-bhopal-casego-aid0126.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=new-delhihttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=new-delhihttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=supreme-courthttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=supreme-courthttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=supreme-courthttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=cbihttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=cbihttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/05/12/cbito-be-asked-to-push-for-early-hearing-in-bhopal-casego-aid0126.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/05/27/bhopalgas-victims-outfits-oppose-carbide-plantdemolition-aid0126.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/08/08/bhopal-tragedy-dow-s-sponsorship-london-olympics-row.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/08/08/bhopal-tragedy-dow-s-sponsorship-london-olympics-row.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=olympicshttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=londonhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=britainhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/05/27/bhopalgas-victims-outfits-oppose-carbide-plantdemolition-aid0126.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=jairam-rameshhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=protesthttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/05/12/cbito-be-asked-to-push-for-early-hearing-in-bhopal-casego-aid0126.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=new-delhihttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=supreme-courthttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=cbi


5/26

Bhopal gas case: Government to abide by SC decisionNew Delhi, May 11: The Government today said it will "abide" by the decision of the Supreme Court which dismissed CBI's curative petition

against an earlier apex court judge...

Find More Articles On: bhopal gas tragedy| new delhi|supreme court|veerappa moily

SC dismisses CBI's curative petition on Bhopal tragedyNew Delhi, May 11: In an apparent setback to the campaign for those seeking stringent punishment for the accused in the Bhopal gas

disaster, the Supreme Court today (May 11)...

Find More Articles On: bhopal gas tragedy| supreme court| new delhi|cbi

SC leaves Bhopal tragedy victims high & dry; bashes CBINew Delhi, May 11: It seems that the victims of 1984 Bhopal gas tragedy have been rejected to receive any justice in their own country. Their

incurable wounds were left unse...

Find More Articles On: bhopal gas tragedy| supreme court| cbi

BGPMUS demands day-to-day hearing in Bhopal Gas tragedy caseBhopal, April 20: The Bhopal Gas Peedit Mahila Udyog Sangathan (BGPMUS) today (April 20) demanded that hearing on the 26-year-old

gas tragedy case should be held on a day-to...

Find More Articles On: bhopal gas tragedy| madhya pradesh
http://news.oneindia.in/2011/05/11/bhopalgas-case-govt-to-abide-by-scdecision-aid0126.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=new-delhihttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=new-delhihttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=supreme-courthttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=supreme-courthttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=supreme-courthttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=veerappa-moilyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=veerappa-moilyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=veerappa-moilyhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/05/11/scdismisses-cbis-curative-petition-onbhopal-aid0126.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/05/11/scdismisses-cbis-curative-petition-onbhopal-aid0126.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=supreme-courthttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=supreme-courthttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=new-delhihttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=new-delhihttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=cbihttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=cbihttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/05/11/sc-says-no-to-re-open-bhopal-trageday-case-cbi-aid0101.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/05/11/sc-says-no-to-re-open-bhopal-trageday-case-cbi-aid0101.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=supreme-courthttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=supreme-courthttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=cbihttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=cbihttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/04/20/bgpmusdemands-day-to-day-hearing-in-bhopal-gas-tragedycase-aid0126.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/04/20/bgpmusdemands-day-to-day-hearing-in-bhopal-gas-tragedycase-aid0126.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=madhya-pradeshhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=madhya-pradeshhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/04/20/bgpmusdemands-day-to-day-hearing-in-bhopal-gas-tragedycase-aid0126.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/05/11/sc-says-no-to-re-open-bhopal-trageday-case-cbi-aid0101.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/05/11/scdismisses-cbis-curative-petition-onbhopal-aid0126.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/05/11/bhopalgas-case-govt-to-abide-by-scdecision-aid0126.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/05/11/bhopalgas-case-govt-to-abide-by-scdecision-aid0126.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=new-delhihttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=supreme-courthttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=veerappa-moilyhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/05/11/scdismisses-cbis-curative-petition-onbhopal-aid0126.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=supreme-courthttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=new-delhihttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=cbihttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/05/11/sc-says-no-to-re-open-bhopal-trageday-case-cbi-aid0101.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=supreme-courthttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=cbihttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/04/20/bgpmusdemands-day-to-day-hearing-in-bhopal-gas-tragedycase-aid0126.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=madhya-pradesh


6/26

Bhopal gas tragedy: CBI admits mistake in approaching lateNew Delhi, Apr 13: CBI today (Apr 13) admitted in the Supreme Court that it made a "mistake" in approaching it late for restoring stringent

charges in Bhopal gas tragedy cas...

Find More Articles On: bhopal gas tragedy| new delhi|cbi |supreme court

Bhopal gas tragedy: SC questions delay in filing curative pleaNew Delhi, Apr 13: The Supreme Court today (Apr 13) questioned the CBI for approaching it 16 years after it had diluted in Sep 1996 the

charge of culpable homicide not amoun...

Find More Articles On: bhopal gas tragedy| new delhi|supreme court|cbi

Bhopal gas case:SC to hear for harsher charges against accused New Delhi, Apr 12: A five-judge constitution bench of the Supreme Court will hear the Centre's plea for prosecuting Bhopal gas tragedy case

accused, who have escaped with li...

Find More Articles On: bhopal gas tragedy| supreme court| new delhi

WikiLeaks revelation 'distorted, one-sided': BuddhadebKolkata, Apr 5: West Bengal Chief Minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee has termed as "distorted" and "one-sided" the WikiLeaks revelation

that he had invited Dow Chemicals to a ...

Find More Articles On: buddhadeb bhattacharjee |west bengal |wikileaks |kolkata |bhopal gas tragedy
http://news.oneindia.in/2011/04/14/bhopalgas-tragedy-cbi-admits-mistake-in-approachinglate-aid0126.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/04/14/bhopalgas-tragedy-cbi-admits-mistake-in-approachinglate-aid0126.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=new-delhihttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=new-delhihttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=cbihttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=cbihttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=supreme-courthttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=supreme-courthttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/04/13/bhopalgas-tragedy-sc-questions-delay-in-filing-curativepl-aid0126.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=new-delhihttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=new-delhihttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=supreme-courthttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=supreme-courthttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=supreme-courthttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=cbihttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=cbihttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/04/12/bhopalgas-casesc-to-hear-for-harsher-charges-againstaccus-aid0126.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/04/12/bhopalgas-casesc-to-hear-for-harsher-charges-againstaccus-aid0126.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=supreme-courthttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=supreme-courthttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=new-delhihttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=new-delhihttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/04/05/wikileaksrevelation-distorted-one-sidedbuddhadeb-aid0126.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/04/05/wikileaksrevelation-distorted-one-sidedbuddhadeb-aid0126.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=buddhadeb-bhattacharjeehttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=west-bengalhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=west-bengalhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=wikileakshttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=wikileakshttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=kolkatahttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=kolkatahttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/04/05/wikileaksrevelation-distorted-one-sidedbuddhadeb-aid0126.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/04/12/bhopalgas-casesc-to-hear-for-harsher-charges-againstaccus-aid0126.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/04/13/bhopalgas-tragedy-sc-questions-delay-in-filing-curativepl-aid0126.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/04/14/bhopalgas-tragedy-cbi-admits-mistake-in-approachinglate-aid0126.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/04/14/bhopalgas-tragedy-cbi-admits-mistake-in-approachinglate-aid0126.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=new-delhihttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=cbihttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=supreme-courthttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/04/13/bhopalgas-tragedy-sc-questions-delay-in-filing-curativepl-aid0126.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=new-delhihttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=supreme-courthttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=cbihttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/04/12/bhopalgas-casesc-to-hear-for-harsher-charges-againstaccus-aid0126.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=supreme-courthttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=new-delhihttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/04/05/wikileaksrevelation-distorted-one-sidedbuddhadeb-aid0126.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=buddhadeb-bhattacharjeehttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=west-bengalhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=wikileakshttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=kolkatahttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedy


7/26

Bhopal Gas Tragedy accused Anderson to back to India New Delhi, Mar 23: The main accused of the Bhopal Gas tragedy Warren Anderson has been ordered to back to India to face the fresh trials

regarding the man-made calamity in 1...

Find More Articles On: warren anderson |bhopal gas tragedy |cbi| new delhi

First

1

2

3

4

5

6

..

7

Next

Last

More Headlines New twist in Anna's aide's murder case

Anna to be in Jharkhand school syllabus?

21 Indians taken hostage off Oman coast

2G probe: CBI snoozes, DMK flays

Arunachal joins anti-HIV campaign
http://news.oneindia.in/2011/03/23/warren-anderson-extradition-allowed-bhopal-tragedy-aid0101.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=warren-andersonhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=cbihttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=cbihttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=cbihttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=new-delhihttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=new-delhihttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedy&start=1%20title=http://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedy&start=2http://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedy&start=3http://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedy&start=4http://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedy&start=5http://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedy&start=6http://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedy&start=7http://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedy&start=2http://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedy&start=6http://news.oneindia.in/2011/08/20/rti-activist-shehla-masood-murder-proof-against-ips-man.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/08/20/anna-hazare-lokpal-movement-jharkhand-school-syllabus.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/08/20/21-indians-taken-hostage-off-oman-coast.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/08/20/21-indians-taken-hostage-off-oman-coast.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/08/20/cbi-allegations-silly-based-on-assumptions-md-of-kt.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/08/20/arunachal-joins-anti-hiv-campaign.htmlhttp://netspiderads3.indiatimes.com/ads.dll/clickthrough?slotid=673http://news.oneindia.in/2011/03/23/warren-anderson-extradition-allowed-bhopal-tragedy-aid0101.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/03/23/warren-anderson-extradition-allowed-bhopal-tragedy-aid0101.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=warren-andersonhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedyhttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=cbihttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=new-delhihttp://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedy&start=1%20title=http://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedy&start=2http://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedy&start=3http://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedy&start=4http://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedy&start=5http://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedy&start=6http://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedy&start=7http://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedy&start=2http://news.oneindia.in/search.html?topic=bhopal-gas-tragedy&start=6http://news.oneindia.in/2011/08/20/rti-activist-shehla-masood-murder-proof-against-ips-man.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/08/20/anna-hazare-lokpal-movement-jharkhand-school-syllabus.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/08/20/21-indians-taken-hostage-off-oman-coast.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/08/20/cbi-allegations-silly-based-on-assumptions-md-of-kt.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/08/20/arunachal-joins-anti-hiv-campaign.html


8/26

Priority No1 is to push reforms, says PM

Lokayukta ADGP to probe BSY's role

Anna stir: Protests continues in B'lore

Another threat to Anna's JanLokpal Bill?

We are open to all views: Parl panel

Back to Top

14. Is there groundwater contamination at the site?

According to media reports, various groups have made assessments of the groundwater quality at theBhopal site through the years, including a recent effort supervised by the State of Madhya Pradesh.Questions regarding groundwater are best addressed by the State Government.

Back to Top

15. Did the gas leak contaminate the groundwater and soil outside the plant?

No. Indian government authorities have publicly and repeatedly confirmed that no contamination of soil orgroundwater outside the plant walls resulted from the gas leak.

Back to Top

16. Did the day-to-day operations of the plant contaminate the groundwater or soil outside theplant?

No. A report issued by the India's National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI) in1997 found soil contamination within the factory premises at three major areas that had been used aschemical disposal and treatment areas. However, the study found no evidence of groundwatercontamination outside the plant and concluded that local water-wells were not affected by plant disposalactivities.

A 1998 study of drinking-water sources near the plant site by the Madhya PradeshPollution ControlBoard did find some contamination, but it was unrelated to the plant. The Control Board did not find anytraces of chemicals linked to chemicals formerly used at the UCIL plant. Rather, the Control Board foundthat the contamination likely was caused by improper drainage of water and other sources ofenvironmental pollution.

While we are aware of conflicting claims being made by various groups and reported in the media, wehave no first-hand knowledge of what chemicals, if any, may remain at the site and what impact, if any,

they may be having on area groundwater. The Hindustan Times reported on April 29, 2006, that A studyby the National Institute of Occupational Health (NIOH), Ahmedabad, has virtually debunked voluntaryorganizations' fear about contamination of water in and around Union Carbide plant.

...the report says that serum levels of pesticide residue (DDT & HCH) and mercury in the blood of peopleliving adjacent to the plant are comparable with the level of these compounds reported from other parts ofthe country. It further said that the results of study showed that contents of VOCs [volatile organiccompounds] i.e., benzene, toluene, xylene and cholorobenzene, in water samples were not detected andwere found below the detection limit of the instrument, i.e., 2 ppm [parts per million].
http://news.oneindia.in/2011/08/20/priority-no-1-is-to-push-reforms-says-manmohan-singh.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/08/20/lokayuktaadgp-to-probe-into-bsys-role-in-illegal-mining.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/08/20/protests-continues-in-bangalore-for-hazare-campaign.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/08/20/lokpal-third-version-rti-activist-aruna-roy-anna-fast.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/08/20/abhishek-singhvi-parliament-panel-chief-lokpal-bill.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/08/20/abhishek-singhvi-parliament-panel-chief-lokpal-bill.htmlhttp://www.mp.gov.in/bgtrrdmp/default.htmhttp://www.mp.gov.in/bgtrrdmp/default.htmhttp://a.tribalfusion.com/h.click/apmR8ToTjIXF7dWtFQm6fJnsfopWMH5EF83dAr3A7EmFUGXVfRYsM00GjonTvV2UJ5WF7ZcWAQWRqUYScnnPWjy0HnoVPbn3GB00UYIVmqw4ArhQmMF3WrmXW3AmHAw4PU03sngTsUaVVZbhP6QnTHYRWmepw7BRmFmUoAYEm6TlsSejoab2tSPat9yTxQqPTp7mN7vTvprZd3rftHhSZage/http:/clk.atdmt.com/INM/go/347254610/direct/01/476524910/http://news.oneindia.in/2011/08/20/priority-no-1-is-to-push-reforms-says-manmohan-singh.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/08/20/lokayuktaadgp-to-probe-into-bsys-role-in-illegal-mining.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/08/20/protests-continues-in-bangalore-for-hazare-campaign.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/08/20/lokpal-third-version-rti-activist-aruna-roy-anna-fast.htmlhttp://news.oneindia.in/2011/08/20/abhishek-singhvi-parliament-panel-chief-lokpal-bill.htmlhttp://www.mp.gov.in/bgtrrdmp/default.htm


9/26

MP [Madhya Pradesh] High Court is also seized of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) on the issue andhas been monitoring progress of Union Carbide plant's cleaning up operation undertaken by the MPPollution Control Board at its behest. Now, the State Government has filed the NIOH report in the HighCourt in support of its contention that hazardous wastes lying in the Union Carbide were notcontaminating water.

The NIOH team, in its report, has concluded that serum levels of DDT and HCH and mercury level inblood of people affected by contamination was comparable with the levels of these compounds from anyother part of the country. ...Similarly, the levels of mercury in water and soil sample outside the UCILcompound and other locations were also comparable with the levels of mercury reported from other partsof the country....

For additional information, contact the Madhya Pradesh State Government.

Back to Top

17. What remediation work has been performed at the site?

UCIL was only able to undertake additional clean-up work in the years just prior to the sale (1994), and

spent some $2 million on that effort. The central and state government authorities in India approved,monitored and directed every step of the clean-up work. We understand that, after UCC sold its stock inUCIL in 1994, the renamed company -- Eveready Industries -- continued the clean-up work at the siteuntil 1998. That year, the Madhya Pradesh State Government, which owns and had been leasing theproperty to Eveready, took over the facility and assumed all accountability for the site, including thecompletion of any additional remediation.

In 2004, a Public Interest Litigation was filed and is currently before the State of Madhya Pradesh HighCourt in Jabalpur. One of the claims made in the litigation -- against the Union of India, the State ofMadhya Pradesh and private companies allegedly responsible -- seeks remediation of the plant site.However, according to media reports, court-ordered remediation efforts directed at the governmententities have proceeded slowly. For example, the media reported in 2007 that the Supreme Court of Indiahad directed the central and state governments to pay for collection of waste on the site and to have itlandfilled or incinerated, as appropriate. While some of the waste has been landfilled, public interestgroups and the State of Gujarat, where the waste incineration facility is located, have challenged theincineration.

Proposals made by private companies have similarly been questioned or rejected. For example, activistgroups and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have protested against and repeatedly blockedremediation attempts by those who offered to help raise funds for clean up or to conduct pro-bonoremediation. It's surprising that the very people who claim to have dedicated their lives to helping thepeople of Bhopal continue to block efforts to clean up the site.

Back to Top

18. Why shouldnt Union Carbide be responsible for the Bhopal site clean up under the polluterpays principle?

Union Carbide Corporation did not own or operate the site. If the court responsible for directing clean-upefforts ultimately applies the "polluter pays" principle, it would seem that legal responsibility would fall toUnion Carbide India Limited, which leased the land, operated the site and was a separate, publicly tradedIndian company when the Bhopal tragedy occurred. In 1994, Union Carbide sold its interest in UnionCarbide India Limited with the approval of the Indian Supreme Court. The company was renamedEveready Industries India Limited and remains a viable company today.

Back to Top
http://www.mp.gov.in/bgtrrdmp/default.htmhttp://www.mp.gov.in/bgtrrdmp/default.htm


10/26

19. What about claims of contaminated groundwater outside the plant contaminating the adjoiningregion?

While we are aware of conflicting claims being made by various groups and reported in the media, wehave no first-hand knowledge of what chemicals, if any, may remain at the site and what impact, if anythey may be having on area groundwater.

It is important to note, however, that a 1998 study of drinking-water sources near the plant site by theMadhya Pradesh Pollution Control Board did find some contamination that likely was caused by improperdrainage of water and other sources of environmental pollution. The Control Board did not find any tracesof chemicals linked to chemicals formerly used at the UCIL plant. And, the Hindustan Times reported onApril 29, 2006, that "A study by the National Institute of Occupational Health (NIOH), Ahmedabad, hasvirtually debunked voluntary organisations' fear about contamination of water in and around UnionCarbide plant." (See Question 13 for more details.) We believe it is important for theMadhya PradeshState Government to complete the remediation of the plant site. The State is in the best position toevaluate all scientific information that is available and make the right decision for Bhopal. For specificdetails, please contact theMadhya Pradesh State Government.

Back to Top

20. What is the status of litigation against Union Carbide regarding remediation of the site and/orpaying additional restitution to victims?

In 1989, Union Carbide and UCIL entered into a $470 million legal settlement with the IndianGovernment, settling all claims arising from the incident. The Indian Supreme Court affirmed thesettlement and described it as "just, equitable and reasonable." Union Carbide and UCIL promptly paidthe money to the Government of India. A lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in 1999 asserting claims forpersonal injuries and property damage arising out the Bhopal gas disaster was dismissed, and allsubsequent appeals in the case have upheld the dismissal. A few other cases, filed in New York Federalcourt in November 2004, and thereafter, have focused on site remediation and compensation forresidents. These cases have largely been dismissed by the courts, although recently one such case wassent back to the District Court for limited further activity based strictly on procedural grounds. A recentcase, filed in March 2007, and making similar claims, has been stayed pending the resolution of theabove-mentioned lawsuit.

Back to Top

21. What role has the Government of India played in the aftermath of the Bhopal tragedy?

The Government of India entered into a settlement with Union Carbide Corporation and Union CarbideIndia Limited on behalf of the victims. The settlement resulted in a fund that determined eligibility and paidthe victims; a government organization administered the fund. In its 1991 reaffirmation of the 1989 Bhopalsettlement, the Indian Supreme Court required the Government of India to make up for any shortfall in thesettlement account (see page 682, paragraph 198 of the Courts ruling on Bhopal.com) and to acquire amedical insurance policy to cover 100,000 people who might later develop symptoms shown to haveresulted from being exposed during the gas release (see pages 684-686, paragraph 205-208).

Therefore, any question regarding monetary reparations as a result of the Bhopal tragedy should bedirected to the Government of India.

Back to Top

22. Has the Government of India paid out the settlement money to the victims?

The Government of India (GOI) enacted the Bhopal Gas Leak Disaster Act in 1985, enabling the GOI toact as the sole legal representative of the victims in claims arising from or related to the Bhopal disaster.
http://www.mp.gov.in/bgtrrdmp/default.htmhttp://www.mp.gov.in/bgtrrdmp/default.htmhttp://www.mp.gov.in/bgtrrdmp/default.htmhttp://www.mp.gov.in/bgtrrdmp/default.htmhttp://www.mp.gov.in/bgtrrdmp/default.htmhttp://bhopal.com/http://www.mp.gov.in/bgtrrdmp/default.htmhttp://www.mp.gov.in/bgtrrdmp/default.htmhttp://www.mp.gov.in/bgtrrdmp/default.htmhttp://bhopal.com/


11/26

Pursuant to the settlement, therefore, the GOI assumed responsibility for disbursing funds from the $470-million settlement and providing medical coverage to citizens of Bhopal in the event of future illnesses.

In July 2004, fifteen years after reaching settlement, the Supreme Court of India ordered the Governmentof India to release all remaining settlement funds to the victims. Unfortunately, in April 2005, the SupremeCourt of India granted a request from the Welfare Commission for Bhopal Gas Victims and extended toApril 30, 2006, the distribution of the rest of the funds by the Welfare Commission. News reports indicatedthat approximately $390 million remained in the fund at that time as a result of earned interest.

In September 2006, India media reported the registrar in the office of Welfare Commission said that "allcases of initial compensation claims by victims of the 1984 Bhopal gas tragedyand revision petitionshad been cleared; no case was pending." If the media report was accurate, this could mean that all thesettlement money has finally been distributed.

Back to Top

23. Media reports indicate that the victims are still suffering. What are you doing about this?

UCC has contributed significantly in providing aid to the victims and has fulfilled every responsibility andobligation it had in Bhopal. For example, UCC paid the full settlement of $470 million to the Government

of India in 1989, and also provided substantial monetary and medical aid to the victims, includingestablishing a charitable trust fund to which it paid approximately $100 million (including the proceeds ofits sale of all its UCIL stock) to build a hospital that opened in Bhopal in 2000. (Please see The Incident,Response and Settlement section of this web site for additional information on UCCs efforts andcontributions.)

Pursuant to the settlement, the Government of India assumed responsibility for disbursing funds from the$470-million settlement and providing medical coverage to citizens of Bhopal in the event of futureillnesses. In July 2004, fifteen years after reaching settlement, the Supreme Court of India ordered theGovernment of India to release all additional settlement funds to the victims. Unfortunately, in April 2005,the Supreme Court of India granted a request from the Welfare Commission for Bhopal Gas Victims andextended to April 30, 2006, the distribution of the rest of the funds by the Welfare Commission. Newsreports indicated that approximately $390 million remained in the fund as a result of earned interest. InSeptember 2006, India media reported that "registrar in the office of Welfare Commissioner... said that all

cases of initial compensation claims by victims of the 1984 Bhopal gas tragedy had been cleared.... Withthe clearance of initial compensation claims and revision petitions, no case was pending...." We areencouraged by this report and hope that these funds will help alleviate any suffering being experienced bythe victims and/or their families.

It is important to remember that when the Supreme Court of India affirmed the settlement in 1991, theCourt also:

Required the Government of India to purchase, out of the settlement fund, a group medicalinsurance policy to cover 100,000 persons who may later develop symptoms; and

Required the Government of India to make up any shortfall, however unlikely, in the settlementfund.

Furthermore, in 2007, the Supreme Court of India again reaffirmed the adequacy and finality of the 1989settlement.

Back to Top

24. Where does responsibility lie for the clean up of the factory site in Bhopal and to address anyon-going needs of the victims and their families?

Responsibility for the clean-up of the Bhopal site lies with the Madhya Pradesh State government. In1998, theMadhya Pradesh State Government, which owned and had been leasing the property to UCIL,
http://www.mp.gov.in/bgtrrdmp/default.htmhttp://www.mp.gov.in/bgtrrdmp/default.htmhttp://www.mp.gov.in/bgtrrdmp/default.htm


12/26

took over the facility and assumed all accountability for the site, including the completion of any additionalremediation. As owners of the site, the State is in the best position to evaluate all scientific informationthat is available, to complete whatever remediation may be necessary.

The central Government of India needs to address any ongoing concerns of the Bhopal people, therebyfulfilling the terms of the 1989 settlement and subsequent ruling upholding the settlement by the IndianSupreme Court in 1991.

Union Carbide's responsibility - along with the rest of the chemical industry - is to work hard every day toprevent a tragedy like this from ever happening again.

Back to Top

25. Why havent Union Carbide and retired Chairman Warren Anderson appeared in the criminalproceedings in India?

With regard to Bhopal litigation in India, all the key people from Union Carbide India Limited (UCIL) --officers and those who actually ran the plant on a daily basis -- have appeared to face charges, whichwere reduced to a misdemeanor status. Neither Union Carbide nor its officials are subject to the

jurisdiction of the Indian court since they did not have any involvement in the operation of the plant.

By requirement of the Government of India, the plant was designed, owned, operated and managed on aday-to-day basis by UCIL and its employees.

Back to Top

26. Didnt Dow inherit the Bhopal plant facility and liabilities for the Bhopal tragedy when itacquired the shares of Union Carbide Corporation?

A. No. Union Carbide India Limited (UCIL) owned, operated and managed on a day-to-day basis theBhopal plant. UCIL was a publicly traded Indian company of which Union Carbide Corporation (UCC)owned 50.9 percent of the stock. Indian financial institutions and thousands of private investors in Indiaowned the remaining stock. At the time of the incident, UCIL was one of the top 50 companies in India

and had a 50-year history in the country.

UCIL still exists today. It underwent an ownership change in 1994 when UCC sold its interest in thecompany to Macleod Russel India Limited. The renamed company now is known as Eveready IndustriesIndia Limited. The proceeds from this sale were used to construct and fund a hospital in Bhopal for theongoing care and treatment of those whose health was affected by the tragedy.

Today, UCC still remains a separate company, but its stock now is fully owned by The Dow ChemicalCompany. UCC had settled all civil claims related to the gas release with the Government of India andwas no longer doing business in India when Dow acquired its shares in 2001. Dow did not inherit anyliability from UCC.

Back to Top

27. What processes have been put in place industry-wide to prevent a tragedy like this fromoccurring again?

Union Carbide, together with the rest of the chemical industry, has worked to develop and globallyimplement its Responsible Care program, designed to prevent any future events through improvingcommunity awareness, emergency preparedness and process safety standards. For more information onResponsible Care, please visit www.responsiblecare.comorwww.icca-chem.org (the web site of theInternational Council of Chemical Associations).
http://www.responsiblecare.com/http://www.responsiblecare.com/http://www.icca-chem.org/http://www.responsiblecare.com/http://www.icca-chem.org/


13/26

Back to Top

Bhopal Gas Tragedy: Endless nightmareSubodh Varma, TNN Dec 3, 2009, 11.52am IST

Tags:

Gas

Twenty-five years have passed since that night of terror and death in Bhopal, which saw a cloudof deadly gases explode out of a faulty tank in a pesticide factory and silently spread into thehomes of sleeping people. Although no official count of casualties has ever been done, estimatesbased on hospital and rehabilitation records show that about 20,000 people died and about 5.7lakh suffered bodily damage, making it by far the world's worst industrial disaster ever.

Many who breathed the highly toxic cocktailthat night suffered a horrible death withmultiple organ failure. Those who survivedhave suffered multiple diseases for 25 years.A report of the Gas Tragedy ReliefDepartment of the state says that the

morbidity rate (occurrence of ailments) isnearly 20% among gas-affected personscompared to about 5% among the unaffected
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/topic/GAShttp://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/topic/GAShttp://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/photo/5294763.cmshttp://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/topic/GAShttp://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/topic/GAS


14/26

population. Seven convicted over 1984Bhopal gas disasterFormer employees of Union Carbide India Ltd guilty of causing death by negligence over

disaster that killed at least 15,000

Share193

reddit this

Associated Press

guardian.co.uk, Monday 7 June 2010 09.26 BST

Article history

Bhopal residents demonstrate on the 25th anniversary of the gas disaster in 2009.

Photograph: Reinhard Krause/Reuters

An Indian court today convicted seven former senior employees of Union Carbide's Indiansubsidiary of causing "death by negligence" over their part in the Bhopal gas tragedy in which anestimated 15,000 people died more than 25 years ago.

The subsidiary company, Union Carbide India Ltd, which no longer exists, was convicted of thesame charge.

The former employees, many now in their 70s, face up to two years in prison. The judge has notyet announced sentences.

Large groups of survivors and relatives, along with rights activists, gathered in Bhopal, MadhyaPradesh, in central India. They said the verdict was too little, too late.
http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/07/bhopal-disaster-india-seven-convicted&t=Seven%20convicted%20over%201984%20Bhopal%20gas%20disaster%20%7C%20Environment%20%7C%20guardian.co.uk&src=sphttp://www.reddit.com/submit?url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/07/bhopal-disaster-india-seven-convicted&title=http://www.guardian.co.uk/http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/bhopalhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/world/indiahttp://www.reddit.com/submit?url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/07/bhopal-disaster-india-seven-convicted&title=http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/07/bhopal-disaster-india-seven-convicted&t=Seven%20convicted%20over%201984%20Bhopal%20gas%20disaster%20%7C%20Environment%20%7C%20guardian.co.uk&src=sphttp://www.reddit.com/submit?url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/07/bhopal-disaster-india-seven-convicted&title=http://www.guardian.co.uk/http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/bhopalhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/world/india


15/26

On 3 December 1984, about 40 tonnes of deadly methyl isocyanate gas leaked from a pesticideplant run by Union Carbide into the air in Bhopal, killing about 4,000 people.

The lingering effects of the poison increased the death toll to about 15,000 over the next fewyears, according to government estimates.

Local activists insist the actual toll is almost twice as high, and say the company and governmenthave failed to clean up toxic chemicals at the plant, which closed after the incident.

The verdicts, which are likely to be appealed against, came as the case crawled through India'snotoriously slow judicial system.

The country's central bureau of investigation had originally accused 12 defendants eight seniorIndian company officials, Warren Anderson, the head of Union Carbide Corp at the time of thegas leak, the company itself, and two subsidiary companies.

One of the Indian officials has since died. Anderson, and Union Carbide and its subsidiaries,have never appeared in court proceedings.

Union Carbide was bought by the Dow Chemical Co in 2001. Dow says the legal case wasresolved in 1989 when Union Carbide settled with the Indian government for $470m (326m),and that all responsibility for the factory now rested with the government of the state of MadhyaPradesh, which owns the site.

Bhopal Gas Tragedy

Introduction

Pollution is caused primarily by the affluent. The effects of the pollution are mostly felt by thedeveloping and the underdeveloped countries. These are the first to fall victims to the pollutionof the world's oceans into which industrially developed affluent countries with no regard to theenvironment dump industrial wastes. While development is essential to improve the quality oflife it is equally essential to ensure that development takes place on a sustainable basis. There aremany instances of environmental disruptions due to poorly conceived plans from all over theworld. These disruptions are often manifested in various environmental problems ranging fromair, water, and soil pollution to destruction of forests and consequent costs to human health andwell-being. The major industrial offenders are petroleum, steel, organic chemicals and paperindustries owned by the industrialised countries.

It is neither scientific nor rational to accept the argument that the developing countries should

develop and progress first and having developed then attempts can be made to rectify theenvironmental disruptions that may have been caused during the development process. Theargument is not only unacceptable from an ethical view point , it is also incorrect from economicconsiderations. The "get rich quick" syndrome generally produces short term benefits at longterm costs which often could far exceed the initial gains. Some may argue that sinceindustrialised countries developed first and then looked after their environmental problems whycan the developing countries not follow the same path? Why are poor nations being asked to paycosts that the rich nations did not bother paying while they became rich? Also during the


16/26

industrialisation of the presently developed countries resources, energy and labour were plentifuland cheap. The era of cheap energy has now been over for nearly two decades.

In several developed countries a contradiction exists between the interests of the industrialistwho wants to make production cheaper by not spending on pollution control technology, andthose of the local population. That is why many multinationals move the "dirty" industries to thedeveloping countries. Multinationals all over the world are intensively shifting ecologicallyharmful types of modern production that greatly pollute the environment, to the Third Worldcountries. Most of these factories are not provided with purification facilities as a result of whichthe air and water in these Third World countries get polluted with enormous quantities ofharmful toxic gases. These developed countries show no compunction in turning some ThirdWorld regions into grounds for testing nuclear, chemical and bacteriological weapons. Due tothese factors the pollution levels keep spiralling, which make the real cost of atmosphericpollution run into billions of dollars a year. Thus there is no alternative but to pursue economicand social development in developing countries of the world, wherein more than two-thirds ofmankind live in order to meet basic human needs and to secure better prospects for their citizens.

Environmental philosophers have been warning us for many years about some of the dangers ofpesticides, atomic energy plants and similar phenomena of modern industrialisation.Environmental dislocations in fact occur daily and many persons think that taking all these risksis irrational. When a nightmarish incident like the Bhopal tragedy involving loss of numerouslives occurs, our thoughts return to the basic question of the price paid for progress.

Bhopal Gas Tragedy

What Happened and Why

The Bhopal Gas Tragedy is a catastrophe that has no parallel in industrial history. In the earlymorning hours of December 3, 1984 a rolling wind carried a poisonous grey cloud past the walkof the Union Carbide C plant in Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh , India. An estimated 8,000 or morepeople died (over three times the officially announced total), people whose hopes and dreamswere ironically bound up with the technology and affluence the plant symbolised. About 300,000more would suffer agonising injuries from the disastrous effects of the massive poisoning whilenone could say if future generations would be affected. Forty tons of toxic gases were releasedfrom Carbide's Bhopal plant and spread throughout the city. The cause was the contamination ofMethyl Isocyanate (MIC) storage tank No. 610 with water carrying catalytic material. The resultwas a nightmare that still has no end. Residents awoke to clouds of suffocating gas and began adesperate flight through the dark streets. No alarm ever sounded a warning and no evacuationplan was prepared. When victims arrived at hospitals breathless and blind, do doctors did notknow how to treat them since Carbide had not provided emergency information. But it was onlywhen the sun rose the next morning that the magnitude of the devastation was clear. Dead bodies

of humans and animals blocked the streets, leaves turned black, the smell of burning chillipeppers lingered in the air. Responsible estimates suggest that as many as 10,000 may have diedimmediately. The precise number of deaths still remains a mystery. 2,000,00 were injured and30,000 to 50,000 were too ill to ever return to their jobs. This is the Hiroshima of chemicalindustry.

In October 1982 a mixture of MIC, chloroform and hydrochloric acid escaped from the Bhopalplant endangering the neighbouring community and injuring a few workers. This incident made


17/26

very clear the potential public risks but in spite of the insistence of Carbide officials for safetyprecautions there was still no action taken. All this, coupled with the series of accidents thatoccurred in the plant and the increasingly gloomier prospects for its turnaround, served as asignal for many well-trained and experienced engineers and operators to leave the Bhopal factoryin search of more secure and satisfactory employment. Between one-half and two-thirds of theskilled engineers who were fully familiar with the plant right from the project stage and certainlysince the commissioning, had left the Union Carbide Bhopal establishment before the accident.

MIC in gaseous form is heavier than air and has a tendency to settle down. In this form it issubject to wind dispersal. The geographical characteristics of the area would control thedispersal. At 11 PM on December 2, 1984 the pressure in the tank started building up till thesafety valve opened. At that time, the carbaryl plant was stated to be working. The escaping MICwas released into the atmosphere. The leakage was between 12.45 am and 1.30 am. A gentlewind slowly moved the deadly cloud over an area of about 40 sq. km, thus causing a vastdestruction of life. The suggestion of senior administrators like Mr. M N Buch that the plantshould be located in a less populated area was ignored. Before he could take any action he wasgiven marching orders and transferred to another post.

The issue of the danger posed by the pesticide plant to Bhopal was raised in the M. P. Assemblyin December 1982. Mr. T S Viyogi, labour minister in the Arjun Singh government stated "Asum of Rs. 25 crore has been invested in this unit. The factory is not a small stone, which can beshifted elsewhere. There is no danger to Bhopal, nor will there ever be." Equally confident -rather over confident - was J. Mukund, Carbides works manager, when he stated, "The gas leakjust cant be from my plant. The plant is shut down. Our technology just cant go wrong., we justcant have such leaks." Once it was confirmed that the leak was indeed from Union CarbideCorporation (UCC), the chief medical officer denied that MIC was fatal, stressing that it was justa minor irritant. While the experts debated, people died like flies.

Senior management design and operate plants to maximise the inflow of money, while safety and

maintenance are given much lower priority especially if a plant is losing money. Cost cuttingalmost always means lowering safety standards and increasing the risks of a serious accident, ifnot a catastrophe.

Investigations however revealed that before the tragedy there had not been a single year when amishap had not occurred. On various occasions inquiries were ordered and subsequentlyforgotten. This showed that there was something wrong in the safety standards. In addition, thefollowing were major contributors to the disaster:

Gradual but sustained erosion of good maintenance practices.

Declining quality of technical training of plant personnel, especially its

supervisory staff. Depleting inventories of vital spares.

An indiscriminate economy drive that starved the plant of necessary capitalreplacement and produced general staff demoralisation.

An exodus of some of the more experienced and able engineers andoperators from the factory.


18/26

Last but not the least, increasing under manning of important work stationsin many parts of the plant.

Together these factors combined to cause the multiple failures that underlay the calamitousaccident which occurred on the night of December 2-3, 1984. The Bhopal disaster was the worstindustrial accident in history.

Bhopal Gas Tragedy

The Economic and Legal Aspects

Union Carbide's operations in India go back to the beginning of this century when it

began marketing its products there. In 1924, an assembly plant for batteries was

opened in Calcutta. By 1983 Carbide had 14 plants in India manufacturing

chemicals pesticides, batteries and other products. Union Carbide's operations in

India were conducted through a subsidiary , Union Carbide India, Ltd. (UCIL). The

parent US Company (UCC) held 50.9 % of UCIL stock. The balance of 49.1% was

owned by various Indian investors. Normally foreign investors are limited to 40%

ownership of equity in Indian companies, but the Indian government waived thisrequirement in the case of Union Carbide because of the sophistication of its

technology and the company's potential for export.

Should India throw out the multinationals? Keeping in mind the pros and cons one may say thatmultinationals operating in frivolous areas should be given second priority as compared to themuch needed technology for key sectors of Indian industry. What is vital is that the multinationalshould not be allowed to function except under a strict regime of environmental controls andhealth and safety regulations. Unfortunately the negligence of the authorities in India match theavariciousness of the multinationals. The negligence shown by the Madhya Pradesh Governmentin the context of the Bhopal tragedy is representative of the situation in the rest of the country.

The Bhopal plant was licensed to manufacture 5250 tons of MIC based pesticides per year.However, peak production was only 2704 tons in 1981, falling to 1657 tons in 1983. Thus thequantity of pesticides manufactured in 1983 was only 31.37% of its licensed capacity. Was theBhopal plant used for experiments in processes for which the UCIL was not authorised? Or wasthe capacity of the plant being under-utilised to maintain a monopolistic hold over prices?

In the first ten months of 1984, losses amounted to Rs. 5, 03,39,000. Union Carbide IndiaLimited (UCIL), was thus deducted by Union Carbide Corporation (UCC) to close the plant andprepare it for sale. When no buyer was available in India, plans were made to dismantle thefactory and ship it to another country. Negotiations toward this shutdown were completed by theend of November 1984. Financial losses and plans to dismantle the plant exacerbated Carbide's

already negligent management practices leading to executive decisions that directly caused thecontamination of the MIC storage tank that leaked its contents over Bhopal. While saving moneyfor both Union Carbide Corporation (UCC) and UCIL, negligent maintenance and substantialreductions of trained personnel culminated in the horrors of December 3, 1984.

By the first anniversary, on December 3, 1985, it was more than apparent to the IndianGovernment that Bhopal was a major problem on its hands with which it was steadily failing tocope. The victims witnessed neither speed nor selflessness not competence nor compassion from


19/26

those appointed to manage and alleviate their condition. One of the most important reasons forthis paralysis of action in Bhopal was the fact that the majority of the victims were poor and, inaddition, from the minority community. Not all the relatives of those officially declared dead hadbeen compensated- even if only with the nominal Rs. 10,000 set aside for the purpose. A largeproportion of the victims whose monthly income was less than Rs. 500 were promised spot cashrelief of Rs. 1500, but since there was already widespread corruption the scheme wasdiscontinued.

Within months after the disaster, the Government of India issued an ordinance appointing itselfas the sole representative of the victims for any legal dealings with Union Carbide as regardscompensation. The ordinance was later replaced by the Bhopal Gas Leak (Processing of Claims)Act, 1985. Armed with this power, the Government of India filed its expected suit forcompensation and damages against Union Carbide in the United States District Court for theSouthern District of New York. Besides filing the suit, one of its prime responsibilities was toregister the claims of each and every gas victim in Bhopal. This job was never done, or rather,not with any seriousness for the next ten years. The government set up various inquirycommissions to investigate the causes of the disaster: they remained half-hearted initiatives at

best. Union Carbide, on the other hand, moved more quickly with its investigations: itannounced by March 1985 itself, that the disaster was due to an act of sabotage by a Sikhterrorist. Then they shifted blame to a disgruntled worker. Its Indian subsidiary, Union CarbideIndia Ltd.(UCIL), used the excuse of the closure of the plant to reach a settlement on December3, 1985 with its 627 retrenched workers for a final amount of US $1.8 million.

The second year after the disaster was also a turbulent year for Union Carbide since it had todefend itself against a take-over bid by a smaller company called GAF. Was there anyconnection between GAF and Union Carbide in the take-over drama? Was the take-over battle aput-on for public consumption? As a result of the battle, not only was Union Carbide able todivest itself assets sufficiently to file a bankruptcy claim under US laws, thus effectivelyblocking any order of compensation from Bhopal, if and when the suit was decreed, but GAF

walked off with $ 81 million even though the take-over failed.

In addition, Union Carbide shareholders emerged richer with dividends worth more than whatthey had before the gas leak disaster! The gas victims figured nowhere in this scenario. To makethings worse, on May 12, 1986, Judge J.F. Keenan ruled that India and not the US was theappropriate forum for the Bhopal compensation litigation. In the first pre trial hearing in theconsolidated Bhopal litigation in US federal courts, John F Keenan, asked Carbide as a matterof fundamental human decency to provide an interim relief payment of $5 - 10 million.Although contending that, according to Government of India reports, considerable relief hadalready been extended to the victims (some $8 million in ex-gratia payments to affected personsplus another $4 million allocated to the MP state Government to cover some of its extraordinary

expenses), Carbide agreed to provide $5 million for this purpose, provided a satisfactory plan ofdistribution and accounting of the funds was devised. For 8 months, this sensitive initiative byJudge Keenan came to nought as various principals in the litigation, including Union Carbideand the Government of India, haggled over terms of reference and conditions for using the $5million interim relief. Finally in November 1985, agreement was reached that the money wouldbe channelled through the American Red Cross to the Indian Red Cross. In Bhopal itself, on thefirst anniversary of the disaster, no one - not even the official of the MP Government in charge ofrelief for the victims - had any idea just what the Red Cross would do with the money - andcertainly, none of the money had yet benefited any victims.


20/26

On December 17, 1987, Judge Deo passed a significant order directing Union Carbide to payRs. 350 crores as interim relief. The order was unprecedented and decidedly controversial. Beingan interim order, it could not be decreed. And without a decree UC could - and did - refuse topay it.

Union Carbide soon challenged this order of the District Judge before the MP high court atJabalpur on the grounds that the trial judge was not authorised to pass the order under anyprovisions of the Indian Civil Penal Code. On April 4, Justice S. K. Seth of the High Courtupheld the liability of Union Carbide for the Bhopal disaster but reduced the interimcompensation to Rs. 250 crores and it was that order against which Union Carbide had come inappeal to the Supreme Court. For centuries before the English came here, the common law inIndia held a person who had injured another to pay damages, not according to the status of thevictim but according to the status of the wrongdoer. That is the role of the Indian law. This law,has never been repealed. This rule of the ancient common law of India, enforced by many rulersin the last thousand years and more, is still the law of India. And it must be enforced by ourcourts, under the principles of justice, equity and good conscience. Then, in a shockingjudgement on February 14, 1989 the Supreme Court directed Union Carbide to pay up US $ 470

million in "full and final settlement" of all claims, rights, and liabilities arising out of the disasterin 1984. Union Carbide was the first to describe the courts decision as fair and reasonable andthe Companys stock soared in the London market immediately after. But the country as a whole,particularly the victim groups reacted in a rage and with bitterness. The Bhopal Gas disaster,which left thousands of people dead and 6,00,000 injured, was settled for a mere US $ 470million - which works out to around Rs. 10,000 per victim if it had been divided equally amongstall. In the same year, an article in the Times of India stated that approximately US $ 40,000 wasspent on the rehabilitation of every sea otter affected by the Alaska oil spill. Each sea otter wasthus given rations of lobsters costing US $ 500 per day. Thus the life of an Indian citizen inBhopal was clearly much cheaper than that of a sea otter in America.

The nation was feeling disturbed at the outcome of the case. The government which had a special

responsibility in the matter had not formalised a list of the dead and injured or even got acomplete compendium of the specific injuries that people had suffered. So obviously it waspremature to reach a final decision on the amount of compensation.

On September 9 1993, Union Carbide successfully sold its entire 50.9% shares in UCIL to theCalcutta based Mc Leod Russell India Ltd., a company of the B M Khaitan Group. The sharesfetched a price of Rs. 175 each, netting the Bhopal Trust a total sum of Rs. 290.23 crores. Oncethe hospital's total cost of Rs. 65 crores was set aside, the rest of the money would be madeavailable to increase the settlement fund to pay compensation to the victims. Some of the moneywould also be used for setting up three rehabilitation centres in Bhopal.

However even after nearly 10 years, the administration had not come to terms with theelementary fact that the money being disbursed to the gas victims was their due and not somebonus that was being doled out to them as a goodwill gesture on the part of the Government. TheClaims Commissioners continued to make procedures as difficult as possible for the victims.Corruption became so rampant until in desperation once again the victims' organisations had toreturn to the Supreme Court.

UC soon challenged this order of the District Judge before the MP high court at Jabalpur on thegrounds that the trial judge was not authorised to pass the order under any provisions of the


21/26

Indian Civil PC. On Apr. 4, Justice S. K. Seth of the HC upheld the liability of UC for theBhopal disaster but reduced the interim compensation to Rs. 250 cr. and it was that order againstwhich Union Carbide had come in appeal to the Supreme Court. For centuries before the Englishcame here, the common law in India held a person who had injured another to pay damages, notaccording to the status of the victim but according to the status of the wrongdoer. That is the roleof the Indian law. This law, has never been repealed. This rule of the ancient common law ofIndia, enforced by many rulers in the last thousand years and more, is still the law of India. Andit must be enforced by our courts, under the principles of justice, equity and good conscience.Then, in a shocking judgement on Feb. 14, 1989 the SC directed UC to pay up US $ 470 millionin " full and final settlement" of all claims, rights, and liabilities arising out of the disaster in1984. UC was the first to describe the court's decision as fair and reasonable and the Cos. stocksoared in the London market immediately after. But the country as a whole, particularly thevictim groups reacted in a rage and with bitterness. The Bhopal Gas disaster , which left approx.3500 dead and 6,00,000 injured, was settled for a mere US $ 470 million - which works out toaround Rs. 10,000 per victim if it had been divided equally amongst all. In the same year, anarticle in the Times of India stated that approx. US $ 40,000 was spent on the rehabilitation ofevery sea otter affected by the Alaska oil spill. Each sea otter was thus given rations of lobsters

costing $500 per day. Thus the life of an Indian citizen in Bhopal was clearly much cheaper thanthat of a sea otter in America.

The Bhopal scenario, even as late as 1993, presented a sordid

picture. In terms of relief, the record remains disgraceful. For

the most part, all that the victims received so far is the

pathetic sum of Rs. 200 per month as interim relief. The Claims

Courts had decided just 5% of all claims. The total

compensation paid so far worked out to less than the interest

earned by the Government. on the US $ 470 million that UCC

deposited under the controversial settlement of 1989 to secure

its release from all civil litigation. If Bhopal retained all its

squalor despite the Rs 216 crores. that had been spent there

it was because the money had been neatly and efficiently

recycled out of the pockets of the poor. The Bhopal victims

have become a mere footnote to a sordid story of transfer of

money from one group of vested interest - Carbide or the

Government - to another : doctors, lawyers, and drug

companies, many of them multinationalsBhopal Gas TragedyEnvironmental Aspect

On the night of December 2-3, 1984 a gas leak at a small pesticide plant in Central

India owned by a subsidiary of Union Carbide Corporation devastated a whole city.

Like natural disasters man-made ones also seem to have a preference for the poor.

Over 90% of the worst affected people were the poor living in the close vicinity of

Bhopal's industrial area. They ran as fast as they could but how could they overtake


22/26

the cars and scooters of the rich? And what is the ownership of a telephone if not

the best chance that you will be warned by friends of impending disaster? The job of

the police who went to lower class localities was clearly defined: Open doors to one-

room tenants; and pull out bodies five, six, seven. Anees Chisti, a journalist who

witnessed the tragedy first hand states, "after a while we began to devalue the

meaning of death. On seeing another dead body, all one felt was a twinge ofsadness, rather like what one feels when an Indian batsman walks back to the

pavilion".

The Bhopal disaster which killed several thousand people and injured another two lakhs in thespace of a few hours, constitutes a watershed in the history of the chemical industry.

The first of the autopsies revealed that the human blood had turned purple red, the lungs hadbecome ash colour and filled with their own secretions. The tracheas were so dry that the mucousflaked off on touch. Sometimes the blood was so thick that if you dipped your finger in it andlifted it, it would come off like a wire.

The gas leak saw thousands blinded, breathless and giddy, flooding the hospitals, carrying thosewho had collapsed along the way. In cases of acute exposure, victims had suffered extensivedamage to their lungs. Those who did not succumb to their injuries fell victims to secondaryinfections of the lungs and respiratory tracts. The psychological trauma caused by the accident isjust beginning to be acknowledged and goes far beyond those physically affected by the gas.Victims suffered depression, anxiety, impotence, loss of appetite, nightmares etc.

For one whole week the government failed to assure the citizens of Bhopal on whether the airthey were breathing, the water they were drinking , and the food they were consuming were safeor not.

When health department personnel were spraying DDT some residents began to flee in panic asthey imagined it was another noxious substance. On December 6 the Chief Minister declared thatthe air was totally safe, but tests conducted at the initiative of a group of science studentsindicated the presence of MIC.

Not very much is yet known about the environmental impacts of the gas leak from the Bhopalplant. The Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) had issued a preliminary report ondamage to crops, vegetables, animals and fish from the accident, but the investigation reportedthere were mostly in their early stages with few conclusive findings.

The ICAR Report did indicate that the impact of whatever toxic substances emerge from theplant were highly lethal on exposed animals. Many were reported to have died within three

minutes of such exposure. Large numbers of cattle (estimates range as high as 4000), as well asdogs and cats and birds were killed.

Plant life was also severely damaged by exposure to the gas. Vegetable crops such as spinach,cauliflower and tomatoes grown by small farmers on the outskirts of the city were destroyed.There was also widespread defoliation of trees, especially in low lying areas.


23/26

In the name of economic development Third World countries

are thus becoming dumping grounds for hazardous

technologies from the industrially advanced countries. The

strong environmental awareness and environmental

movements in the industrially advanced countries haveenforced strict legislative safeguards that have made the

operation of hazardous technology economically unviable.

Many pesticides that are being pushed in Third World

countries by multinationals are already banned in industrially

advanced countries. DDT is a typical example which is being

freely overused in India. To expect strict enforcement of

environmental safeguards is to forget the basic economic fact

that it is that relocation is taking place to avoid such

enforcements that relocation is taking place. Statistics statethat every year approximately 22,000 people die in the

developing countries from the use of pesticides no longer

manufactured in the West. Bhopal Gas Tragedy

Conclusion

What lessons can one draw at the end of the struggle?

Firstly, the tragedy was caused by the synergy of the very worst of American and Indian cultures.An American corporation cynically used a third world country to escape from the increasinglystrict safety standards imposed at home. Safety procedures were minimal and neither theAmerican owners nor the local management seemed to regard them as necessary. When thedisaster struck there was no disaster plan that could be set into action. Prompt action by the localauthorities could have saved many, if not most, of the victims. The immediate response wasmarred by callous indifference.

Secondly we must frankly acknowledge that the legal system failed the victims and then begin toconsider reforms. Our legal regime requires a radical reorientation. Given the so-called neweconomic policy which welcomes investments in every conceivable sector, we will see theemergence of multinationals in pursuit of cheap labour and markets. We need to introduce asystem of laws which will make them accountable for higher standards of safety. We also needto see international treaties to enable the victims of any tragedy to sue these companies in the

country of the origin or in their own home countries. Multinationals operating in India, mustagree as a condition of doing business that they will submit to the jurisdiction of the Indiancourts both civil and criminal. They must agree to be responsible for the acts of their subsidiariesand not disown them like rats leaving a sinking ship.

The attempt by the top management of the Union Carbide USA to shift all the blame for theBhopal tragedy out to the management of its Indian branch is churlish to say the least. At hispress conference in Connecticut Warren Anderson (President UCC) transferred the blame to


24/26

India, and stated, "It is their country, their company, their people". He completely ignored thefact that the parent company owned more than 50% of the shares and thus retained the power ofmanagement. It so appeared that UC was not only grossly negligent in the design, maintenance,and operation of the plant but equally callous in its response to the accident. The MadhyaPradesh government was all set to arrest Mr. Anderson, but was the Madhya Pradesh governmentless guilty? Just as UC should have had the self-realisation to exercise the greatest care and takethe maximum precaution when it was dealing with chemical gases as lethal as they have provedto be, it was the bounden administrative duty of the state government to play its supervisory andregulatory role with the utmost seriousness. The record shows that the state government has beenno less guilty of criminal negligence. The Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi himself made a briefappearance at the Hamidia Hospital in Bhopal and stayed just long enough to be photographedbefore dashing off to resume his election campaign. They must accept as a binding rule absoluteliability for their hazardous activities. In addition, all victims of personal injury must have theright to claim interim damages if they can show a prima facie case. India should considerlegalising the system of contingency peace. The sacrifice of the victims of the Bhopal tragedywill have been in vain unless some of these changes can be introduced in the law.

The dead may not have been so unlucky after all. The end came horribly, but at least thenightmare was brief. For those who survived the MIC leak the release will not come so quickly.Thousands of the seriously affected survivors still suffer such extensive lung damage that theycan no longer apply themselves physically and walking briskly even for a few minutes sendsthem gasping to their knees. Women have peculiar gynaecological problems and are still givingbirth to deformed children. Though there is need for more health care centres are increasing,, thefunds provided by UC are grossly inadequate. and are UC is reluctant to provide further financetowards the 500 bed hospital for the victims at Bhopal.

MIC in gaseous form is heavier than air and has a tendency to settle down. In this form it issubject to wind dispersal. The geographical characteristics of the area would control thedispersal. At 11 p.m. on December 2, 1984 the pressure in the tank started building up till the

safety valve opened. At that time, the carbaryl plant was stated to be working. The escaping MICwas released into the atmosphere. The leakage was between 12.45 A.M. and 01.30 A.M. Agentle wind slowly moved the deadly cloud over an area of about 40 sq. km, thus causing a vastdestruction of life. The suggestion of senior administrators like Mr. M. N. Buch that the plantshould be located in a less populated area was ignored. Before he could take any action he wasgiven marching orders and transferred to another post.


25/26

This capacity of the politicians of India to capitalise positively

on a tragedy for which they are partially responsible has

ensured the survival of the politicians- while the people they

are supposed to represent and take care of, die. The late Prime

Minister Rajiv Gandhi himself made a brief appearance at theHamidia Hospital in Bhopal and stayed just long enough to be

photographed before dashing off to resume his election

campaign. The relief that follows the tragedy is far more

important for these politicians than the victims of the tragedy.

All these accidents and disasters provide our politicians the

much needed relief that comes from the public exchequer but

is essential for the political survival. In this manner, in the

absence of public accountability while individual politicians

flourish the political system collapses. Bhopal Gas Tragedy

Environmental Impact Assessment

In view of the Bhopal gas tragedy, future projects in a developing country like India

must apply Environmental Impact Assessment. (EIA) to fulfil the following

objectives:

1. to identify adverse environmental problems that may be expected to occur;

2. to incorporate into the development action appropriate mitigation measures;

3. to identify the environmental benefits and drawbacks of the project, as wellas its economic and environmental acceptability to the community;

4. to identify critical environmental problems which require further studiesand/or monitoring;

5. to examine and select the optimal alternative from the various relevantoptions available;

6. to involve the public in the decision-making process related to theenvironment; and

7. to assist all p

Date post:	07-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	adil-khan
View:	233 times
Download:	0 times

Adil Project

Documents