The Crime Book

(Wang) #1

112


summoned. Ten days after the
accident he appeared before the
US Congress to report that his
company had a commitment to
safety. He promised to take action
to ensure that a similar incident
“cannot happen again.” In the
months that followed, UCC set up
a $120,000 (£200,000 today) relief
fund for their employees who had
been affected by the tragedy, but
that did not go far. By April 1985, it
had increased the fund to $7
million (£11.1 million today).

The struggle for justice
The subsequent investigation into
the Bhopal disaster lasted for years,
and eventually revealed that a
faulty valve had allowed 1 ton of
water meant for cleaning internal
pipes to mix with 40 tons of methyl
isocyanate. This caused a chemical
reaction that forced a valve to open
and allowed the gas to escape. The
investigators believed this was the
result of sabotage: an employee
must have tampered with the tank.
At first, UCC tried to avoid legal
responsibility for the tragedy, but in
1989, it reached an out-of-court
settlement with India’s government

THE BHOPAL DISASTER


Warren Anderson, CEO of UCC at
the time of the disaster, was charged
with manslaughter by the authorities
in Bhopal in 1991. The US refused to
extradite him to India to face trial.

and paid $470 million (£460 million
today) in damages. However, some
commentators felt that the company
significantly underestimated both
the long-term health consequences
of exposure to the gas and the
number of people affected. India’s
government and UCC paid for a
hospital to treat victims which
opened in 2001, and established a
health insurance fund to cover the
expenses of 100,000 people. Yet,
chronically ill survivors and their

dependents were still awaiting
compensation more than 20 years
after the disaster. And some group
claims remain in litigation.
While no single saboteur was
named, both civil and criminal
cases were filed against UCC and
dragged on for years. In 2010, seven
former executives of UCC, all Indian
nationals, were convicted of causing
death by negligence. Each was fined
$2,000 (about £1,450) and sentenced
to two years in prison. Given the
devastation the gas leak caused the
punishment seems light, but it was
the maximum allowed by Indian law.
In terms of public safety, it
seems that some lessons are yet
to be learned from Bhopal. In the
years since the accident, India has
undergone rapid industrialization,
but activists say the government
has been slow to regulate industry,
continuing to put the health of the
country’s citizens at risk. Bhopal
proved the need for preventative
strategies to avoid similar events,
enforceable international standards
for environmental safety, and
industrial accident preparedness.

A toxic legacy
Decades after the Bhopal disaster,
estimates of the death toll vary
from as few as 3,800 people to as
many as 16,000. However, the
Indian government now cites a
figure of 15,000 people, which
includes those who have died from
illnesses related to exposure to the
gas. Several thousand more
survivors continue to battle life-
limiting conditions, such as cancer,
blindness, and neurological and
immune disorders. A large number

Medical experts report a high
incidence of lung cancer,
adverse outcomes of
pregnancy, and respiratory,
neurological, psychiatric, and
ophthalmic problems among
those exposed to the gas.
John Elliott

110-113_Bhopal_Disaster.indd 112 13/01/2017 15:10


113


Survivors’ organizations and other
local activists regularly stage protests
demanding harsher punishment for
those responsible for the tragedy, and
more compensation for its victims.

of the children born after the
disaster in the area around
the plant suffered mental and
physical deformities.
Human rights groups claim
that birth defects have actually
occurred in the area since the plant
opened in 1969 due to groundwater
contamination arising from the
hazardous waste dumped in and
around the plant. However, the
government has not confirmed a
link, and no long-term research has
been carried out that proves the
birth defects are directly related to
the drinking of poisoned water.

Government apathy
Although UCC’s 27-hectare
(67-acre) factory was closed down
immediately after the disaster, the
company was not permitted to
decontaminate the site until the
early 1990s. While litigation was in
progress, the methyl isocyanate
unit was considered “evidence” in
the criminal case. In 2001, UCC

WHITE COLLAR CRIMES


Corporate negligence


Generally, corporate negligence
occurs when a company breaches
its promise to a third party to do
no harm. Whether it is done
accidentally or intentionally to
save money, a company can be
held accountable for a negligent
action, or a failure to act. A parent
corporation may be found liable
for the negligence of a subsidiary
company, even if it played no part
in the wrongdoing. Landmark
cases include 79-year-old Stella
Liebeck, who in 1994 successfully
sued McDonald’s for $2.86 million

(£2.5 million today) after spilling
a cup of their scalding coffee in
her lap and suffering serious
burns. Today, most commercial
hot drinks carry warning signs.
In 2014, a US jury awarded
Cynthia Robinson $23.6 billion
(£19 billion) in punitive damages
in her law-suit against cigarette-
maker R.J. Reynolds for the
wrongful death of her husband,
a smoker who died of lung
cancer in 1996. She argued that
the company was negligent in
not informing consumers that
its products are addictive and
harmful to health.

The jury in the Robinson vs
Reynolds case found that the tobacco
giant had marketed its cigarettes as
safe, knowing full well they were not.

was taken over by Dow Chemical
Company, which has steadfastly
refused to accept liability for the
Bhopal accident. Dow says the legal
case was settled in 1989, and that
responsibility for the cleanup
operation, as well as for ongoing
medical care for victims and fresh
claims for compensation, now rests
with the authorities in Madhya
Pradesh state, who assumed control
of the site in 1998. Little has been
done in recent years by India’s

government to resolve this
impasse. And while local activists
have no doubt that the toxic
waste at the abandoned plant
poses serious health risks for
people living nearby, they have
opposed government plans to
remove and incinerate it, on safety
grounds. However, in 2015, a small
amount of waste from the site was
burned in a trial incineration and
the emissions were deemed to be
within permissible limits. ■

110-113_Bhopal_Disaster.indd 113 02/12/2016 16:17
Free download pdf