The Crime Book

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