Bhopal disaster: The Warren Anderson Story
There is evidence to prove that the decision not to press for the extradition of Anderson was taken at a core group meeting of Government of India as early as 1995. The operative portion of a noting on an External Affairs Ministry (CRV division) document regarding the warrant of arrest against Anderson said that the “the issue (Anderson’s extradition) has international and domestic implications. Both political and economic implication for Indo-US relations are self evident
Due to criminal negligence and gross callousness on the part of the Union Carbide pesticide plant management in taking adequate safety precautions, water and other impurities – that cause MIC to react violently – entered one of the MIC storage tanks during the midnight of December 2 and 3, 1984 resulting in exothermic reactions and forcing MIC and its reaction products to escape in the form of froth and lethal gases into the atmosphere resulting in the death of thousands of Bhopal citizens.
Thirty-two years after the disaster, neither the State nor the Central Government has made any attempt to either undertake a comprehensive assessment of the ramifications of the Bhopal disaster or to take necessary remedial measures. If we look at the current status of issues such as health care, enhancement of compensation, prosecution of the accused, and remediation of environment, there isn’t a proper protocol for treatment of each gas-related ailments and there is “persistent apathy” on the part of the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) and the State of Madhya Pradesh in monitoring the health status of the Bhopal gas victims.
None of the culprits, directly or indirectly, responsible for causing the Bhopal disaster have been punished. The former Chairman of the US Multinational company Union Carbide Corporation Warren Anderson, who was the principal accused and was declared an absconder in the criminal case linked with 1984 Union Carbide gas disaster in Bhopal is now dead. Bhopal has gone through the worst industrial disaster and the tragedy is that the linchpin responsible for perpetrating a disaster and a person who should have been tried for mass homicide went unpunished.
In a related development, the CJM Bhopal last month (19 November 2016) ordered a case to be registered against Moti Singh, retired IAS officer and the Bhopal Collector in December 1984 and against Swaraj Puri, a retired IPS officer, and the then SP Bhopal for sheltering Anderson, and allowing him to escape from Bhopal on 7 December1984.
Over the years, the Central Bureau of Investigation kept telling the courts that all was being done for Anderson’s extradition but the truth is entirely different. A few years ago, the CBI had told the court of Bhopal Chief Judicial Magistrate that the request for extradition of Warren Anderson had been forwarded on April 5, 2011 to the Ministry of External Affairs and sent to the competent US authorities through diplomatic channels but no decision has been taken in this matter by the US department of Justice. On June 7, 2010 when the the Bhopal CJM’s court had convicted all the accused, Warren Anderson, UCC USA and UCC Hong Kong were not among those convicted as they were absconding. The Bhopal Court had issued non-bailable warrant of arrest against Anderson on April 10, 1992 for ensuring his presence in court. As he continued to remain absent, a second non-bailable arrest warrant was issued against him on July 22, 2009.
(CBI’s request for extradition of Anderson, along with a vetted dossier attested by the Tis Hazari Court in Delhi on March 23, 2011 was forwarded to the Union Ministry of External Affairs in April 2011 for transmission to the competent US authorities.)
CBI’s deposition in Bhopal court notwithstanding, there is evidence to prove that the decision not to press for the extradition of Anderson was taken at a core group meeting of Government of India as early as 1995. The operative portion of a noting on an External Affairs Ministry (CRV division) document regarding the warrant of arrest against Anderson said that the “the issue (Anderson’s extradition) has international and domestic implications. Both political and economic implication for Indo-US relations are self evident. It has been categorically stated that the U.S. courts will not certify that there is a prima facie case for extradition and indicated that the US Government will not agree.” This stand was taken by the Ministry of External Affairs after the Cabinet Secretariat, which was seized of the matter, convened a high level meeting at a room in Rashtrapati Bhawan on February 9, 1995 to discuss the sensitive issue of Mr. Anderson’s extradition. Those who attended the deliberations and supported the idea that in view of Indo-US relations, it will not be advisable to press for Mr. Anderson’s extradition included the then Cabinet Secretary A.N. Verma, Union Secretary Chemicals and Petroleum K.K. Mathur, Secretary Finance K. Srinivasan, Home Secretary K. Padmanabhaiah, Secretary Legal Affairs P.C. Rao and the CBI Director K. Vijayramarao. (This had been brought to light for the first time by me immediately after the controversial meeting in Rashtrapati Bhawan).
After the Bhopal Chief Judicial Magistrate gave the judgment on June 7, 2010 sentencing the Indian accused in the Union Carbide criminal case, the former joint Director of CBI B.R. Lall had also gone on record saying that the CBI had been told by the External Affairs Ministry not to pursue Mr. Anderson’s extradition. Mr. Lall’s claim has been rejected by the then director CBI, Mr. Vijayramarao, who was part of GOI’s core group that took a stand against Anderson’s extradition.
Anderson was the accused no.1 in the 1984 gas disaster criminal case which seeks to punish those responsible for the death of more than 20,000 residents of Bhopal and causing grave injuries to hundreds of thousand survivors. He was arrested along with Mr. Keshub Mahindra and Mr. Vijay Gokhale, the then chairman and managing director of Union Carbide India Limited, when they arrived in Bhopal soon after the gas disaster on December 7, 1984. Cases under sections 304-A, 426, 429, 278, 284 and 120-B of the Indian penal Code were registered against them and they were detained in the luxury of the Union Carbide guest house overlooking the picturesque Upper Lake in the State capital. After few hours of detention, Anderson was released on bail and flown to New Delhi in the State Government aircraft. Moti Singh, who was the Bhopal district collector at the time of the gas disaster several years later made the revelation that he had been instructed by the then Chief Secretary to complete the formality of releasing Anderson on bail and ensure his quick passage to New Delhi by a State Government aircraft. This happened when senior Congress leader Arjun Singh was the Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh. Former State Home Secretary K.S. Sharma also went on record stating that there was no question of any movement of State Government aircraft “under the circumstances” without the Chief Minister’s direct intervention. This was in response to late Arjun Singh’s claim that he had nothing to do with Anderson’s arrest and subsequent release after the 1984 Union Carbide gas disaster. He had even described the charge as “irresponsible and misleading”. When this controversy was raging Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan had described Arjun Singh’s statement that he had nothing to do with the former Anderson’s arrest and subsequent release after the 1984 Union Carbide gas disaster as irresponsible and misleading.
When the Arjun Singh controversy was raging, Madhya Pradesh chief minister Shivraj Singh Chauhan had taken Mr. Singh head-on by issuing a statement which said: “one cannot expect such an irresponsible statement from a senior politician like Mr. Singh. He had further stated that the denial of any role in the administrative decision-making process as chief minister when it came to giving the State aircraft to Mr. Anderson for a safe passage lacked credibility. He also said it would not be possible to do justice to the Bhopal gas victims till we do not unravel the truth about Anderson’s release.
The VIP treatment given to Anderson and the way he was allowed to go scot-free from Bhopal is not surprising since the Union Carbide contraption was a boon for the political executive and bureaucracy in the State capital. So many lucrative jobs went on a platter to the children of senior bureaucrats. It is common knowledge here that those ingratiated included officers at the level of Chief secretary, and Inspector General of Police. Major contracts were also given by the company to political bigwigs in the State and the Union Carbide guest house was a major centre for entertainment for the so called “bigswigs”.
Ever since the Supreme Court approved the $ 470 million out of court settlement of compensation with Union Carbide Corporation in February 1989, hundreds of thousand gas affected citizens in Bhopal have continuously felt that they have been cheated because of the meagre compensation awarded to them and also since the multinational company had not been held accountable on the criminal liability front even thirty years after the gas disaster.
Prior to Judge Keenan transferring the Carbide case to India, when I had met Gerald j Williams, Attorney at Law with Slap, Williams and Cuker at Franklin Plaza in Philadelphia in USA in 1985 while researching the causes leading to the Bhopal gas disaster, the US attorney had expressed his gut feeling and predicted that the Carbide case will be tried in India because the general view in the US power lobbies was that matters could be manipulated in India and there was no question of pushing a powerful US multinational through a legal wrangle in US courts.
Within days of the poisonous gas leak in Bhopal, UCC had repeatedly expressed its desire for a mutual settlement. Its keenness for a “compromise” was explicit from the statement made by Anderson soon after his return from Bhopal after his arrest and subsequent release on December 7, 1984. At a press conference at Danbury, USA on December 10, 1984, he had said that an ‘equitable resolution of the compensation question was possible without resort to the path of litigation. John Coale (who was retained by more than six thousand victims to fight their case in the U.S courts), also held the same view. Upon his arrival in Washington D.C from Bhopal on December 12, he had said “we had rather not go through a long drawn out battle in the courts.” The similarity in the stand taken by Anderson and Coale was rather stark. The similarity in their stand became a cause for concern among those closely watching the developments on the legal front immediately after the gas leak disaster.
In March 1986, a section of the US media had disclosed that Union Carbide Corporation had agreed to pay $ 350 million as compensation to the gas victims. When Union Carbide realised that it would be difficult to negotiate with the Indian government, it mutually worked out a compromise settlement offer of $ 350 million with a 3-members committee of US attorneys representing a large number of victims in the US Courts. John P. Coale and Arthur Lowy, representing this committee had come to Bhopal in the last week of March 1986 to discuss the compromise offer with the victims. At a press conference called by these attorneys in Bhopal on March 29, 1986, when I had asked Coale why he had failed to demand punitive damage from the multinational company before accepting a proposed settlement offer, Coale had replied that punitive damages were not possible since “deliberate negligence” on the part of Union Carbide Corporation was difficult to prove.
On July 31, 1998, the then Attorney General of India, Soli J. Sorabjee had also given a written opinion to the Ministry of External Affairs advsing that the Supreme Court order in the Keshub Mahindra case “would apply to Mr. Anderson also”. On his advice, The Government of India then sought opinion from a US solicitors firm, which took three years in stating that there were missing evidentiary links and without these links, the Indian Government would not be able to convince a US Court about its case for extradition of Mr. Anderson. In his subsequent written opinion, Mr. Sorabjee on August 6, 2001 told the Government “I am not sanguine that at the end of the day the requisite evidentiary material would be forthcoming.”
Government of India had rejected a proposed settlement offer by the US lawyers taking the stand that the amount of $ 350 million fell short of what was fair and equitable. In this backdrop, on May 12, 1986, judge Keenan of the New York District Court declared that India and not the US was the proper forum for such litigation. Three years later, in February 1989, the Supreme Court directed that there be an overall settlement of the claims for $470 million (about Rs.713 crore) and termination of all civil and criminal proceedings arising out of the Bhopal gas disaster.
Significantly, prior to Judge Keenan transferring the Carbide case to India, when I had met Gerald j Williams, Attorney at Law with Slap, Williams and Cuker at Franklin Plaza in Philadelphia in USA in 1985 while researching the causes leading to the Bhopal gas disaster, the US attorney had expressed his gut feeling and predicted that the Carbide case will be tried in India because the general view in the US power lobbies was that matters could be manipulated in India and there was no question of pushing a powerful US multinational through a legal wrangle in US courts.
In such gloomy circumstances what however came as a big relief to the Bhopal surviviors was the Supreme Court decision to set aside the quashing and termination of criminal proceedings In response to a review petition on October 3, 1991. On November 27, 1991 the criminal case was thus resumed in the Bhopal court but not before a lot of precious time had been wasted.
In the third week of June 2010 after the Indian accused in the Carbide case had been sentenced, External Affairs Minister and the then leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha Sushma Swaraj had announced in Parliament that the BJP shall move a resolution to terminate the $ 470 million out of court settlement of compensation for the gas victims approved by the Supreme Court in February 1989. On Anderson being flown out of Bhopal in the State plane in December 1984, Ms. Swaraj, while addressing party MPs, MLAs, senior leaders, and State BJP office bearers, had drawn attention towards the issue of former chairman of Union Carbide Corporation Warren Anderson and said “his was a great send off and not a great escape.” She had also said that at the root of the June 7, 2010 judgement by the Bhopal Chief Judicial magistrate in the criminal case linked with the gas tragedy was the 1989 out of court settlement with UCC, the U.S. multinational. She was also critical of the Supreme Court decision for converting the charge against the accused in Carbide criminal case from section 304-II IPC to section 304-A IPC, that is from culpable homicide to negligence. She even had drawn a parallel between Anderson and Ottavio Quattrocchi, linked with the Bofors controversy, and said that foreigners accused of committing crimes in India had been set free. In one breath, Ms. Swaraj even had said, Rajiv Gandhi, former Chief Justice of India A.M. Ahmadi, the CBI director and the judicial system all were guilty.
Bhopal: On the 32nd Anniversary of the gas disaster hundreds of survivors of the World’s worst industrial disaster marched today (3 December, 2016) from the city centre to the pesticide factory of the American multinational Union Carbide. The marchers held banners, chanted slogans and at the end of the rally, set fire to the logos of Union Carbide and its current owner Dow Chemical along with the US flag.
Leaders of five survivors’ organizations who jointly organized the rally, called upon the governments of USA, India and Madhya Pradesh state to stop sheltering and colluding with the corporations and ensure justice and a life of dignity for the half million survivors.
“The US government is sheltering Dow Chemical for the last two years by refusing to serve the notices of the Bhopal District court against the US corporation in the ongoing criminal case on the disaster. It must stop violating the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty it signed with India in 1991. ” said Rashida Bee, president of the Bhopal Gas Peedit Mahila Stationery Karmchari Sangh and winner of the Goldman Environmental prize.
Balkrishna Namdeo, president of the Bhopal Gas Peedit Pensionbhogee Sangharsh Morcha said “The collusion between the Indian government and these American corporations is the main reason for the denial of justice and rehabilitation to the survivors for the last 32 years.” “ That and the fact that half of the gassed people are Muslims and 80 % of the Hindus are from lower castes.” he added.
“Our Prime Minister paid special attention to the menu for the dinner he invited Andrew Liveris, Dow Chemical’s CEO to. But he remains oblivious to the need for revision of figures of injury and death in the curative petition for additional compensation to the survivors pending before the Supreme Court for last six years.” said Nawab Khan of the Bhopal Gas Peedit Mahila Purush Sangharsh Morcha.
Charging the state government with deliberate negligence, Satinath Sarangi of the Bhopal Group for Information and Action said, “The Madhya Pradesh government has known about contamination of ground water in and around the pesticide factory since 1991. Yet till today it has taken no legal steps to make Dow Chemical pay for the clean up or for the health damages to thousands of residents living next to the abandoned factory.”
“The long disastrous aftermath of the man made disaster in Bhopal is also man made. The disaster can end today if the governments of USA, India and Madhya Pradesh respect national and international laws, follow their respective constitutions and fulfill promises made.” said Safreen Khan of the Children Against Dow Carbide, an organization of next generation of survivors.
STATEMENT ON THE 32nd ANNIVERSARY OF THE BHOPAL GAS LEAK DISASTER
The escape of about 40 tonnes of methyl isocyanate (MIC) – a highly toxic chemical – from a storage tank on the premises of the pesticide plant of Union Carbide India Limited (UCIL) in Bhopal – the capital of the State of Madhya Pradesh – on the night of 02/03 December 1984 resulted in a horrendous disaster in the city, which was inhabited by about 900,000 persons then. Due to criminal negligence and utter callousness on the part of the plant management in taking adequate safety precautions, water and other impurities – that cause MIC to react violently – entered one of the MIC storage tanks resulting in exothermic reactions and forcing MIC and its reaction products to escape in the form of froth and lethal gases. The escaping poisonous gases, which were heavier than air, spread across 40 sq. kms of area of Bhopal, covering about 36 of the 56 municipal wards, leaving in its wake more than 20,000 dead (over several years) and inflicting injuries in varying degree on about 550,000 others. The pernicious impact on flora and fauna in the affected area was equally grave. UCIL was then under the control of Union Carbide Corporation (UCC) – a U.S. multi-national company, which is currently wholly owned by the Dow Chemical Company, USA.
As noted on previous occasions, even three decades after the disaster, neither the State nor the Central Government has attempted either to undertake a comprehensive assessment of the ramifications of the disaster or to take necessary remedial measures. The unjust Settlement of 14/15.02.1989 was a complete sham with each gas-victim being finally awarded less than one-fifth of the sum allotted even as per the terms of the settlement. As a result, the gas-victims have had to wage concerted struggles in their quest for medical relief & rehabilitation, compensation, environmental remediation and justice. There was little progress during 2016 on the most pressing issues concerning the gas-victims, which is a matter of serious concern. The current status of issues such as health care, enhancement of compensation, rehabilitation, prosecution of the accused, remediation of the environment, etc., may be briefly recounted as follows:
1. HEALTH: The gross indifference on the part of the State and Central Governments to the health needs of the gas-victims continues to be as grim as ever. Apart from the fact that a fairly large health-infrastructure has been built in terms of buildings and number of hospital beds (about 1000 beds exclusively for gas-victims) because of pressure exerted over the years by organizations supporting the cause of the Bhopal gas victims, the quality of health care in terms of investigation, diagnosis, treatment, research and record-keeping continue to be abysmal as ever. The persistent apathy of the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) and the Government of Madhya Pradesh in monitoring the health status of the Bhopal gas victims is shocking to say the least. They have failed to maintain proper medical records of hospitals and clinics through computerization and networking and have failed to supply health-booklet to each gas-victim with his/her complete medical record. That proper protocol for treatment of most gas-related ailments has not been evolved even 32 years after the disaster speaks volumes about the apathetic attitude of the concerned authorities in this regard. Mere symptomatic treatment, over-medication due to lack of proper monitoring, and dispensing of sub-standard and spurious drugs has resulted in increasing number of renal failures among gas-victims. Bhopal-disaster-related medical research, which the ICMR had thoughtlessly discontinued in 1994 and which the ICMR was compelled to revive in 2010, is yet to be pursued with necessary vigour. The fact is that neither the ICMR nor the State Government has any idea of the number of gas-victims suffering under each category of disease arising from respiratory, ophthalmic, gastro-intestinal, neurological, psychiatric, and other problems. What is equally shocking is that even 32 years after the disaster, most of the gas-victims seeking treatment continue to be classed as suffering from temporary injury in order to deny them compensation for permanent injury.
1.1 It was because of this utter insensitivity on the part of the Union of India and the State of Madhya Pradesh that BGPMUS, the Bhopal Group for Information & Action (BGIA) and BGPSSS – as Petitioners Nos.1, 2 and 3 – had filed a Writ Petition (No.50 of 1998) before the Supreme Court on 14.01.1998. The Petitioners pleaded for restarting of disaster-related medical research, monitoring & recording the health status of each gas-victim, improvement in health care facilities, appropriate protocol for treatment of each disaster-related ailment, etc. After 14 years of litigation, and after several interim directions, the Supreme Court finally issued a comprehensive Order on 09.08.2012 acceding to the above prayers of the Petitioners and issued necessary directions to the Union of India, the State of MP and to concerned institutions in this regard. The Petitioners were further directed to pursue the matter before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh (as Writ Petition No.15658 of 2012), a task that BGPMUS & BGPSSS are actively engaged in at present. However, the fact remains that even 51 months after the Supreme Court had passed the said Order dated 09.08.2012, neither the UOI nor the State Government has taken the necessary steps to comply fully with all the directions of the Court. What is most appalling and disheartening is that even 32 years after the disaster, proper health records of the gas-victims are not being maintained and, although claims are being made to the contrary, the fact is that most of the gas-victims do not have a hard copy of his/her complete medical record in his/her possession to date.
1.2 Because of the failure of the Respondents to comply with the said Order of the Supreme Court dated 09.08.2012, BGPMUS & BGPSSS were compelled to file a Contempt Petition (No.832 of 2015) on 15.05.2015 against the concerned officials of UOI, State of MP and allied institutions such as ICMR, National Institute for Research in Environmental Health (NIREH) and Bhopal Memorial Hospital and Research Centre (BMHRC). Subsequently, based on the plea of BGPMUS & BGPSSS, the MP High Court vide order dated 12.02.2016 directed the Petitioners and the Respondents to hold joint meetings along with members of the Advisory Committee and the Monitoring Committee, to sort out outstanding issues. As a result, joint meetings were held on 14.03.2016 and 11.06.2016 and the Respondents (the Union of India and the State of Madhya Pradesh) made commitments to comply with the outstanding directions of the Supreme Court dated 09.08.2012 without further delay. However, the truth is that even five months later, there is little indication that requisite steps have been taken to comply with the said directions. The most exasperating aspect is that during the last 32 years no one has been held accountable for denying requisite medical treatment and, thereby, meting out gross injustice to the Bhopal gas-victims.
1.3 A shocking and disgraceful act that came to light in 2008 was the illegal manner in which secret drug trials were conducted on gas-victims at BMHRC during 2004-2008. After the matter become public, the authorities at BMHRC have been making every effort to shield the culprits. BGPMUS & BGPSSS have sought detailed inquiry into this unsavory incident of using gas-victims as guinea pigs and have demanded stringent action against the guilty. For pursuing the matter, BGPMUS & BGPSSS have become interveners in Writ Petition (C) No.33 of 2012, which was filed to oppose unregulated drug trials in the country, especially by multinational drug companies, and the matter is currently pending before the Supreme Court.
2. COMPENSATION: Twenty-one years after the unjust Bhopal Settlement of 14/15 February 1989, the Union of India had decided to file a curative petition [Curative Petition (Civil) Nos.345-347 of 2010] before the Supreme Court on 03.12.2010 against the terms of the Settlement on the plea that the Settlement was based on underestimated figures of the dead and injured. The UOI has sought enhancement of compensation by an additional Rs.7728 crores while the 1989 Settlement amount was merely about Rs.705 crores. The petition has been admitted but has not yet been taken up for hearing. BGPMUS and BGPSSS do support the UOI’s Curative Petition in principle regarding the total casualty figure (i.e., 5,73,586 victims, including dead and injured) and regarding the modalities for enhancing compensation (i.e., that it should be based on the Dollar-Rupee exchange rate that prevailed at the time of the Settlement). However, BGPMUS and BGPSSS have serious differences with the UOI’s stand regarding the number of dead (just 5295 according to the Curative Petition) and the seriously injured (just 4944 according to the Curative Petition) and regarding the UOI’s paltry claims for relief & rehabilitation and for environmental remediation. The stand of BGPMUS & BGPSSS regarding the number of dead (20,000+) and seriously injured (150,000+) has already been explained in the Special Leave Petition (SLP) that is currently pending before the Supreme Court as SLP (C) No.12893 of 2010, which will be heard only after the disposal of UOI’s Curative Petition. On 24.10.2013, BGPMUS & BGPSSS filed an Interlocutory Application in UOI’s Curative Petition (C) Nos.345-347 of 2010 to point out the inadequacies in the same and praying for granting appropriate relief. It is astonishing that the Union of India had made no attempt to place the relevant ICMR reports before the Claim Courts to enable the Claim Courts to assess fairly the types and gravity of injuries suffered by the Bhopal gas victims. In the absence of proper health booklets, which the ICMR and the State Government had failed to provide to each gas-victim, circumstantial evidence would have been very valuable in determining the likely degree of injury suffered by a gas-victim. BGPMUS & BGPSSS hope that the said Curative Petition, which has been pending before the Supreme Court for the last six years, would be disposed of without further delay but after health booklet with his/ her complete medical record is issued to each gas-victim. Compensation is supposed to be awarded in terms of the category and degree of injury but as of now gas-victims are left without the means to prove the same. Computerization of health records and networking of the records of the various hospitals and clinics treating gas-victims as well as providing each gas-victim with his/her complete medical records is a prime necessity in this regard.
3. CRIMINAL CASE: The criminal cases against the accused are supposedly proceeding at two levels: one against the three absconding accused and the other against the nine accused who appeared before the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM), Bhopal, to face trial. Through Judgment and Order dated 07.06.2010, the CJM had prosecuted eight accused (one of the accused is dead) under Section 304-A, 336, 337 and 338 of IPC. The CBI, the State of MP and BGPMUS & BGPSSS had filed Criminal Revision Petitions against the said Judgement before the Sessions Court, Bhopal. The CBI had sought enhancement of charges against Keshub Mahindra and 7 other accused from Section 304-A to Section 304 Part-II of IPC based on evidence already before the CJM. BGPMUS & BGPSSS have already expressed their utmost displeasure at the extremely slow pace at which the criminal case has been proceeding and their demand for setting up a special court to speed up the proceedings has not yet been acceded to by the State Government. Currently, the Appeals filed by the eight Accused against the sentencing is being heard by the Sessions Court, Bhopal.
3.1 Ten to fourteen days imprisonment at the time of arrest in 1984 is the only privation that seven of the accused (Nos.2 to 9) have suffered so far (accused No.4 has not faced even that inconvenience to date)! Under the circumstances, the culprits are least perturbed about the likelihood of being imprisoned any further in their lifetime and the next of kin of the dead and the surviving victims are left with not even the faintest hope that justice would be rendered to them in their lifetime for the loss & suffering they have had to endure during the last 32 years. This apathy speaks volumes about the pathetic state of the criminal justice system in the country that renders justice only on selective basis. When the governments at the Centre and the States are not serious in pursuing a criminal case, they can scuttle the due process with impunity and, thereby, make a complete mockery of the criminal justice system.
3.2 The criminal case against the three absconding accused, namely accused Nos.1, 10 and 11, which has been pending before the Court of the CJM, Bhopal, as Miscellaneous Judicial Case (MJC) No.91 of 1992 has also been proceeding at an equally tardy pace. After acceding to the plea of BGPSSS, BGIA and BGPMUS dated 07.09.2001, the CJM had issued notice to the Dow Chemical Company (Dow), USA, on 06.01.2005 to appear in the criminal case on behalf of the absconding accused No.10, Union Carbide Corporation (UCC), USA, which had become a wholly owned subsidiary of Dow in 2001. However, on 17.03.2005, the MP High Court at Jabalpur had stayed the said order of the CJM at the urging of a purportedly non-party in the matter. The stay was vacated only seven years later on 19.10.2012, when the High Court finally upheld the validity of the CJM’s Order dated 06.01.2005. After BGPSSS & BGPMUS brought the ruling of the High Court to the attention of the CJM, Bhopal, through an Application dated 30.11.2012 in MJC No.91/1992, the CJM re-issued notice to Dow on 24.07.2013, 01.03.2014, 12.11.2014 and on 22.01.2016. On 11.07.2016, the CBI informed the concerned Judicial Magistrate, Bhopal that the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) had forwarded the notice to the U.S. Department of Justice on 01.02.2016 and a reminder was further sent by the MHA on 15.06.2016. However, Dow has repeatedly failed to respond to the notice. Meanwhile, the proceedings against accused no.1, Warren Anderson, have become infractuous after his demise on 29.09.2014.
3.3 On 19.11.2016, BGPSSS & BGPMUS filed an application urging the CJM, Bhopal to proceed ex parte for consideration of Application dated 07.09.2001 in terms of the orders of the CJM dated 15.06.2004 and 06.01.2005 and proceedings against the Dow Chemical Company for wilful violation of summons of the CJM. The next date of hearing before the CJM is 08.12.2016. The lackadaisical manner in which the trial against the accused in the Bhopal disaster criminal case has proceeded for the last thirty-two years makes a mockery of the criminal justice system in the country. Neither the Central Government nor the State Government appear to be serious in pursuing the criminal cases against the accused, including Dow Chemicals, which is indicative of their total lack of commitment to the cause of the gas-victims.
3.4 Interestingly, in response to an application filed by Abdul Jabbar Khan and Shanawaz Khan on 15.06.2010, the CJM Bhopal on 19.11.2016 ordered a case to be registered against Moti Singh, a retired IAS officer and against Swaraj Puri, a retired IPS officer, under Sections 212, 217 and 221 of IPC for sheltering Accused No.1, Warren Anderson, and allowing him to escape from Bhopal on 07.12.1984. Summonses have been issued to Mr.Singh and Mr.Puri to appear before the Court on 08.12.2016.
4. ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION: Toxic waste that was generated during UCIL’s operation from 1969 to 1984 was dumped in and around the plant leading to severe soil and water contamination. A comprehensive study to estimate the extent and gravity of the damage has not been carried out by the Centre or the State Government to date. Instead, the magnitude of the problem has been grossly underestimated by making it appear that the total toxic waste that needs to be safely disposed of is only about 345 tonnes that is stored at the plant site. The matter is pending before the Supreme Court as SLP (C) No.9874 of 2012 and as a part of the Curative Petition (Civil) No.345-347 of 2010. The current proposal to incinerate/bury the toxic waste near Indore is wholly misconceived and it would only result in shifting the problem from Bhopal to Indore. On the contrary, in a preliminary study that was jointly carried out by the National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI), Nagpur, and the National Geophysical Research Institute (NGRI), Hyderabad, during 2009-2010, it was estimated that “the total quantum of contaminated soil requiring remediation amounts to 11,00,000 MT [metric tonnes]”(p.68). Since the Government of India has submitted that the private incinerator at Pitampur (Indore) has been suitably upgraded to prevent any toxic emission, the Supreme Court has permitted test-incineration of toxic waste currently stored at the Bhopal plant. The results of the tests are awaited. Based on the “Polluter Pays Principle”, it is the duty and responsibility of the Dow Chemical Company, USA, which currently owns UCC, to meet the cost of remediating comprehensively the affected environment in and around the UCIL plant with the latest available remediation technology. Similarly, the cost of providing safe-drinking water to the affected population residing in and around the former UCIL plant too has to be borne by Dow. However, the responsibility for providing safe drinking water to the affected population is entirely that of the State Government, which is yet to fulfill its responsibility in this regard. Moreover, the victims of contaminated water have still not been made eligible for free medical treatment.
4.1 Remediation of the estimated 11,00,000 MT of contaminated soil is a far more difficult task. At the initiative of the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), Delhi, a preliminary attempt was made in April 2013 to bring together on a common platform the various stakeholders (including BGPMUS & BGPSSS) and experts to prepare an Action Plan to remediate the degraded environment. While a draft Action Plan has been worked out, it requires further refinement as well as inputs from other experts and stakeholders, including the Government of Madhya Pradesh. The stoic indifference of the State Government to this daunting task is alarming. In situ decontamination of the toxic waste (including the contaminated soil & groundwater) using closed-loop remediation technologies is a possibility. With inputs and technical help from UN Environment Programme (UNEP), cleaning up of the contaminated site in Bhopal is quite feasible. However, the Government of India has to take the initiative in inviting the UNEP to undertake this task. It goes without saying that the entire costs for the cleanup of the contaminate site should be ultimately borne by the Dow Chemical Company, the present owners of accused No.10, UCC.
5. RELIEF & REHABILITATION: The State Government has failed to address adequately and with sensitivity a host of socio-economic problems that confronts the chronically sick, the elderly, the differently abled, the widowed, and other vulnerable sections among the gas-victims. The pittance, which was disbursed as compensation in most instances to these sections was never enough to take care of their daily needs. Finding gainful employment in accordance with the reduced capacity to work and to lead a dignified life has been a serious challenge. The State Government has to give far more attention and provide far larger support to the most vulnerable sections of gas-victims than in the past.
On the 32nd anniversary of this man-made-disaster, the Bhopal Gas Peedith Mahila Udyog Sanghathan (BGPMUS) and the Bhopal Gas Peedith Sangharsh Sahayog Samiti (BGPSSS) pay their homage to the deceased victims and reiterate their determination to continue to uphold the cause of the survivors and to seek justice for the hapless victims.
BHOPAL GAS PEEDITH MAHILA UDYOG SANGHATHAN (BGPMUS), 51, Rajender Nagar, Bhopal 462010 &
BHOPAL GAS PEEDITH SANGHARSH SAHAYOG SAMITI (BGPSSS), C/o Delhi Science Forum, D-158, Saket, New Delhi 110017
Abdul Jabbar Khan
N.D. Jayaprakash. Co-Convener, BGPSSS . Tel: 011-27666980 . Mobile: +91-9968014630. email@example.com