Bhopal gas tragedy verdict under criticism

The Bhopal gas tragedy verdict has been hitting headlines across the world and angry reactions are coming in from everywhere.

Many see this as a case not just of justice delayed but also justice not delivered. And overwhelmingly, the international media holds the Indian government and judiciary responsible for the travesty.

On Monday, after over 25 years, eight people were convicted for the world's worst industrial disaster and sentenced to two years in prison. One of them died during the course of the trial. The other seven were granted bail. About 20,000 people were killed in the Bhopal gas tragedy of December 2-3, 1984.


Although Britain has never faced a disaster of this scale, there has been recognition that common manslaughter laws are not enough to hold companies accountable. This led to them tightening their corporate manslaughter laws a few years ago to ensure companies operate in the safest ways possible.

After the judgement, The Times, London said, "Nor has the US emerged with great honour blocking India's requests to extradite Warren Anderson, the elderly former chairman of the Indian subsidiary, leaving the prosecution with only local managers to pursue. But the greatest censure should fall on the Indian government itself."

In US too, the Indian legal system came in for the most criticism.

The New York Times said Indian courts are notoriously slow. The Times online went a step further, claiming the Bhopal verdict shows that the wealthy can outwit India's judiciary.

"It would be extraordinary for something like this to happen in the United States. There is a firm conviction here that justice delayed is justice denied. Regardless of the merits of any decision, you have to decide it quickly enough so that the decision has consequences," said Professor Douglas Baird of the University of Chicago Law School.

At a time when Americans are asking who will be held accountable for the Gulf Coast oil spill, the outcome of the Bhopal gas tragedy verdict touches a chord in the US.

Apart from the predictable critique of the Indian legal system, the American press has also reported on the issue of the nuclear liability bill, under discussion in Parliament, which envisages capping a foreign company's liability in the event of an accident at a nuclear power plant.

The world over, environmental groups too are united in dismay over the verdict that gave the minimum sentence of two years to local factory managers but couldn't bring to books the big fish, like then Union Carbide chairman Warren Anderson.

"Criminal negligence is always difficult to prove but I find it unbelievable that it has taken more than 25 years. It's a scandal. It wouldn't happen in the UK. Management in US has got away scot-free. Can't imagine that would happen in the UK," said Kieth Tyrell of Pesticide Action Network, UK.

The Bhopal verdict has been hitting the headlines in France as well as it has in the rest of Europe. A lot of interest has also been generated over the general public opinion in India and the anger expressed by certain sections of the Indian media, which many feel is justified as they see this as a case not just of justice delayed but also justice not delivered.

"It was a great shock for us to hear that for biggest industrial disaster in history ever, the conclusion of the judges was not at all matching up to the extent of damage. Neither the sentence nor the fines are adequate for the catastrophe. It's not enough for the pain the victims and their family have suffered," said Marc Senant of Industrial Risk Campaign, France Nature Environment.

These reactions of shock and dismay at the Bhopal verdict prove most countries feel that India has lost a huge opportunity to send out a strong signal to the world that such disasters would be a thing of the past