Bhopal - 20 years later

elivsvonchiaing

I only realised today this happened 20 years ago. Did a bit of googling and found this:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/Bhopal-compensation-a-hoax/2004/12/04/1101923388299.html?oneclick=true

What I found most shocking was this (from above link):
"Union Carbide, bought by Dow Chemicals in 2001, paid $US470 million to the Indian Government in 1989 as a legal settlement. Much of it remains tied up by bureaucracy."

I've read this before in a publication that I thought at first is verging on Marxist - but now am beginning to respect more...

1989 was fifteen years ago - the Indian government should be shamed by the entire world to see that this gets paid out to the victims of Bhopal - they should in fact be shamed into paying more than this - this might mean tax goes up for industry - for one year- Tata Industries could easily pay for this by themselves. There is quite a bit of wealth in India held by those that have it. [EDIT] That is, if this indeed true [/EDIT]

This not my country, I know only a dozen or so Indians, but have to say people - your goverment does need to be shamed into this! Imho!

elivsvonchiaing

On rethink $500M is what the Indian government should pay - they have had the money too long and probably $100M has been spent on civil servants salaries so far...

On 13/12/04 this should legally rise to $500,054! "There is some sh1t that we will not eat" - Hunter S Thompson
__________________

bonkey

$500 million is an insultingly low figure considering the number of people who were killed and injured by this disaster.

(Just thought I'd add something so you didn't feel lonely writing this thread all on your own!)

jc

Hobbes

bonkey wrote:

$500 million is an insultingly low figure considering the number of people who were killed and injured by this disaster.

It is an insanely high figure in India though.

bonkey

Yeah, but it wasn't an Indian company.

I mean...I can understand the use of cheap labour and all of that, but when something goes wrong, the logic of "we will/should pay less for this mess because the people we killed/maimed/injured were really poor" sticks in my gut.

I don't think punitive damages for an act should be based on the developmental stage of where the act was performed. To me, that would be little removed from saying that murder in a developed nation should carry a life sentence, but in an underdeveloped nation should carry only a 3 year suspended.

jc

sovtek

Looks like the BBC got Dow to own up...or something like it.
Forsee any more Hutton Inquiry's?

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1212-22.htm

bonkey

Isn't that the article that was followed within 24 hours with an admission that the BBC were duped, and that the spokesperson had nothing to do with Dow, Union Carbide, or Bhopal?

jc

mycroft

bonkey wrote:

Isn't that the article that was followed within 24 hours with an admission that the BBC were duped, and that the spokesperson had nothing to do with Dow, Union Carbide, or Bhopal?

jc

Yup two "wacky" anti globalisation activists dupped the BBC, what utterly pissed me off about this situation is news of the "settlement" reached Bhopal where their was a protest going on outside the plant.

Massive victory for these guys, Yah made evil corporate look foolish, no sympathy for the actual people who's hopes could be raised.....

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/review/story/0,6903,1371727,00.html

sovtek

mycroft wrote:

Yup two "wacky" anti globalisation activists dupped the BBC, what utterly pissed me off about this situation is news of the "settlement" reached Bhopal where their was a protest going on outside the plant.

Massive victory for these guys, Yah made evil corporate look foolish, no sympathy for the actual people who's hopes could be raised.....

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/review/story/0,6903,1371727,00.html

The fact that they succeeded in duping such a well known media outlet might be an excuse for not fully thinking through the implications of such a prank.
On the other hand it might eventually lead to more concessions from Dow because they were made to look like such assholes.

mycroft

sovtek wrote:

The fact that they succeeded in duping such a well known media outlet might be an excuse for not fully thinking through the implications of such a prank.
On the other hand it might eventually lead to more concessions from Dow because they were made to look like such assholes.

You'd think creating the world's worst ecological disaster might have had that effect, never mind two wacky pranksters.

sovtek

mycroft wrote:

You'd think creating the world's worst ecological disaster might have had that effect, never mind two wacky pranksters.

You would but then you would have to ignore a familiar MO amongst large multi-national corporations.

mycroft

sovtek wrote:

You would but then you would have to ignore a familiar MO amongst large multi-national corporations.

Yeah the whole thing reminds you just how phenomnially depressing and enraging the world is....

Pause.

**** didn't I say I was going to go live in a cave in cavan for the next four years if Bush got elected.......

elivsvonchiaing

bonkey wrote:

$500 million is an insultingly low figure considering the number of people who were killed and injured by this disaster.

Couldn't agree more... I reckon this money needs to go to at least the next three generations. So even by Indian standards $500 million is just not enough.

elivsvonchiaing

sovtek wrote:

The fact that they succeeded in duping such a well known media outlet might be an excuse for not fully thinking through the implications of such a prank.
On the other hand it might eventually lead to more concessions from Dow because they were made to look like such assholes.

Let us hope this is indeed the case! Found this link:
http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/12/03/bhopal.hoax/

So hitting share price may force shareholders to support further compensation to Bhopal from Dow. This would take months to emerge I suspect!

Blackjack

"Union Carbide, bought by Dow Chemicals in 2001, paid $US470 million to the Indian Government in 1989 as a legal settlement. Much of it remains tied up by bureaucracy."

Does not surprise me in the slightest. I believe that Indian Govt agencies are an absolute nightmare to deal with, incredibly Bureaucratic, lack consistency in requirements, and rarely follow through on commitments. Not that this is significantly different to a lot of other countries Govt agencies mind.

Also, the amount at the time would have been an exceptionally large settlement. In today's terms it would be quite small for such an event.
I am not condoning the companies actions by the way, as 23,500 per victim is a pittance by any standard.

elivsvonchiaing

Blackjack wrote:

Does not surprise me in the slightest. I believe that Indian Govt agencies are an absolute nightmare to deal with, incredibly Bureaucratic, lack consistency in requirements, and rarely follow through on commitments. Not that this is significantly different to a lot of other countries Govt agencies mind.

I am the flea on the tail of the dog that wants to wag them both!

Blackjack wrote:

Also, the amount at the time would have been an exceptionally large settlement. In today's terms it would be quite small for such an event.
I am not condoning the companies actions by the way, as 23,500 per victim is a pittance by any standard.

I really think Dow should pay more, will only do this if shareholders cry for it (because they are watching their stock, plunging on the strength of bad-press from Bhopal). Indian goverment - with inflation should pay $1b. However, we don't want another treaty of Versailles here. I'll let them off with $550m :cool:

Sand

I don't think punitive damages for an act should be based on the developmental stage of where the act was performed. To me, that would be little removed from saying that murder in a developed nation should carry a life sentence, but in an underdeveloped nation should carry only a 3 year suspended.

So If an American owned company kills thousands through negligence or whatever in the U.S. - as in Bhopal, then the payments to compensate should be on an American standard of what constitutes proper compensation, which all things being equal were assuming is higher than the Indian standard.

What happens if an Indian owned firm kills thousands in the U.S? Should the Indian standard of proper compensation be applied as *where* the crime takes place isnt important?

Money is just an abstract, exspressing goods and services in terms of commonly understood value/desirability. The cost of living is lower in India than it is here or in the U.S. hence money goes farther, so you dont require the same amount of it to provide the same compensation. Focusing on the nominal figure of the settlement is a red herring.

The real issues are why the money is still tied up in the bureacracy, and why this extradition treaty isnt being utilised.

elivsvonchiaing

Sand wrote:

The real issues are why the money is still tied up in the bureacracy, and why this extradition treaty isnt being utilised.

Fairly sure this is still the case. If you murder someone in New York, bugger-off to Florida - if you haven't committed any federal crimes - you can appeal extradition if there was a racial undertone to the crime... and you won't be extradited!

Just can't see the Americans extraditing a good 'ole boy to a non-caucasion nation!

bonkey

Sand wrote:

Should the Indian standard of proper compensation be applied as *where* the crime takes place isnt important?

I would tend to say that in any situation like this, the higher value (from the company's home nation's, or the plant's home nation's) should be applied in all cases.

Money is just an abstract

Not for the capitalist companies who'd be effected by a harsher set of penalties it isn't.

The cost of living is lower in India than it is here or in the U.S. hence

but we're not talking about the cost of living. We're talkign about teh cost of life. Here's some quotes I've found from teh first handful of sites I found by throwing Bhopal into google.

The state government of Madhya Pradesh reported that approximately 3,800 persons died, 40 persons experienced permanent total disability, and 2,680 persons experienced permanent partial disability.

More than 150,000 people were left severely disabled ––of whom 20,000 have since died of their injuries––in a disaster now widely acknowledged as the world’s worst-ever industrial disaster.

So you're saying that because these victims live somewhere where living is cheaper that the punishment for this death-toll and for this permanent-disability-toll should be lessened????

Focusing on the nominal figure of the settlement is a red herring.

I hear that argument, and immediately hear the General Motors (or Ford?) comment about recalls echoing in my head. It goes something like "estimate the cost of not recalling, in terms of claims from injuries etc. caused by the defect. Only recall if this figure is higher then the cost of the recall".

You can jail the directors/managers/whoever who made the decisions, but there will always be more unscrupulous people willing to try and get away with risking human life in the name of profit. Remember...they don't need to protect the company, only themselves. The company only gets a relatively-speaking light slap on the wrist.

Ultra-large companies have shown time and time again that human deaths means one thing only to them : how much will it cost us. If the cost of death(s) is lower than the cost of fixing the problem.....then you don't fix the problem if you can avoid it.

So I don't think that the punishment applied to the company is a red herring. While we continue to accept that companies can get away with insultingly low puntive measures taken against them for their being directly responsible for death and/or serious injury, then they will not significantly change.

The real issues are why the money is still tied up in the bureacracy, and why this extradition treaty isnt being utilised.

I'd agree that these are also important issues, but I still think that UC got let off far too easily.

Redleslie2

Blackjack wrote:

I am not condoning the companies actions by the way, as 23,500 per victim is a pittance by any standard.

I thought it was more like $500.

A $3-billion settlement was reduced to $470 millions in an out of court settlement negotiated between the Government of India and UC, without involving the survivors. This sum translates to $1170 for death and $520 for injury. Of this amount, $280 millions still lies with the Govt. of India, which on Dow’s suggestion might be used by the Govt. to clean up the toxic mess in the vicinity of the factory. A spokesperson for Dow, Kathy Hunt when asked about it once said that “$500 is plenty good for an Indian.”. $500 over the course of 20 years translates to ~7cents a day.

Source.

Sand

Just can't see the Americans extraditing a good 'ole boy to a non-caucasion nation!

Thats a possible angle alright, but I didnt see where any reason was given for the extradition treaty not being utilised. It may be the guy just has influential friends who are protecting their friend regardless of other concerns, including the mandatory racism. It may be the responsible US department honestly doesnt believe there is a valid case to answer in India, seeing as whilst this Warren chap apparently ran the American parent company, he didnt run the the Indian subsidiary company that operated the Bhopal plant. Or it may be the Indian police for whatever reason havent pursued the case.

I dont know why the treaty hasnt been utilised. Ill see what I can find with my friend Google later.

but we're not talking about the cost of living. We're talkign about teh cost of life.

Id argue we are talking about the cost of living, rather than the cost of life. One could argue the cost of life is some complicated formula that calculates the expected life span times expected annual earnings and throw a bit extra in for good measure - but most agree that life is effectively priceless.

So you're saying that because these victims live somewhere where living is cheaper that the punishment for this death-toll and for this permanent-disability-toll should be lessened????

It isnt the Bhopal dead who are being compensated - all the money in the world wont help them now. Its the survivors who are being compensated - or should be at any rate. Because the cost of living is lower in India as a general rule than in west, obviously you dont require the same amount of money to provide the same or similar level of compensation. You admit as much when you accept that an Indian company would have to compensate American victims of its wrong doing with a view to the American standard for compensation, rather than the Indian.

Another point is that youre talking about the compensation as some form of punishment for the company - its not. Its to compensate the victims, nothing more. It doesnt doing much to prevent wrong doing as it occurs after the fact, hence its not really preventive - much like the death sentence which many argue against on similar grounds. At the end of the day its a once off lump sum - that can be fit into another rather cynical equation involving the probability of another Bhopal.

Charging the factory a rather excessive charge for every given unit of pollution it produces on the other hand is not a lump sum payment, its a continuing cost that hits the company harder the more it pollutes and rewards them the more they cut pollution - and while I dont know for sure, Id doubt the Bhopal plant was eco-friendly even before the disaster - which itself would have brought about a pretty significant bill seperate to the compensation.

Blackjack

Redleslie2 wrote:

I thought it was more like $500.

Source.

Guilty I am- I was calculating the settlement amount against the number of the dead as opposed to including the injured.

I really think Dow should pay more, will only do this if shareholders cry for it (because they are watching their stock, plunging on the strength of bad-press from Bhopal). Indian goverment - with inflation should pay $1b. However, we don't want another treaty of Versailles here. I'll let them off with $550m

I agree - they should pay more.

elivsvonchiaing

http://web.amnesty.org/pages/ec-bhopal-eng

Is a link to a thread on a similar vein... I am quite happy to use titanic arrogance, in this thread to inspire a bunch of sh1t stirring journalists to take on this cause...

What I think is needed is to post links to similar threads in other languages with a brief english description of each. Likewise such threads should cross-link with this.

I am just a humble turd. I just want to be part of the sh1t-storm :cool:

I don't want to see another Diwali where more of this money get pissed away on civil servants! :eek:

pickarooney

The money is just an arbitrary sum, there's no scale of measuring how much a life is worth. For such a large crime, the company should expect a "death-sentence" of sorts, with all their assets immediately liquidated.

elivsvonchiaing

pickarooney wrote:

The money is just an arbitrary sum, there's no scale of measuring how much a life is worth. For such a large crime, the company should expect a "death-sentence" of sorts, with all their assets immediately liquidated.

This is exactly what should have happened in 1984! Ain't gonna happen now but if the sh1tstorm can be created a further payout may be possible imho (shareholders not just voting for this maybe even advocating it).

I do not hate the Indian government for this - I am just angry with what has happened here. This is not to quote a celebrity who said something simililar about hate vs anger. If you/your PR company is listening, be inspired by this thread. The Indian government needs a galaxy of voices against them in order for justice to prevail here!

bonkey

Sand wrote:

It isnt the Bhopal dead who are being compensated - all the money in the world wont help them now. Its the survivors who are being compensated - or should be at any rate.

I'm wondering if you'd say the same to, for example, the survivors of the Holocaust in WW2? The US, concerning its reactions to the deaths caused in the attacks on the Twin Towers?

If a company successfully hid facts about lethality in its product over years, and then it emerged, should the deaths that they caused also be simply brushed aside, as it would only be the survivors that matter?

Because the cost of living is lower in India as a general rule than in west, obviously you dont require the same amount of money to provide the same or similar level of compensation.

Look at the figures RedLeslie just provided. $500 for a disability, or 7 cents a day is insultingly low as compensation even in India. Iwould also suggest that if we examine the differing costs of living, and - say - the award values granted by US courts to the survivors of the Lockarbie crash and suchlike, you'll still find a significant difference.

Another point is that youre talking about the compensation as some form of punishment for the company - its not. Its to compensate the victims, nothing more.

Well, given how paltry an amount per victim is being paid, its clear in this case that there isn't any punitive element to it.

I'd argue that there should be some punitive element. Or do you find no disparity between the issuance of punitive fines by the EU/US for (say) abuse of monopolistic positions, whilst saying that killing thousands shouldn't result in any punitive action???

Or should I take it that you basically don't think companies should be punished for anything, and that its the fining of the likes of MS which is wrong....and not the fact that a company can commit without retribution acts which would give the world's sickest terrorists a wet dream ?

It doesnt doing much to prevent wrong doing as it occurs after the fact,

So why do we lock up or punish criminals? Why do you think that part of the problem is that the individuals involved haven't been extradited? Surely going after them is a waste of time too, given that we'd only be doing it after the fact as well???

At the end of the day its a once off lump sum

Who said it is? I would never assume that a punitive action against a company could only take teh form of a single lump-sum charge. Hell, if you do that there's a fixed limit to what can be charged, and bankrupting the company is (realistically) counter-productive to some degree as well.

Charging the factory a rather excessive charge for every given unit of pollution it produces on the other hand is not a lump sum payment, its a continuing cost that hits the company harder the more it pollutes

Yup. Charging the factory an annual charge for the continued care of the survivors of Bhopal wouldn't be a one-off charge either. It would also ensure that the survivors wouldn't end up "short changed" as inflation over the years meant that their 7c a day didn't become even more worthless relative to the costs of their disabilities/injuries etc.

jc

Moriarty

bonkey wrote:

I'd argue that there should be some punitive element. Or do you find no disparity between the issuance of punitive fines by the EU/US for (say) abuse of monopolistic positions, whilst saying that killing thousands shouldn't result in any punitive action???

Shouldn't that be dealt with through direct action by governments against companies though? Compensation is there to compensate victims of wrong-doing, a seperate mechanisim should be in place for society to punish the company for it's faults. The two shouldn't be lumped in together.

elivsvonchiaing

Just noticed the pdf on the link I previously posted also available here as html: http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGASA200152004.

"At the time of writing in September 2004, around US$330 million of the US$470 million remained held by the Reserve Bank of India. ". This is $50M more than Redleslie's figure of $280M. (17 September, 2004 -Don't know which source to trust tbh!) At $330M at just over 3% compound interest - this would have made $200M in 15 years.

I.e. they have paid out less than the interest earned.

This would seem a good strategy if the Indian government are simply planning to make the money last to cover future generations. I can find no evidence whatsoever of this. I continue to suspect incompetance and would be simply outraged with the sudden appearance of an official statement echoing this idea: "Yes, that was the idea actually!" :eek:

While the Indian government "sits" on the money, there can be no hope of further compensation from Dow imho. Meanwhile 100's of thousand continue to suffer - even those that got the poxy, insulting, pittance of a settlement!

bonkey

elivsvonchiaing wrote:

While the Indian government "sits" on the money, there can be no hope of further compensation from Dow imho.

Oh, I dunno. It wouldn't be the first time that cases were made for the urgent need of survivors for more money whilst the organisations making the case were still sitting on monies previously gathered for the same reason.

jc

Sand

I'm wondering if you'd say the same to, for example, the survivors of the Holocaust in WW2? The US, concerning its reactions to the deaths caused in the attacks on the Twin Towers?

I wont invoke Godwins law, but Ill argue you cant logically expect me to react to the holocaust (a deliberate, planned and long running campaign to mass murder sections of a population, mainly Jews) or 9/11 ( a deliberate, planned terrorist atrocity that at the very least planned for the murder of everyone on those planes) in the same manner as Bhopal, which pretty much everyone - except Dow Chemicals interestingly - accept was an accident, that was at worst brought about by crinimal negligence.

Regardless, Id view money being just as useless to the people who died in Belsen or the two towers as it is useless to the people who died on the night of the Bhopal accident.

If a company successfully hid facts about lethality in its product over years, and then it emerged, should the deaths that they caused also be simply brushed aside, as it would only be the survivors that matter?

Again, the victims would be dead where money, as far theologians can tell us, isnt important. We'd again be talking about the cost of living rather the cost of life, as it would be the dead's family who might be seeking compensation for loss of the victims earning power.

Look at the figures RedLeslie just provided. $500 for a disability, or 7 cents a day is insultingly low as compensation even in India. Iwould also suggest that if we examine the differing costs of living, and - say - the award values granted by US courts to the survivors of the Lockarbie crash and suchlike, you'll still find a significant difference.

Yeah, I ran those figures through a quick and dirty spreadsheet on excel and youre right those figures look far too low.

$1,170 compo for a death. 8000 died on the night according to the source article - if excel is right that adds up to 9.36 million dollars total paid out. Another 20,000 have died since, assuming we throw them into the mix we get up to 32.76 million dollars.

The source article doesnt give a number for those suffering disabilities as a result....according to the BBC amnesty international estimates 100,000 suffering from disabilities. $500 each, thats 50 million USD according to my excel spreadsheet. So out of $500 million dollars compensation, the victims got ....somewhere between 60 and 82 million dollars total.

I dont know what the breakdown of the compensation package was but it does seem incredible that the compensation to the victims most affected would make up less than a sixth of the package. The Indian government certainly hasnt been spending the difference on cleaning up the site which is still highly dangerous. That leaves 390 million USD being spent on what?

Doesnt look to me that "enough" compensation wasnt provided by Dow Chemicals, more that it wasnt allocated properly by the Indian government?

I'd argue that there should be some punitive element. Or do you find no disparity between the issuance of punitive fines by the EU/US for (say) abuse of monopolistic positions, whilst saying that killing thousands shouldn't result in any punitive action???

Id find a disparity as those would be fines for breaching a regulation or law, whereas in Bhopal its still compensation. The company may, and actually should, have to answer for breaches of regulations or law at its plant but that is a *seperate* matter to the issue of compensation to victims of Bhopal.

Indeed , reading Redleslies source article it mentions an ongoing issues at the plant that should have been fined/charged for to an extent as to ensure Bhopal never happened.

Or should I take it that you basically don't think companies should be punished for anything, and that its the fining of the likes of MS which is wrong....and not the fact that a company can commit without retribution acts which would give the world's sickest terrorists a wet dream ?

Perhaps you need to take a step back and breathe Bonkey. Ive never claimed that breaches of the law shouldnt be investigated or punished. Ive simply stated that I dont think you should blur the distinctions between compensation and punishment for crinimal negligence, and the objectives youre trying to achieve with each.

Do you believe that a compensation package should replace answering crinimal charges or adhering to the law in the first place? Its not an unknown concept as the idea of paying a bloodprice to a dead mans family is present in some cultures. But its not something that should be encouraged I think.

Im going to go out on a limb here and guess the desire to make the compensation deal punitive is because the Indian government is seen to have failed to put this Warren guy on trial - there has been no punitive angle so lets get them on the compensation bill instead?