Environmentalists and activists who have been tracking the Bhopal gas tragedy case, say the current ownership of the Union Carbide India Limited (UCIL) plant should make no material difference to the case against Dow Chemicals. On Saturday, the Group of Ministers was concerned that the ambiguity over the current ownership of the UCIL could adversely affect the case being fought against Dow.
“Dow must take responsibility for the [impact of the] chemicals that was produced by the company that it bought,” Sunita Narain of the Centre for Science and Environment told The Hindu , pointing out that if Dow had assumed responsibility for the asbestos-induced illnesses among victims in the United States after it bought Union Carbide there, there was no reason why it shouldn't compensate the Bhopal victims for the methyl isocyanate-induced illnesses.
Gopal Krishna of ToxicsWatch had revealed in an article on December 4, 2009, that in a May 14, 2008, letter, Dow shareholders had written to the U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission noting that the company had not disclosed potential liabilities related to Bhopal. In December 2007, a resolution by key shareholders, such as the New York City Pension Funds, had asked the company to address liability issues concerning Bhopal, according to Mr. Krishna.
Of course, Dow continues to deny liability. Last week, Dow spokesman Scot Wheeler wrote to a television channel, saying that Dow entered the picture in 2001, “well after the settlement” between the Indian government and Union Carbide, and after that company had ceased to do business in India. He added that UCIL “exists today in the form of Eveready Industries India Limited,” which was “working on some remediation of the site” when the Madhya Pradesh government revoked its lease in 1998 and took control of the site. In 1994, Mr. Wheeler says, Union Carbide sold its interest in UCIL with the approval of the Supreme Court: “The company was renamed Eveready Industries India Limited and remains a viable company today.”
