You are on page 1of 4

Running head: BHOPAL VICTIM’S COMPENSATION CASE 1

Bhopal Victim’s Compensation Case

Name

Institution
BHOPAL VICTIM’S COMPENSATION CASE 2

Bhopal Victim’s Compensation Case

The union carbide is a company that was manufacturing the pesticide and therefore it was

primarily in charge of the safety percussions, and consequently, it should be responsible for

compensating the victims. The united states of America government can also be held accountable

because the mother plant for union carbide is West Virginia; thus, the company is under the

jurisdiction of the united states and the international law. When it comes to the Indian

government, it should be held responsible because it had shares in the company and as well as its

citizens thus making the company to be under its jurisdictions (Pal & Dutta, 2012).

All the three parties should be held responsible and should pay the costs for medication

for the victims of this disaster. Starting with the united states, the country is developed, and it

knows the standards that are applicable when setting such a plant to avoid catastrophic

consequences by enforcing the best safety regulations, instead, the united states of America

employs double standards hen it is doing so the developing countries. The multinationals that

were operating in the developing countries are not enforcing safety regulations as they do in the

developed countries thus bringing in the aspect of negligence (Sarangi, 2012).

Turning on to the local governments, its Indian government should be held responsible

because it could not have allowed the company to set the plant in urban areas knowing its

hazardous consequences even though theirs the evolution of land use. The government of India

in 1984 had weak public health unfractured in Bhopal since there was no enough tap water and

that which was available was for a few hours and of poor quality. There was no functioning

sewage as well, and the untreated human wastes were being dumped to the nearby lakes which
BHOPAL VICTIM’S COMPENSATION CASE 3

happen to be the only source of drinking water. The Indian government should pay around 50

percent of the cost followed by the united states the company should pay 30 percent and the

reaming 20 percent. This is because the Indian government was resistible for regulations laws

and unfractured for the cone apart from having shares in the company. The united states knew

standard regulations, and the company was the player in the business.
BHOPAL VICTIM’S COMPENSATION CASE 4

References

Pal, M., & Dutta, M. J. (2012). Organizing resistance on the Internet: The case of the

international campaign for justice in Bhopal. Communication, Culture & Critique, 5(2),

230-251.

Sarangi, S. (2012). Compensation to Bhopal gas victims: will justice ever be done? Indian

journal of medical ethics, 9(2).

You might also like