The Bhopal Gas Crime: A Few Thoughts on the 23rd Anniversary
Yet another year has passed by since the disastrous gas leak in Bhopal. The anniversary constitutes an opportunity to reflect on what has happened thus far and what lies ahead.
From the point of view of justice, I think it would be fair to say nothing has fundamentally changed. The criminal case is unresolved with the chief accused not even showing up in court thus far and the factory site and its neighboring area remains seriously contaminated.
Of course, this is not to say that nothing has been achieved. Far from it. The very fact that the memory of Bhopal still survives is testimony to the immense courage and will shown by the survivors. The survivors’ campaign has achieved significant victories, for instance the fact that the Prime Minister of India agreed to provide clean water from the Kolar reservoir to the disaster affected areas.
I’d like to reflect on one key lesson for all of us active campaigners as well as those that are sympathetic to the cause of the survivors. It’s one thing to be moved by the plight of the victims of this crime. Our world is so screwed up even this is not as common as it should be. But once moved, it’s far too easy to forget about the survivors’ rights and instead adopt a charitable mindset.
This issue comes to focus when we consider the contamination problem. Many well-meaning folks wonder what is wrong with some agency (such as Tata) doing a clean-up of the factory site as a matter of charity. They wonder why the survivors would be opposed to such proposals.
Just in case anyone has any doubts, let me start by saying the survivors most definitely want a clean-up. They are sick of living with water filled contaminants orders of magnitude above safe levels. They want the clean-up to be comprehensive. The issue is this: do we believe the survivors have a right to a comprehensive clean-up? If the answer is yes, then it follows that the agency doing the clean-up must be accountable to the survivors so that if the clean-up is not comprehensive, then the survivors have legal recourse to take action.
An offer made out of charity almost by definition undermines this right. That is the problem.
On the occasion of the 23rd anniversary, maybe we should all resolve to fight for the survivors' rights.
From the point of view of justice, I think it would be fair to say nothing has fundamentally changed. The criminal case is unresolved with the chief accused not even showing up in court thus far and the factory site and its neighboring area remains seriously contaminated.
Of course, this is not to say that nothing has been achieved. Far from it. The very fact that the memory of Bhopal still survives is testimony to the immense courage and will shown by the survivors. The survivors’ campaign has achieved significant victories, for instance the fact that the Prime Minister of India agreed to provide clean water from the Kolar reservoir to the disaster affected areas.
I’d like to reflect on one key lesson for all of us active campaigners as well as those that are sympathetic to the cause of the survivors. It’s one thing to be moved by the plight of the victims of this crime. Our world is so screwed up even this is not as common as it should be. But once moved, it’s far too easy to forget about the survivors’ rights and instead adopt a charitable mindset.
This issue comes to focus when we consider the contamination problem. Many well-meaning folks wonder what is wrong with some agency (such as Tata) doing a clean-up of the factory site as a matter of charity. They wonder why the survivors would be opposed to such proposals.
Just in case anyone has any doubts, let me start by saying the survivors most definitely want a clean-up. They are sick of living with water filled contaminants orders of magnitude above safe levels. They want the clean-up to be comprehensive. The issue is this: do we believe the survivors have a right to a comprehensive clean-up? If the answer is yes, then it follows that the agency doing the clean-up must be accountable to the survivors so that if the clean-up is not comprehensive, then the survivors have legal recourse to take action.
An offer made out of charity almost by definition undermines this right. That is the problem.
On the occasion of the 23rd anniversary, maybe we should all resolve to fight for the survivors' rights.
posted by Raghav Kaushik | 6:45 PM
|
0 comments
