|
Online edition of India's National Newspaper Wednesday, December 20, 2000 |
|
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Classifieds |
Employment |
Index |
Home |
|
Opinion
| Previous
| Next
Bhopal victims
Sir, - Kudos to The Hindu for publishing a timely and detailed
report under the caption ``Last chance to render justice to
Bhopal victims'' by Messrs C. Raj Kumar and Pratibha Jain, New
York attorneys (Dec. 13). The report fully exposes the violation
of the human rights by the Union Carbide of USA (UCC) and the
unhelpful attitude of the Government of India.
The Bhopal gas tragedy did not simply happen on December 2/3,
1984; the unsafe conditions at the facility in Bhopal had been
allowed in the previous years to cause the disaster. A few
examples of the earlier instances, available with this writer,
are given below:
1. Phosgene gas leak on Dec. 26, 1981 caused severe environmental
pollution and killed a maintenance fitter.
2. There was a toxic gas release during the first week of
February, 1982, injuring 16 workers and causing panic among the
inhabitants of Bhopal.
3. On December 5, 1982, there was a massive explosion in the
Methyl Iso Cyanate (MIC) unit and the people in the locality ran
for their lives.
4. A special inspection team of experts from UCC, which visited
the MIC complex in Bhopal in May 1982, reported serious
violations of safety norms and the risky conditions like (i) the
extent of corrosion and possibility of escape of toxic gases;
(ii) many vital instruments were not working; (iii) filling of
MIC tanks was done manually and there was no scientific
instrument to back up in case of error.
5. Nothing was done to correct the deteriorating unsafe
conditions.
6. The refrigeration system which cooled the killer gas MIC was
out of service in June 1984; the refrigerant was removed!
7. A safety survey conducted during the second week of July 1984
had warned that a runaway reaction could occur in one of the MIC
unit storage tanks and that response to such a situation would
not be timely or effective enough to prevent catastrophic failure
of the tank.
8. But the company continued the gross violations of basic safety
requirements. The flare tower could not be used during the
disaster because a length of piping was corroded and had not been
replaced!
K. Kuttykrishnan,
Kochi (Kerala)
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail
|
|
Section : Opinion Previous : Accountability Next : Southern States vying to clinch airport projects | |
|
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Classifieds |
Employment |
Index |
Home | |
|
Copyrights © 2000 The Hindu Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu |
|