Citation

Rosencranz A. Ambio 1988; 17(5): 336-341.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1988, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, Publisher Holtzbrinck Springer Nature Publishing Group)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Just after midnight on December 3, 1984, forty tons of highly toxic methyl isocyanate (MIC), which had been manufactured and stored in Union Carbide's chemical plant in Bhopal, escaped into the atmosphere and killed over 2800 people. As many as 20 000 others were injured-many seriously and some permanently. This article discusses only three of the many facets of the Bhopal case, namely, Bhopal and the applications of international law; Indian institutional and governmental responses to the Bhopal disaster; and the progress of the Bhopal victims' lawsuits. The developing norms and principles of international law are not sufficient in themselves to protect the victims of the Bhopal chemical plant. The Bhopal disaster has demonstrated that enforceable ("hard") international standards are clearly and urgently needed for hazardous technologies, especially those operating in developing countries. Such standards would eliminate, or at least narrow, the gap between standards prevailing in the developed countries and those in the Third World. Even without enforcement, international standards could provide norms against which to measure the performance of individual companies in extremely hazardous industries. The Bhopal disaster has heightened Indian and world consciousness of the danger to human health and the environment posed by the manufacture of toxic chemicals. Had there been a "culture of safety" at Bhopal, different and higher safety measures and different technologies would have been chosen.