In a recent court appearance, lawyers representing the American chemical giant ‘Dow Chemical‘ finally showed up for a hearing related to the tragic 1984 Bhopal gas disaster, which occurred 36 years ago. This event marks a significant development in a case that has been ongoing for nearly two decades.
About 18 years after the initial summons was issued to Dow, their legal representatives appeared in the Bhopal court. This hearing was in response to an application filed by a non-governmental organization (NGO) that assists the victims of the Bhopal tragedy.
Amy Wilson, the representative of Dow Chemical, appeared partially through her legal counsel. During the proceedings, Dow submitted a concise one-page memorandum to the court, requesting more time and arguing that, as an American corporation, they are not under the jurisdiction of the Bhopal court.
The High Court bench, led by Judge Vidhan Maheshwari, conducted online hearings for this case. Advocate Avi Singh, representing the NGO known as the Bhopal Group for Information and Action, argued that the idea of ‘partial presence’ has no legal standing in criminal jurisprudence. He emphasized that Dow Chemical cannot selectively challenge the summons and must fully comply with the court’s orders.
Singh also pointed out that Dow Chemical had already attempted to contest the jurisdiction in 2005 in the High Court, and their argument had been rejected at that time.
Furthermore, he clarified that if Dow Chemical’s authorized representative fails to appear in person, the court has the authority to issue a bailable warrant and proceed with the hearing in their absence.
After hearing arguments from both sides, Judge Vidhan Maheshwari decided to defer his ruling on the matter to October 6.
This court appearance is significant because it relates to the Bhopal gas tragedy of 1984, one of the world’s deadliest industrial disasters. It left thousands dead and many more suffering from the long-term effects of exposure to toxic gases. The case has been pending for a long time, and the victims and their families have been seeking justice and compensation.
The fact that Dow Chemical finally appeared in court after 18 years suggests that there may be some progress in the legal proceedings. However, their argument that they fall outside the jurisdiction of the Bhopal court is a matter of contention.
The NGO representing the victims of the tragedy strongly opposes Dow Chemical’s argument. They assert that the concept of ‘partial presence’ should not apply in this case and that Dow Chemical should fully comply with the court’s directives.
Advocate Avi Singh also highlighted that Dow Chemical’s jurisdiction challenge had already been addressed and rejected by the High Court in 2005, indicating that this issue had been legally settled.
Moreover, Singh pointed out that the court has the authority to issue a bailable warrant if Dow Chemical’s authorized representative continues to avoid appearing in person. This means that the court can proceed with the hearing even if Dow Chemical does not fully cooperate.
The ruling deferred to October 6 adds an element of anticipation to this case. The court’s decision will determine the next steps in the legal process and whether Dow Chemical will be held accountable for its alleged involvement in the Bhopal gas tragedy.
Please, also have a look into: Madhya Pradesh sets up 5-member panel to frame law for journalist’s safety
