Charges against Warren Anderson and others

The Chairman and CEO of Union Carbide, Warren Anderson, had been arrested and released
on bail by the Madhya Pradesh Police in Bhopal on December 7, 1984. The arrest, which
took place at the airport, assured Anderson would meet no harm by the Bhopal community.
Anderson was taken to Union Carbide's house after which he was released six hours later on
$2,100 bail and flown out on a government plane.

In 1987, the Indian government summoned Anderson, eight other executives and two
company affiliates with homicide charges to appear in Indian court.[51] Union Carbide balked,
saying the company is not under Indian jurisdiction.[51]

Beginning in 1991, the local authorities from Bhopal charged Anderson, who had retired in
1986, with manslaughter, a crime that carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison.
Anderson has so far avoided an international arrest warrant and a US court summons. He was
declared a fugitive from justice by the Chief Judicial Magistrate of Bhopal on February 1,
1992, for failing to appear at the court hearings in a culpable homicide case in which he was
named the chief defendant. Orders were passed to the Government of India to press for an
extradition from the United States, with whom India had an extradition treaty in place. The
Bhopal Medical Appeal believe that "neither the American nor the Indian government seem
interested in disturbing him with an extradition". A seemingly apathetic attitude from the US
government, which has failed to pursue the case, has also led to strong protests in the past,
most notably by Greenpeace. A plea by India's Central Bureau of Investigation to dilute the
charges from culpable homicide to criminal negligence has since been dismissed by the
Indian courts.

The U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal of the decision of the lower federal courts
in October 1993, meaning that victims of the Bhopal disaster could not seek damages in a US
court.[48] The Rajiv Gandhi government reached an out of court settlement for compensation
for the victims.

Meanwhile, very little of the money from the settlement reached with Union Carbide went to
the survivors.[4] On the anniversary of the tragedy, effigies of Anderson and politicians are
burnt.

In July 2004, the Indian Supreme Court ordered the Indian government to release any
remaining settlement funds to victims. The deadline for this release was extended by the
Indian Supreme Court In April 2005, giving the Indian government until 30 April 2006 after
a request from the Welfare Commission for Bhopal Gas Victims. The fund is believed to
amount to $500 million after earning interest "from money remaining after all claims had
been paid".[48]

August 2006 saw the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City uphold the
dismissal of remaining claims in the case of Bano v. Union Carbide Corporation. This move
blocked plaintiffs' motions for class certification and claims for property damages and
remediation. In the view of Carbide, "the ruling reaffirms UCC's long-held positions and
finally puts to rest—both procedurally and substantively—the issues raised in the class action
complaint first filed against Union Carbide in 1999 by Haseena Bi and several organizations
representing the residents of Bhopal". In September 2006, the Welfare Commission for
Bhopal Gas Victims announced that all original compensation claims and revised petitions
had been "cleared".[48]

Criminal charges were laid against former Union Carbide India Limited employees including:
Former UCIL Chairman Keshub Mahindra; presently Chairman-cum-managing Director
Vijay Gokhale; former Vice-President Functioning In charge, Kishor Kamdar; former works
manager J. Mukund; and former Production manager A.P. Division, S.P. Choudhury. On
June 7, 2010, an Indian court convicted all five of the above employees plus plant
superintendant K.V. Shetty and production assistant S.I Qureshi of "death by negligence",
which carries a maximum prison term of two years. All seven employees are expected to
appeal the decision.[52]

Federal class action litigation, Sahu v. Union Carbide et al. is presently pending on appeal
before the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York.[53] The litigation seeks damages for
personal injury, medical monitoring[54] and injunctive relief in the form of cleanup[55] of the
drinking water supplies[56] for residential areas near the Bhopal plant[57] A related complaint
seeking similar relief for property damage claimants is stayed pending the outcome of the
Sahu appeal before the federal district court in the Southern District of New York.

On 7 June 2010 seven former employees of the Union Carbide subsidiary, all Indian nationals
and many in their 70s, were convicted of causing death by negligence and each sentenced to
two years imprisonment and fined Rs.1 lakh (US$2,124; €1,776).[58] All were released on bail
shortly after the verdict.[59] [60][61]

The names of those convicted are:

 Keshub Mahindra, former chairman of Union Carbide India Limited

[edit] Changes in corporate identity

Union Carbide sold its Indian subsidiary, which had operated the Bhopal plant, to Eveready
Industries India Limited, in 1994.

[edit] Acquisition of Union Carbide by Dow Chemical Company

The Dow Chemical Company purchased Union Carbide in 2001 for $10.3 billion in stock and
debt. Dow has publicly stated several times that the Union Carbide settlement payments have
already fulfilled Dow's financial responsibility for the disaster. However, Dow did not
purchase UCC's Indian subsidiary, Union Carbide India. That was sold in 1984 and renamed
Eveready Industries India limited
Some Dow stockholders filed suits to stop the acquisition, noting the outstanding liabilities
for the Bhopal disaster.[62] The acquisition has gained criticism from the International
Campaign for Justice in Bhopal, as it is apparently "contrary to established merger law" in
that "Dow denies any responsibility for Carbide's Bhopal liabilities". According to the Bhopal
Medical Appeal, Carbide "remains liable for the environmental devastation" as environmental
damage was not included in the 1989 settlement, despite ongoing contamination issues.[62