How Countries Avoid Liability after Disaster by Karyn Keenan Mass disaster, illustrated by the tragic Bhopal accident, often affects multiple parties, both individuals and nation states, and involves several legal jurisdictions. To resolve such a legal conundrum, it is instructive to examine which parties escape liability as well as those who fall prey. Significantly, in several of the worst international accidents involving hazardous technologies and activities, nations that were arguably responsible for the damage sustained, at least in part, escaped liability. This paper explores how both importers and exporters of dangerous technology avoid accountability, and whether or not the legal apparatus exists for their prosecution.
Considerable evidence indicates that India was at least, in part, responsible for the accident.
Government regulation of industrial hazards is generally ineffective in this country. In addition, regulatory legislation is largely ineffective. Implementing procedures for requirements had not yet developed, set out under the Factories Act of 1948. Similarly, the Water Act of 1974 and the Air Act of 1981 both designed to control pollution, are neither implemented nor enforced effectively. Moreover, there is a deficiency of meaningful health and safety regulations, which are actively enforced.