Protection Against Chemical Disasters

Let us begin with a fundamental truth:

Most environmental laws in India are written in blood—after disasters expose legal gaps.

India’s framework on chemical disaster management evolved largely after the Bhopal Gas Tragedy (1984), which revealed the absence of specialised environmental laws to deal with industrial catastrophes.

📜 Key Legislations for Protection Against Chemical Disasters

1️⃣ Environment (Protection) Act, 1986

• Enacted in the aftermath of the Bhopal gas tragedy
• Before 1986, the Indian Penal Code was the only law available—clearly inadequate
• Empowers the Government of India to:
  • Set environmental standards
  • Inspect industrial units
  • Regulate hazardous substances
  • Take preventive and remedial measures

📌 Core idea: EPA 1986 is the umbrella legislation for environmental protection in India.

2️⃣ Bhopal Gas Leak (Processing of Claims) Act, 1985

• Authorises the Central Government to:
  • Represent victims
  • Secure and process compensation claims
• Prevents victims from being overwhelmed by powerful multinational corporations

📌 Significance: Shifted bargaining power from victims to the State.

3️⃣ Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991

• Introduces the “no-fault liability” concept
• Industries dealing with hazardous substances must take insurance
• Provides immediate relief to victims of chemical accidents

📌 Exam phrase: Relief without proving negligence.

4️⃣ National Environment Appellate Authority Act, 1997

• Established an appellate authority to hear appeals against:
  • Restrictions on industrial activities imposed under EPA 1986
• Later became largely redundant after the NGT’s establishment

5️⃣ National Green Tribunal Act, 2010

• Established the National Green Tribunal
• Enables fast-track resolution of:
  • Environmental protection cases
  • Forest conservation disputes
• Crucially mandates the application of the Absolute Liability Principle

📌 UPSC Insights: NGT combines legal authority + scientific expertise.

⚖️ Strict Liability vs Absolute Liability: The Core Legal Debate

This distinction is central to chemical disaster jurisprudence.

Strict Liability Principle

• Origin: English law (Rylands v. Fletcher)
• A hazardous industry may escape liability if the accident occurs due to:
  • Act of God
  • Third-party intervention
  • Natural calamities

📌 Problem: Provides defences and exemptions to industries.

Absolute Liability Principle

• Developed by Indian judiciary
• A hazardous industry must pay compensation in all cases
• No exceptions, no defences

📌 Key idea: If you profit from hazardous activity, you bear 100% responsibility.

🏭 Contemporary Illustration: LG Styrene Gas Leak

• Styrene gas leak at LG Polymers, Visakhapatnam
• NGT applied strict liability
• Legal experts argued absolute liability should have been applied
• Under NGT Act, 2010, absolute liability is mandatory, even if the disaster is accidental

📌 Mains critique: Inconsistency between statutory mandate and judicial application.

🏛️ Supreme Court’s Landmark Intervention

⚖️ M.C. Mehta vs Union of India

• Triggered by the Oleum Gas Leak (1986), Delhi
• The Supreme Court of India:
  • Rejected strict liability
  • Introduced Absolute Liability Principle
• Held that:
  • Hazardous industries cannot claim exemptions
  • Absolute liability is intrinsic to Article 21 (Right to Life)

📌 Judicial philosophy:
Environmental protection is a fundamental right, not a policy choice.

🚨 Systemic Issue: Burden of Proof on Victims

Despite progressive laws, corporations often:

• Shift the burden of proof onto victims
• Demand scientific certainty, which victims cannot afford

Illustrative Cases:

• Sterlite (TN copper smelter): Victims asked to prove pollution impact
• Dow Chemical / Union Carbide: Deny long-term health effects of Methyl Isocyanate exposure
• Unilever (Kodaikanal mercury case): Denied link between mercury and worker health issues
• Petroleum industry: Delayed banning leaded petrol despite known neurological damage in children

📌 Structural problem:
Victims lack resources; corporations exploit scientific uncertainty.

✍️ Summary

India’s legal framework on chemical disasters—shaped by the Bhopal tragedy and strengthened by Supreme Court jurisprudence—rests on the Absolute Liability Principle under Article 21, yet continues to face challenges of enforcement and victim-centric justice.