It is by now well known that a bench led by then Chief Justice of India diluted the harsh sections of the IPC invoked against the Bhopal Gas case accused by the Central Bureau of Investigations in the year 1996. What however has not received due attention is the fact that soon after he retired in 1997, Justice AM Ahmedi was appointed chairman for life of Bhopal Memorial Trust Hospital. Justice Ahmedi was conferred with this post retirement responsibility by the Supreme Court itself - a decision that was decried by victims of the tragedy and organisations fighting for justice for the victims.
The hospital was formed after an SC bench in 1991 asked the Union Carbide Corporation to pay up for its liability in the industrial disaster and help in setting up a world class hospital ensuring relief and rehabilitation of gas victims.SC had in view a 500 bed hospital catering to long term medical care of survivors. A year after the SC directive,UCC went on to create a Bhopal Hospital Trust (BHT) in the United Kingdom and made its former attorney the sole trustee. But when as contribution,the corporation only coughed up US $ 1000 the Indian shares of the firm were sold off to fund the construction of the hospital. These shares had been seized by the Bhopal district court when it was informed that the company was unwilling to submit to its jurisdiction. It took another six years for the hospital to begin functioning with Justice Ahmedi at its helm.
Despite repeated attempts to contact him on the issue and seek his opinion, Justice Ahmedi remained unavailable for comments on Tuesday. A day earlier,the former CJI had defended his decision (by citing the law) to reduce the charge on the accused from the stringent section 304 to section 304A that carries lighter penalty, ensuring none of the accused has to spend even a night in jail.
Speaking to TOI on the issue Prashant Bhushan, a lawyer who has doggedly taken on the judiciary on issues like judicial appointments, took a dim view of the fact that Justice Ahmedi is chairman of the Trust. While technically there is no conflict of interest involved as he was appointed by the SC and not the Union Carbide, still I agree that a CJI shouldnt have been appointed Chairman, Bhushan said.
===========================
(source-toi)
No comments:
Post a Comment