Hearing on Bhopal Disaster Opens : Judge Wants Carbide to Give Emergency Aid to Victims

A federal judge Tuesday proposed that Union Carbide provide as much as $10 million in emergency relief aid for thousands of victims of the Bhopal chemical disaster, and he ordered Carbide, the government of India and lawyers for the victims to come up with a plan to distribute such aid.

U.S. District Judge John F. Keenan, who is presiding over more than 70 lawsuits filed against the company in federal court here for its role in the catastrophe, suggested at the first pretrial hearing in the cases that the money could be advanced by Union Carbide without its “in any manner, shape or form acknowledging liability.” But he added that, if the company is ultimately charged with liability for the disaster, the sum could be credited against a judgment.

“I wonder whether or not as an indication of good will--God knows what your company spends on advertising--is it possible for Union Carbide to offer a truly significant sum, a sum like $5 million to $10 million, to be funded through the Red Cross?” Keenan asked a Union Carbide attorney.

Carbide lawyer Bud G. Holman resisted Keenan’s proposal, arguing that the company and its Indian subsidiary have already offered payments of $1 million each for emergency aid (only the parent company’s offer has been accepted). Further aid would be useless until more is known of the condition of the victims and thus what specific aid they need, he said.

Absence of Information

“The chief obstacle to settlement here has been the complete absence of information” about the victims, said Holman, who attributed the problem to Indian officials.

Keenan ordered the lawyers to meet with each other by May 1 to discuss his proposal, and said he would meet with them May 8 “to see what has come of this discussion.”

Holman also opposed Keenan’s plan to give the Indian government a seat on a three-member “executive committee” of plaintiffs’ lawyers that he will establish to manage the litigation and engage in settlement talks with the company. As part owner of the Bhopal plant, the Indian government is a potential defendant, Holman said.

“They have a responsibility for this tragedy that makes them potentially a defendant,” he said. “We do not see the government of India on both sides of this lawsuit.”

Keenan made the question of emergency relief virtually the prime issue as he convened the 2 1/2-hour session, the first court meeting of attorneys who have filed federal lawsuits against Danbury, Conn.-based Union Carbide. The company is a 50.9% owner of the chemical plant that on Dec. 3, 1984, spewed forth a cloud of toxic gas that killed at least 1,700 residents of nearby neighborhoods and injured perhaps 200,000 more.

With 85 American lawyers on record as representing Bhopal victims and scores of journalists expected to attend, court officials moved the scheduled hearing from the federal district courthouse to a ceremonial courtroom in the U.S. Court of International Trade in lower Manhattan, one of the city’s largest federal courtrooms. The hearing amounted to a convention of American negligence lawyers, including such personalities as F. Lee Bailey and Melvin Belli. Bailey, as the author of one of three proposed pretrial organizational proposals, was given 10 minutes to address the court. Belli made no statement to the judge but held forth in an outside hallway to reporters and television cameramen.

Keenan moved decisively to maintain a tight grip on what could be a fantastically disorderly proceeding. He held attorneys to strict time limits ranging from 20 minutes for Holman to two minutes for lawyers representing handfuls of individual claimants. Those who repeated points made by earlier speakers were unceremoniously cut short by the judge.

The judge also moved to settle the question of the Indian government’s proper role in the case. The government has passed a law designating itself as the primary legal representative of the victims and has filed its own federal suit against Carbide. Those steps have provoked a conflict with American attorneys who contend that the government is intent on controlling the direction of litigation and potential settlement.

Keenan said he would establish a three-lawyer “executive committee” to manage the litigation, with one seat to be occupied by the India government’s lawyer--probably Michael Ciresi of the Minneapolis firm of Robins, Zelle, Larson & Kaplan--and the other two by lawyers to be selected by the plaintiffs’ lawyers themselves.

Times staff writer Robert E. Dallos also contributed to this story.