22 Jun 2010, 1117 hrs IST
A day after the Group of Ministers on the Bhopal Gas disaster recommended seeking the extradition of former Union Carbide chairman Warren Anderson, the US state department has said they will look into the matter and give any extradition request "full consideration".
With the Bhopal report on the PM's table, the case for Warren Anderson's extradition has resurfaced.
Responding to a question, US State Department Spokesperson PJ Crowley said today that if India put in an official request, the US administration would carefully review the case and consider the mattter in detail.
"As I've said many times from the podium, those requests are confidential, but if we do receive one, we will give it every consideration," said Crowley.
Former Deputy Chief of Mission at the US embassy Gordon Streeb has recently revealed that the Congress government at the Centre in 1984 assured the US government that it would allow Warren Anderson to travel to India and his safe return. He claims the then Indian foreign secretary had assured him no action would be taken against UCIL chief at that time.
When asked whether the US State Department intervened in the days following the Bhopal gas leak seeking the release of Anderson when he was arrested, Crowley said he did not know the details of Streeb's claims.
"I do not know what the former DCM, who I think is now a private citizen, what he told the media," said Crowley.
Despite the continuing silence of the US State Department, there have been voices in America raised in favour of extradition of Anderson. Influential New Jersey Congressman Frank Pallone had said on June 9 that former Union Carbide chief Warren Anderson deserves to be extradited from the US and stand trial in India in connection with the Bhopal gas tragedy case.
"Warren Anderson absolutely deserves to be extradited from the US and punished for the full extent of his crimes. As chairman of Union Carbide at the time of the Bhopal gas disaster, Anderson was ultimately responsible for his company's actions," said Pallone, who is a powerful member of the India Caucus in the Congress.
In 2003, under intense pressure, the then NDA government had sent a request for Anderson's extradition to the US government, which was turned down.
"The government of the US has carefully considered the government of India's request for Warren Anderson and has concluded that the request of the government of India cannot be executed, as it does not meet the requirements of Article 2(1) and 9(3) of the Extradition Treaty."
The US decision was conveyed by the ministry of external affairs to the CBI on July 2, 2004.
Before any talk of extradition of Anderson, the question that should be asked is why Anderson actually came to India? Since the phrase 'safe passage' has been used by a top Indian official of that time, it should be obvious that the person who sought safe passage, Anderson in this case, was laying down a condition to someone who wanted him to come down. Anderson would not have been keen on coming down to India to be arrested for liability in the accident. Whoever wanted him to come down promised him a safe passage because unless he came down a deal could not be cut. He was subsequently arrested by Arjun Singh, who was not in the loop of things and had to bailed out and flown out through special arrangements to keep the promise of safe passage. That the deal was indeed cut is borne out from the out-of-court deal entered into with Union Carbide. Who were the beneficiaries of the deal? This is what is to be answered.
http://www.timesnow.tv/Will-US-finally-extradite-Warren-Anderson/articleshow/4347970.cms
A day after the Group of Ministers on the Bhopal Gas disaster recommended seeking the extradition of former Union Carbide chairman Warren Anderson, the US state department has said they will look into the matter and give any extradition request "full consideration".
With the Bhopal report on the PM's table, the case for Warren Anderson's extradition has resurfaced.
Responding to a question, US State Department Spokesperson PJ Crowley said today that if India put in an official request, the US administration would carefully review the case and consider the mattter in detail.
"As I've said many times from the podium, those requests are confidential, but if we do receive one, we will give it every consideration," said Crowley.
Former Deputy Chief of Mission at the US embassy Gordon Streeb has recently revealed that the Congress government at the Centre in 1984 assured the US government that it would allow Warren Anderson to travel to India and his safe return. He claims the then Indian foreign secretary had assured him no action would be taken against UCIL chief at that time.
When asked whether the US State Department intervened in the days following the Bhopal gas leak seeking the release of Anderson when he was arrested, Crowley said he did not know the details of Streeb's claims.
"I do not know what the former DCM, who I think is now a private citizen, what he told the media," said Crowley.
Despite the continuing silence of the US State Department, there have been voices in America raised in favour of extradition of Anderson. Influential New Jersey Congressman Frank Pallone had said on June 9 that former Union Carbide chief Warren Anderson deserves to be extradited from the US and stand trial in India in connection with the Bhopal gas tragedy case.
"Warren Anderson absolutely deserves to be extradited from the US and punished for the full extent of his crimes. As chairman of Union Carbide at the time of the Bhopal gas disaster, Anderson was ultimately responsible for his company's actions," said Pallone, who is a powerful member of the India Caucus in the Congress.
In 2003, under intense pressure, the then NDA government had sent a request for Anderson's extradition to the US government, which was turned down.
"The government of the US has carefully considered the government of India's request for Warren Anderson and has concluded that the request of the government of India cannot be executed, as it does not meet the requirements of Article 2(1) and 9(3) of the Extradition Treaty."
The US decision was conveyed by the ministry of external affairs to the CBI on July 2, 2004.
Before any talk of extradition of Anderson, the question that should be asked is why Anderson actually came to India? Since the phrase 'safe passage' has been used by a top Indian official of that time, it should be obvious that the person who sought safe passage, Anderson in this case, was laying down a condition to someone who wanted him to come down. Anderson would not have been keen on coming down to India to be arrested for liability in the accident. Whoever wanted him to come down promised him a safe passage because unless he came down a deal could not be cut. He was subsequently arrested by Arjun Singh, who was not in the loop of things and had to bailed out and flown out through special arrangements to keep the promise of safe passage. That the deal was indeed cut is borne out from the out-of-court deal entered into with Union Carbide. Who were the beneficiaries of the deal? This is what is to be answered.
http://www.timesnow.tv/Will-US-finally-extradite-Warren-Anderson/articleshow/4347970.cms
No comments:
Post a Comment