In his weekly address on Saturday, President Obama promised that if laws were broken in the Gulf oil spill, the responsible parties would be brought to justice. The president's forceful admonition followed Attorney General Eric Holder's earlier pledge to ''prosecute to the fullest extent of the law'' any person or company that the Justice Department concluded violated any laws in connection with the oil spill.
The criminal investigation is focused on three companies with the principle target being the British oil giant BP, the operator of the doomed rig. BP has a tarnished reputation having been convicted of three environmental crimes over the past decade. The other two companies implicated are the owner of the rig, Transocean Ltd. and Halliburton Co., the company which handled the well cementing job prior to the explosion. Justice Department officials confirmed that the three companies have been directed to preserve all documents and records relating to the events leading to the explosion and oil spill. (Huffington Post, June 3)
There are a series of environmental laws being considered by the Justice Department for prosecution including the Clean Water Act, the Oil Pollution Act, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, the Refuse Act and the Endangered Species Act. Resorting to these federal laws will provide an element of corporate accountability and an opportunity to recover a portion of the costly cleanup for the spreading oil spill.
If more serious criminal charges follow the current investigation, company executives could be facing stiff prison sentences and an unlimited cap for damages and cleanup costs. (Washington Post, June 3) Obstruction of justice, making false statements and conspiracy to hinder a federal probe are listed as possible felony charges for misleading government regulators and the FBI, interfering with testing equipment or falsififying records about the safe conditions of the rig.
A critical area for prosecutors to explore in the investigation will be to determine if BP officials flouted warning signs of hazardous conditions before the oil rig explosion. According to news reports, warning signs that may have been ignored included gas seeping into the well, a blowout preventer that was leaking, problems with the cement in the well and a final concrete plug improperly installed.(New York Times, June 3)
The most serious criminal charge that may flow from the Gulf oil spill is involuntary manslaughter. The April 20th explosion and inferno which destroyed the Deepwater Horizon rig also killed eleven workers. A charge of involuntary manslaughter requires proof of recklessness which represents a more onerous standard to prove than mere negligence. Justice Department officials, however, may not be deterred from bringing manslaughter charges. According to Loyola law professor, Dane Ciolino, as a result of the eleven deaths attributable to the accident '' you can't rule out some homicide charges being brought against some culpable individuals for either negligent homicide or worse if the facts show that someone was reckless in causing these deaths.'' (WWLTV.com, May 28)
Canada's experience with manslaughter charges after a lethal explosion in a Nova Scotia coal mine illustrates the challenge of pursuing a case of homicide. After the Westray mining disaster in the early 90s where 26 miners lost their lives, two on-site managers were charged with manslaughter. Ultimately, the Crown withdrew their charges after conceding the difficult legal hurdles to secure convictions. A public inquiry was called by the provincial government to fully probe the reasons for the mining explosion and to address inadequate safety rules with proposed legislative reform
