Aguinda vs. Texaco

Aguinda vs. Texaco

The contamination concern at the swath of the Ecuadorean Amazon is both a legal and ethical aspects. Initially, it is an ethical issue because both sides involved in the pollution disputes the devastation thus blaming each other. This is because Chevron claims that it is the responsibility of the company to handle the issue while the plaintiff asserts that Chevron should take the responsibility. It is unethical for both sides not to take the responsibility of preventing the harm they are causing to the swath of the Ecuadorean Amazon and its surrounding community. Instead of disputing the claims, both sides could have agreed on the best practices in order to reduce the rates of their destruction since they are causing many damages for the environmental cleanup, resulting into deforestation and other health complications. It should have been ethical for both companies to consider varying problems that the communities surrounding the region face and implement a solution that could save them from the epidemics (Brenkert, 2004).

Notably, the contamination issue-affecting swath Amazon is also a legal issue. This is because legally, the involved companies have no rights of causing the contamination, which is dangerous to both the environment and inhabitant. For example, a conducted research by a geologist indicated that 1,400 individuals have died because of cancer due to toxic chemicals used in oil extraction. Instead of the companies investigating of the ways to reduce such incidences, Chevron claimed that the geologist who conducted the research is not qualified. Chevron further asserts that the geologists’ allegations lacked support from neither science nor medicine. The contamination at swath Amazon is a legal issue, thus calling for the government’s action to curb the problem (Brenkert, 2004).

 

 

Reference

Brenkert, G. G. (2004). Corporate integrity and accountability. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: SagePublisher.