Italian Scientists Will Face Manslaughter Trial Over Quake Recommendations

In September, seven Italian scientists will stand trial on charges of manslaughter.  The charges stem from an April 2009 earthquake (registering 6.3 on the Richter scale) in the central Italian city of L’Aquila that led to over 300 deaths.  Much of the area is still affected by the damage from the quake.

The investigation has taken its time, as I posted about the possibility of a trial last June.  Apparently the basis of the charges (and possibly the prosecution’s case) will hinge on what happened at meetings in the days before the big quake.  There had been several smaller tremors in the region, and the scientists comments during that meeting and in a subsequent press conference supposedly persuaded the public not to evacuate their homes.  The judge in the case states that the defendants gave “imprecise, incomplete and contradictory information” and “thwarted the activities designed to protect the public.”

I am not a lawyer, and am certainly not versed in Italian jurisprudence.  Indications of poor post-quake support from local government suggests there may be a bit of scapegoating going on.  Independent of that possibility, charging scientists with manslaughter for failing to predict a large quake – something that’s currently impossible with any level of certainty – is hugely problematic.  Absent evidence of fraud or other intent to deceive, I have a hard time seeing a crime here.  Yes, the devastation of earthquakes is tragic, but such devastation can be at best mitigated, not avoided.  And when there is a serious level of uncertainty involved in scientific assessments, to expect strict liability from those who make their best informed judgment will end badly.  Fewer people will provide their expert advice, and governments will have even less information to work with.

However, I’m not as sanguine about this case preserving a scientist’s ability to provide expert advice.  Thinking of the ways in which libel laws in Europe and the U.K. have been used to silence critics, I would not be that surprised to see notable scientists imprisoned for something they had neither the capability or the responsibility to predict.