Victoria Pease,

Correspondent (Europe)

 

Six Italian scientists and a government official have been sentenced with the crime of manslaughter for making false predictions on an earthquake that killed more than 300 people in April 2009. The information presented to the public concerning the scientific assessment of risk before the earthquake had taken place was false, contradictory and “inadequate”, say prosecutors. In addition to the accused being sentenced to six years in prison, they must also together pay €7.8 million to repair damages and to compensate victims’ families, as well as, face being permanently banned from public service.

On 31 March, 2009, the six scientists, all members of the National Institute of Geophysics and Volcanology (INGV), met to discuss and clarify the probability of eruption based on seismic patterns detected over several months around the area of the town L’Aquila. The meeting ended concluding that an eruption was “unlikely” yet not impossible, an evacuation of the town, however, was said to be unnecessary.

The trial faced by the scientists and the government official following the deadly earthquake lasted 13 months. The final verdict on 24 October claims those involved to be at fault for not appropriately applying their seismologic knowledge and experience in predicting a major earthquake. The reassurance the scientists had permitted to the people, that it was safe to stay in their homes, was based on scientific opinion; accuracy in predicting a major earthquake is almost impossible.

To say that these scientists are personally responsible for the deaths of citizens is not right considering their very profession implies working to secure lives. Furthermore, earthquakes had been taking place months prior to the major eruption in April 2009, so that citizens still had a choice to reside or leave their homes. It is also a publicly known fact in Italy, that the government was involved in meeting the decision of informing the public that safety in L’Aquila at the time of eruption was secured.

The debate awoken by this information is therefore rather one of scientific independence and its relationship with political systems. If the scientists involved were unsure of their ability of accurately predicting any such disaster, their morale should have come through to publicly say so. Italian scientists now face greater danger when conducting and publishing findings. For future research this means scientists will tackle and predict crisis situations by favoring a disaster scenario, in fear of being held accountable. For the public, a greater amount of false scientific predictions will meet greater criticism, effectively leading to a loss of credibility for a profession defined by primarily honest intentions.