on june 28, 1993, the Supreme Court of the us passed a verdict that tilted the scales of justice in favour of polluters by undermining the role of science in the country's judicial arena. This fact was made public during a recent press conference of the Tellus Institute, a Boston-based non-governmental organisation. The ruling, which emerged from the case of Daubert vs Merrell-Dow, endowed judges with the power to decide whether to allow expert testimony into the courtrooms or not. The decree was criticised on the grounds of turning judges into amateur scientists.

Families of two children with minor birth defects filed the Daubert case against the manufacturer of the anti-nausea drug Bendectin. In its 7-2 ruling in favour of the manufacturer, the Supreme Court set up four criteria to determine the credibility of science as evidence