India’s Nuclear Liability Bill really aimed at protecting foreign nuclear companies
‘Intent is to give immunity on a platter’, The Hindu , 25 Aug 2010, Nuclear scientist A. Gopalakrishnan, a strong critic of the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill, has alleged that the real intent of the measure, ‘diluted’ by the Union Cabinet, is to provide foreign supplies total immunity from any liability and to help open up the Indian nuclear power sector to private business houses in due course.
“The three critical additions made by the Cabinet to the Opposition-approved draft is a signal that the government intends, in the near future, to let the private sector own and control nuclear installations by making suitable amendments to the Atomic Energy Act 1962,” the former Chairman of the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board told The Hindu. As of now, the private sector can hold stakes in a nuclear plant owned by a “government company” up to 49 per cent of the share capital.He said the ‘diluted’ draft Bill, cleared by the Cabinet, included ‘substantial modifications and additions’ which would hurt the interests of the Indian operators of reactors and jeopardise the right to compensation of potential victims of nuclear accidents. He pointed out that Clause 17 (b) was rewritten, at the Cabinet level, to read: “The operator of a nuclear installation shall have a right of recourse where the nuclear accident has resulted as a consequence of an act of supplier or his employees, done with the intent to cause nuclear damage, and such act includes supply of equipment or material with patent or latent defects or sub-standard services.” As a result, the victims would have to prove, to be eligible for compensation, that the supplier of the equipment had made the supplies “with the intent to cause nuclear damage.”…….
There was also an additional sentence at the end of 7(1): “…Provided that the Central government may, by notification, assume full liability for a nuclear installation not operated by it, if it is of the opinion that it is necessary in the public interest.” The real intent of these additions, in his view, is to enable the handing over of the nuclear industry to the private sector.
Victims’ rights
Further, the Parliamentary Committee and the Cabinet failed to modify Clause 46 to strengthen the victim’s rights to sue under other existing laws. The Opposition must insist that Clause 46 be modified as: “The provisions of this Act shall be in addition to and not in derogation of any other law for the time being in force. Nothing contained herein shall exempt the operator and /or the supplier of any material, design or services, from any proceeding which may, apart from this Act, be instituted against such person, either in any Indian or foreign court.”
The Hindu : News / National : ‘Intent is to give immunity on a platter’
No comments yet.
-
Archives
- December 2025 (223)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (377)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
- February 2025 (234)
- January 2025 (250)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS



Leave a comment