Court will hear appeal by environmental groups against Sizewell C nuclear power station
Sizewell C power station plans to be heard in court
https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/sizewell-c-power-station-plans-be-hear-court 9 Oct 23
THE future of the government’s Sizewell C nuclear power station will be decided at a hearing in the Court of Appeal next month, it was revealed today.
On November 1 and 2, judges will hear an appeal by campaign groups against a High Court rejection of a review of the decision by then business secretary Kwasi Kwarteng to allow the development on the Suffolk coast to go ahead.
The development is being opposed by campaign groups Together Against Sizewell C (TASC), Suffolk Coastal Friends of the Earth and Stop Sizewell C.
They said the station’s huge consumption of water for its cooling system will threaten local domestic supplies, and that the project should have included a desalination plant.
TASC launched an appeal for funds and said: “Because of the short time-frame that has been forced on us we have little time to raise the £25,000 needed to cover the costs of our legal team for this appeal stage of the proceedings.” #nuclear #antinuclear #NuclearFree #NoNukes #NuclearPlants
Boss of Sizewell nuclear project calls for “curbing protestors powers’ to block them in the courts
Nuclear plant developer calls for limits on legal challenges. The
government should seek to accelerate major projects by curbing protestors
powers’ to block them in the courts the boss of Sizewell C says.
Times (not on the web) 9th Oct 2023 #nuclear #antinuclear #NuclearFree #NoNukes #NuclearPlants
Judicial review will hear appeal against UK govt’s consent for Sizewell C nuclear
Together Against Sizewell C is delighted to announce that we now have the
date for our judicial review in the Court of Appeal, a two-day hearing has
been set for Wednesday 1st and Thursday 2nd November 2023.
This will give our legal team the opportunity to present TASC’s appeal against Justice
Holgate’s refusal in the High Court of our judicial review of then
Business Secretary Kwasi Kwarteng’s decision to give development consent
to Sizewell C.
The unusually early date for the hearing is a result of
pressure from the government requesting the case be treated as a priority.
TASC continues to have the support of Suffolk Coastal Friends of the Earth
and Stop Sizewell C in this vitally important battle for the soul of the
Heritage Coast, however because of the short timeframe that has been forced
on us we have little time to raise the £25,000 needed to cover the costs
of our legal team for this appeal stage of the proceedings.
Crowd Justice 8th Oct 2023 #nuclear #antinuclear #Nuclearfree #NoNukes
https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/save-suffolks-heritage-coast-w/
Class action launched against British Government over nuclear bomb tests in Australia
By A Current Affair Staff 7 Oct 23 https://9now.nine.com.au/a-current-affair/nuclear-bomb-testing-australia-class-action-british-government/199eafe9-c774-432e-99b2-f71a96ffb696—
It’s a scandal that has spanned decades as Australian and British servicemen sent to nuclear testing sites fight to be officially recognised for their service and suffering.
Between 1952 and 1963, Great Britain carried out nuclear bomb tests in Australia and the Pacific.
Doug Brooks was at the first one.
“The only thing we were told to do was turn our backs to the blast ground zero, cover our eyes with our hands and the blast x-rayed our hands we could see the bones,” he told A Current Affair.
Tony Spruzen was at the Maralinga test range in the remote outback of South Australia.
“The brightness was so much, it’s something like I never experienced before, I could see through my eyelids, I could see the bones of my fingers,” he said.
Doug and Tony are two of the rapidly diminishing number of veterans sent to the nuclear test sites.
In total 45 tests were conducted by Britain’s Ministry of Defence – 12 of those were in Australia at the blessing of the Menzies government.
There were 22,000 servicemen in the Pacific tests. 1500 are still alive.
Now there is a new class action against the British Government.
“Well, what’s prompted it is that we’ve discovered medical records do in fact exist for these servicemen,” lawyer Matthew Jury said.
“We have a copy of these records and what that tells us is the other medical records exist which the government has been concealing for 70 years so those surviving servicemen who want answers now know that those records exist so where and the government has been concealing them.”
Jury’s firm has launched the action class and he claims records reveal the radiation levels in the blood and urine of the servicemen.
“As they have grown older they have developed extreme and aggressive forms of cancer,” Jury said.
“There have been miscarriages and other birth defects which can’t be treated by their doctors because their doctors don’t have their full medical records.”
The British Ministry of Defence hasn’t responded to requests for an interview or statement.
Watch the full story in the video player above. [on original]
Georgia Power will pay $413 million to settle lawsuit over nuclear reactor cost overruns
GPB, October 6, 2023 Associated Press #nuclear #antinuclear #nuclear-free #NoNukes
Georgia Power Co. will pay $413 million to settle a lawsuit accusing the utility of reneging on financial promises to one of its nuclear reactor partners.
The payments to Oglethorpe Power Corp., announced Friday, could hold down future bills for millions of electric cooperative customers in Georgia.
Oglethorpe sued Georgia Power in June 2022 in a contract dispute over who should pay for cost overruns for a third and fourth reactor at Plant Vogtle, southeast of Augusta.
Atlanta-based Southern Co., which owns Georgia Power, said it would write off a $152 million loss on the settlement.
Georgia Power also announced Friday that it must replace one of the four massive pumps that cools the Unit 4 reactor after operators found a problem with the pump’s motor during testing. Georgia Power said it believes the problem is an “isolated event” and has a spare pump on site, but said the replacement ends the company’s hope of placing Unit 4 in commercial operation this year. The utility said the reactor is still on schedule to begin operating by March.
That was already the company’s fallback date……………………………………………………………………………………………..
Currently, all the owners are projected to pay more than $31 billion in capital and financing costs, Associated Press calculations show. Add in $3.7 billion that original contractor Westinghouse paid to the Vogtle owners to quit building the reactors, and the total nears $35 billion.
Besides Oglethorpe and Georgia Power, Vogtle’s owners include the Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia and the city of Dalton. MEAG and Dalton also sued. Georgia Power agreed last year to pay up to $76 million to settle the lawsuit by MEAG, which provides power to 49 municipal utilities. The Dalton lawsuit is still pending, and Georgia Power said Friday that it could owe the city up to $17 million…………………………………………………………………………………………………. https://www.gpb.org/news/2023/10/06/georgia-power-will-pay-413-million-settle-lawsuit-over-nuclear-reactor-cost
Portuguese youths sue UK and 32 others for climate change failure.
Britain and 32 other countries are in the dock in Strasbourg today for
failing to tackle global warming as a group of Portuguese children and
young people claim political inaction is damaging their human rights. The
group of six, aged between 11 and 24, will argue at the European Court of
Human Rights (ECHR) “that the forest fires that have occurred in Portugal
each year since 2017 are a direct result of global warming”.
Times 27th Sept 2023
US Flouts International Law With Pacific Military Claims
One of these military controls, “the defense veto,” enables the United States to prevent the compact states from forging international agreements that could impede U.S. military priorities. Consequently, the compact states have never joined the Treaty of Rarotonga, which established a nuclear free zone in the region.
There is no legal basis for the United States to prevent ships from other countries from peacefully traversing the compact states’ exclusive economic zones.
Officials argue that Washington has the authority to block enemy navies from an area ‘nearly as large as the continental United States’
Anti-War.com by Edward Hunt
In defiance of international norms and rules, U.S. officials are laying claim to the large oceanic area in the central Pacific Ocean that is home to the compact states.
Now that they are renewing the economic provisions of the compacts of free association with Palau, the Marshall Islands, and the Federated States of Micronesia, U.S. officials are insisting that the compacts provide the United States with exclusive control over an area of the central Pacific Ocean that is comparable in size to the United States.
“We control essentially the northern half of the Pacific between Hawaii and Philippines,” U.S. special envoy Joseph Yun told Congress in July.
For decades, the United States has overseen compacts of free association with Palau, the Marshall Islands, and the Federated States of Micronesia. Under the compacts, the United States provides the three countries with economic assistance while it maintains powerful military controls over the islands and their waters.
One of these military controls, “the defense veto,” enables the United States to prevent the compact states from forging international agreements that could impede U.S. military priorities. Consequently, the compact states have never joined the Treaty of Rarotonga, which established a nuclear free zone in the region.
Another U.S. military control is “the right of strategic denial” by which U.S. officials assert that they can prevent other countries from accessing the compact states’ lands, waters, and airspace.
“The compacts do give us full defense authority and responsibility in those countries and provide our ability to strategically deny third country military access,” U.S. diplomat Jane Bocklage told Congress earlier this year.
Although the compacts include language that permits the United States to foreclose access to the islands by third-party military forces, U.S. officials have broadly interpreted this language to mean that they can exclude third parties from the compact states’ exclusive economic zones (EEZs), which extend up to 200 miles around each island’s coastlines.
At a congressional hearing in July, Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) asserted that strategic denial authority “allows us to deny access to any potential adversary in an area of the Pacific comparable in size to the continental United States.” An associate presented a map that portrayed the EEZs as one contiguous area under U.S. control. “It’s nearly as large as the continental United States,” Barrasso remarked.
Defense Department official Siddharth Mohandas agreed with the senator’s interpretation. He claimed that the United States maintains unfettered and exclusive access to the area. “We have the ability to deny foreign militaries access and the ability to operate in the exclusive economic zones of the Freely Associated States,” Mohandas said, referring to the compact states.
This interpretation of strategic denial is inconsistent with international law. Under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, all countries have the rights of navigation and overflight in the exclusive economic zones of other countries, as stipulated by Articles 58 and 87.
Most countries, including the compact states, are parties to the convention. The United States has never ratified the convention, but high-level U.S. officials have expressed their support for it.
“Although not yet a party to the treaty, the U.S. nevertheless observes the UN LOSC as reflective of customary international law and practice,” the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration explains, referring to the Convention on the Law of the Sea.
When U.S. officials say that they have a right to exclude third-party actors from the compact states’ exclusive economic zones, they are making claims that are inconsistent with the UN Convention. There is no legal basis for the United States to prevent ships from other countries from peacefully traversing the compact states’ exclusive economic zones………………………………. more https://original.antiwar.com/Edward_Hunt/2023/09/25/us-flouts-international-law-with-pacific-military-claims/
Nuclear bomb test veterans relaunch legal action
By Dominic Casciani, 20 Sept 23, BBC News
Veterans of the UK’s nuclear weapons tests are attempting to relaunch a battle for compensation a decade after being legally blocked from suing the government.
Campaigners say newly discovered documents suggest nuclear chiefs may have known the men suffered radioactive damage.
More than 22,000 personnel worked on detonations in Australia and the South Pacific in the 1950s and 1960s.
Campaigners believe personnel suffered cancers and had children with birth defects because of radiation……
In 2012, the Supreme Court narrowly ruled that more than 1,000 veterans could not sue the Ministry of Defence because they had run out of time to bring their case.
But recently found documents suggest the military have long held documents detailing blood and urine tests from personnel.
One of the documents seen by the campaign shows concerns about a pilot’s blood after he had been flying scientific instruments through mushroom clouds.
The men and their families now plan to take the Ministry of Defence to court because they believe there could be thousands more such records.
If the records exist and prove military chiefs suspected radiation damage, that could lead to a last attempt at getting compensation.
‘Guinea Pigs’
Eric Barton, 82, of the “Labrats” campaign group, said British personnel had been treated like guinea pigs.
He suffered cancer and received compensation from the American military because he had witnessed six test denotations of its bombs. But friends who witnessed British bombs have not received any money at all…………………………………………………………………………………………………………. more https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-66869017
Campaigners win permission to appeal against Sizewell C Nuclear Power Station ruling
Campaigners have won permission for another hearing to
challenge the go ahead to build Sizewell C Nuclear Power Station on the
issue of a permanent water supply and because of public interest in the
development.
Court of Appeal judge Lord Justice Coulson says the Together
Against Sizewell C Limited (TASC) arguments around the need for a
desalination plant on the Suffolk Coast should be looked at again.
He has given TASC permission to appeal against Mr Justice Holgate’s refusal in
the High Court of their judicial review of then Business Secretary Kwasi
Kwarteng’s decision to give development consent to the 3.2 gigawatt power
station. The judge said that, given Mr Kwarteng gave permission for the
power station against the advice of the planning Examining Authority, and
because of TASC’s range of arguments about the need for a water supply,
the appeal had “a real prospect of success”.
Leigh Day 18th Sept 2023
Sizewell C seeks outside investment as Together Against Sizewell C Limited (TASC) granted permission to appeal against the project
Andy Mayer, chief executive officer of the Institute of Economic Affairs,
said: “There is a sensible objection to Sizewell C, that the underlying
EPR technology is junk, resulting in projects that run over-time and
over-budget, and when built are riddled with corrosion … outside
investors would be mad to back Sizewell. If built, it will be late and
obsolete. Even if there is regulatory reform, limiting the legal power of
objectors, rival solutions will be advantaged.”
City AM 19th Sept 2023 https://www.cityam.com/sizewell-c-seeks-outside-investment-as-tasc-granted-permission-to-appeal/
Court of Appeal gives permission for appeal of Sizewell C Nuclear Power station ruling
September 18, 2023
The Court of Appeal has given permission for an appeal of the High Court’s
decision to dismiss a challenge brought over development consent for the
Sizewell C Nuclear Power Station.
Local Government Lawyer 18th Sept 2023
Chris Hedges: Craig Murray on the ‘Slow Motion Execution’ of Assange
And I saw, 100% for certain, that the judge came into court with her ruling already typed out before she heard the arguments, and she sat there almost pretending to listen to what the defense was saying for now and what the prosecution was saying for now. Then she simply read out the ruling.
Chris Hedges: She’s like the Queen of Hearts in Alice in Wonderland giving the verdict before she hears the sentence.
SCHEERPOST, September 17, 2023
Julian Assange continues to fight extradition to the United States to face prosecution under the Espionage Act, a growing chorus of voices is rising to demand an end to his persecution. Hounded by US law enforcement and its allies for more than a decade, Assange has been stripped of all personal and civil liberties for the crime of exposing the extent of US atrocities during the War on Terror. In the intervening years, it’s become nakedly apparent that the intent of the US government is not only to silence Assange in particular, but to send a message to whistleblowers and journalists everywhere on the consequences of speaking truth to power. Former British ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, who was fired for exposing the CIA’s use of torture in the country, joins The Chris Hedges Report to discuss what Julian Assange’s fight means for all of us.
TRANSCRIPT
Chris Hedges: Craig Murray, the former British ambassador to Uzbekistan, was removed from his post after he made public the widespread use of torture by the Uzbek government and the CIA. He has since become one of Britain’s most important human rights campaigners and a fierce advocate for Julian Assange as well as a supporter of Scottish independence. His coverage of the trial of former Scottish first minister Alex Salman, who was acquitted of sexual assault charges, saw him charged with contempt of court and sentenced to eight months in prison. The very dubious sentence, half of which Craig served, upended most legal norms. He was sentenced, supporters argued, to prevent him from testifying as a witness in the Spanish criminal case against UC global director, David Morales, being prosecuted for installing a surveillance system in the Ecuador embassy when Julian Assange found refuge that was used to record the privileged communications between Julian and his lawyers.
Morales is alleged to have carried out this surveillance on behalf of the CIA. Murray has published some of the most prescient and eloquent reports from Julian’s extradition hearings and was one of a half dozen guests, including myself, invited to Julian and Stella’s wedding in Belmarsh Prison in March 2022. Prison authorities denied entry to Craig, based on what the UK Ministry of Justice said were security concerns, as well as myself from attending the ceremony.
Joining me to discuss what is happening to Julian Assange and the rapid erosion of our most basic democratic rights is Craig Murray.
And to begin, Craig, I read all of your reports from the trial which are at once eloquent and brilliant. It’s the best coverage that we’ve had of the hearings. But I want you to bring us up to date with where we are with the case at this moment.
Craig Murray: Yeah. The legal procedures have been extraordinarily convoluted after the first hearings for the magistrate ruled that Julian couldn’t be extradited, on essentially, health grounds. Due to the conditions in American prisons, the US then appealed against that verdict. The high court accepted the US appeal on extraordinarily dubious grounds based on a diplomatic note giving certain assurances which were conditional and based on Julian’s future behavior. And of course, the US government has a record of breaking such assurances, and also, those assurances could have been given at the time of the initial hearing and weren’t.
Chris Hedges: I don’t think those assurances have any… It was a diplomatic note. It has no legal validity.
Craig Murray: It has no legal validity. It’s not binding in any sense. And as I say, it is in itself conditional. It states that they may change this in the future. It actually says that –
Chris Hedges: Well, based on his behavior.
Craig Murray: – Based on his behavior, which they will be the sole judges of.
Chris Hedges: Of course.
Craig Murray: And which won’t involve any further legal process. They will decide he’s going into a supermax because they don’t like the way he looks at guards or something. It’s utterly meaningless. And so the US, having won that appeal so Julian could be extradited, it was then Julian’s turn to appeal on all the points he had lost at the original extradition. Those include the First Amendment, they include freedom of speech, obviously, and they include the fact that the very extradition treaty under which he’s being extradited states that there shall be no political extradition and this is plainly a very political case and several other important grounds. That appeal was lodged. Nothing then happened for a year. And that appeal is an extraordinary document. You can actually find it on my website, CraigMurray.org.uk.
I’ve published the entire appeal document and it is an amazing document. It’s an incredible piece of legal argument. And some of the things it sets out like the fact that the US key witness for the charges was an Icelandic guy who they paid for his evidence. They paid him for his evidence and he is a convicted pedophile and convicted fraudster. And since he has said he lied in his evidence and he just did it for the money. That’s one example of the things you find. The documentation is not dry legal documentation at all. It’s well worth going and looking through Julian’s appeal. That appeal ran to 150 pages plus supporting documents.
For a year, nothing happened. Then two or three months ago it was dismissed in three pages of double-spaced A4, in which the judge, Judge Swift, said that there were no legal arguments, no coherent legal arguments in this 150 pages and it followed no known form of pleading and it was dismissed completely. And the thing is that the appeal was written by some of the greatest lawyers in the world. It’s supervised and written by Gareth Pierce, who I would say is the greatest living human rights lawyer. Those people have seen the film In the Name of the Father, starring Daniel Day-Lewis…………………………………….
She’s won numerous high-profile cases. She has enormous respect all around the world and this judge, who is nobody, is saying that there’s no validity to her pleadings which follow no known form of pleading. This is quite extraordinary.
Chris Hedges: Am I correct in that he was a barrister, essentially, for the defense ministry? He was served the interests of the UK government and that’s essentially got him his position. Is that correct?
Craig Murray: Exactly. He was the lead barrister for the security services. Well, he was a banister who specialized in working for the security services.
……………………………………………………And I saw, 100% for certain, that the judge came into court with her ruling already typed out before she heard the arguments, and she sat there almost pretending to listen to what the defense was saying for now and what the prosecution was saying for now. Then she simply read out the ruling.
Chris Hedges: She’s like the Queen of Hearts in Alice in Wonderland giving the verdict before she hears the sentence.
……………………………..On the most basic level, the evisceration of attorney-client privilege because UC Global recorded the meetings between Julian and his lawyers, that in a UK court, as in a US court alone, should get the trial invalidated
Craig Murray: In any democracy in the world, if your intelligence services have been recording the client’s attorney consultations, that would get the case thrown out. ………………………….
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….at times it seemed as though they were deliberately doing things as slowly as possible.
Chris Hedges: Well, this is what Neils Melzer, the special repertoire on torture for the UN, said that he called it, a slow motion execution, were his words.
………………………………..Craig Murray: It was because of my advocacy for and friendship with Julian. That’s why they put me in jail. I was in the cell, my cell was 12 feet by eight feet which is slightly larger than Julian’s cell, and I was kept in solitary confinement for 23 hours a day, sometimes 23.5 hours a day for four months. And that’s extremely difficult. It’s extremely difficult. But I knew when I was leaving, I had an end date. To be in those conditions as Julian has been for years and years and no idea if it will ever stop, no idea if you’ll ever be let out alive, let alone not having an end date, I can’t imagine how psychologically crushing that would be……………………………………………………………………………….
Craig Murray: The immediate thing that will happen is that Julian’s lawyers will try to go to the European Court in Strasbourg –
Chris Hedges: To the European Court of Human Rights.
Craig Murray: – The European Court of Human Rights to submit an appeal and get the extradition stopped, pending an appeal. The worry is that Julian would instantly be extradited and that the government wouldn’t wait to hear from a European Court.
Chris Hedges: Explain to Americans what it is and what jurisdiction it has in the UK, the European Court.
Craig Murray: Yeah, the European Court of Human Rights is not a European Union body. It’s a body of the Council of Europe. It has jurisdiction over the European Convention on Human Rights which guarantees basic human rights and therefore it has legally binding jurisdiction over human rights violations in any member state of the treaty. So it does have a legally binding jurisdiction and is acknowledged as such, normally, by the UK government. They’re very powerful voices within the current conservative government in the UK which wants to exit the convention on human rights. But at present, that’s not the case. The UK is still part of this system. And so the European Court of Human Rights has legally binding authority over the government of the United Kingdom purely on matters that contravene human rights.
Chris Hedges: And if they do extradite him, they’ve essentially nullified that process, the fear is that, of course, the security services would know about the ruling in advance. He’d be on the tarmac and shuttled in, sedated, and put in a diaper and hooded or something and put on a CIA flight to Washington. I want to talk about if that happens. It’s certainly very possible. What we need to do here, and I know part of the reason you’re in the US, is to prepare for that should it take place. You will try and cover the hearings and trial here as you did in the UK but let’s talk about where we go if that event occurs.
Craig Murray: Yeah. The first thing to say is that if that happens, on the day it happens, it will be the biggest news story in the world; It would be a massive news story. So we have to be prepared. We have to know who, from the Assange movement or who from his defense team, who’s going to be the spokesman, who are going to be the spokespeople, who are going to be offered up to all the major news agencies? We have to affect the story on day one. Because if you get behind the story – And we know what their line will be. They’ll put out all these lies about people being killed because of WikiLeaks, about the American insecurity being endangered, we know all the propaganda that they will try to flood the airwaves with – So we need to be ready and ahead of the game to know who our people are, who are going to be offered up to interview, who are going to proactively get onto the media, and not just the alternative media like this media, but onto the so-called mainstream as well, and get out the story…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Chris Hedges. ………………….my reading of it is that they don’t care how they look. And part of it is to send a message. It doesn’t matter what nationality you are, it doesn’t matter where you are. WikiLeaks is not a US-based publication, it doesn’t matter where you are. If you expose the information that Julian and WikiLeaks exposed, we’re going to come for you. Isn’t that the message?
Craig Murray: That’s absolutely right. And this, again, it’s amazing they don’t see the dangers in this claim of universal jurisdiction. …………………….
This claim of universal jurisdiction is extraordinary. And what’s even more extraordinary is they’re claiming universal jurisdiction but Julian is under their jurisdiction because he published American Secrets even though he’s not an American and he wasn’t in America. And at the same time, while they claim jurisdiction over him, they’re claiming he has no First Amendment rights because he’s an Australian.
The combination of we have jurisdiction over you, you have all the liabilities that come with that but you have none of the rights that come with that because you’re not one of our citizens, that’s pernicious. It’s so illogical and so vicious. …………………………………………
Chris Hedges: I want to close because there’s been noise out of Australia. The ambassador, Carolyn Kennedy, said that they might consider a plea deal. I have put no credence in it. It’s all smoke but I wondered what you thought.
Craig Murray: Yeah. It’s an attempt to placate Australian public opinion. Public opinion in Australia is extremely strong. Over 80% of Australians want Julian released and allowed to go home to Australia. Blinken came there and made some very hostile and un-diplomatic remarks at a time when Australia was allowing the US to base nuclear weapons on its side. Caroline Kennedy came out… It’s a lie, frankly. There has been no approach from a justice department or from the State Department to doing any plea deal. It’s purely smoke and mirrors to try to distract the Australian public. Caroline Kennedy was lying to the Australian public. That’s pure and simple.…………..
Guam residents inch closer to compensation for US nuclear testing
By Marian Faa, 11 Sept 23, https://www.abc.net.au/pacific/programs/pacificbeat/guam-nuclear-compensation-us-government-testing/102838844
Guam residents are one step closer to being eligible for compensation from the US government if they’ve suffered exposure to nuclear testing.
The US Senate recently endorsed a major expansion to the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act, which would include Guam and New Mexico.
President of the Pacific Association for Radiation Survivors, Robert Celestial, has spent years lobbying for compensation to include Guam.
His campaign started when he was researching de-classified US documents to understand his own exposure to radiation as an army veteran who worked in the Marshall Islands.
Small island nations take high-emitting countries to court to protect the ocean
Countries threatened by rising sea levels are asking a tribunal to decide on responsibility for pollution of the marine environment
In a landmark hearing, small island nations disproportionately affected by
the climate crisis will take on high-emitting countries in a court in
Hamburg, Germany, on 11 September, in what is being seen as the first
climate justice case aimed at protecting the ocean.
During the two-day hearing, the nations – including the Bahamas, Tuvalu, Vanuatu, Antigua and Barbuda among others – will ask the International Tribunal for the Law of
the Sea (Itlos) to determine whether greenhouse gas emissions absorbed by
the marine environment should be considered pollution.
As one of the planet’s greatest carbon sinks, the ocean absorbs 25% of carbon dioxide
emissions, captures 90% of the heat caused by those emissions and produces
half the world’s oxygen.
Most countries have obligations under the legally
binding UN convention on the law of the sea to take measures to prevent,
reduce and control marine pollution. If the case, brought by the Commission
of Small Island States on Climate Change and International Law (Cosis), is
successful, these obligations would include carbon-emission reduction and
protection of marine environments already damaged by CO2 pollution.
Guardian 10th Sept 2023
French nuclear cartel fined €31m
French watchdog issues 31 million euros fine against companies working on
nuclear dismantling. France’s antitrust watchdog on Thursday issued total
fines amounting to 31 million euros ($33.17 million) against six companies
for having engaged in cartel practices linked to the dismantling of a
nuclear site in Marcoule, southern France.
Reuters 7th Sept 2023
Construction Index 11th Sept 2023
https://www.theconstructionindex.co.uk/news/view/french-cartel-fined-31m
1 This Month
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- September 2026 (184)
- August 2026 (330)
- July 2026 (355)
- June 2026 (287)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (267)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (375)
-
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
nuclear-news 