New Delhi: The controversial Civil Liability on Nuclear Damage Act on Friday came under judicial scrutiny with the Supreme Court giving its nod to examine the legality of the various provisions of the law on a PIL alleging infringement of fundamental right to life of citizens.

"Issue notice only to the vires of the Act," a bench comprising Chief Justice S H Kapadia and justices A K Patnaik and Swatanter Kumar said while asking the Government to respond to the PIL challenging various provisions of the legislation contending that it did not cover the nuclear safety regime.

COMMERCIAL BREAK
SCROLL TO CONTINUE READING

"We will examine the validity of the Act, vis-a-vis Article 21 (right to life) of the Constitution," the bench said while making it clear that it will not venture into any other aspect as the issues raised in the petition about the nuclear plants are "very scientific" in nature and it "does not have the expertise to go into them". "The issue is highly scientific. We are not competent. This court doesn`t have the expertise to declare whether the nuclear reactor is harmful or not," the bench said.

The PIL filed by the NGO, Common Cause and other public spirited persons, also questioned the provision in the Civil Liability on Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, which limits the liability of the supplier for the nuclear reactor to Rs 1,500 crore for any disaster.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the NGO, also raised the issue on the appointment of an independent regulatory body to oversee nuclear plants.

Attorney General G E Vahanvati defended the law saying it is for Parliament to look into the issue of safety aspect and appointment of regulator.

Bhushan said there has been largescale agitation against the setting up of new nuclear plants as there has been a feeling that Government was giving false assurance on the nuclear safety. Bhushan said there has not been nuclear safety audit by the independent authority and even the assurance given by the Prime Minister has not been complied with in the Act.

Besides seeking to declare the Act as "unconstitutional and void ab initio," the PIL has sought direction to declare that in case of a nuclear accident, all nuclear operators and nuclear suppliers, would be jointly and severally, and absolutely liable for civil damages, and their financial liability would be unlimited.

The petition said the Act was not passed because of any pressure from citizens, any mass demonstration for the need of a liability law nor did anybody feel the need to strengthen the nuclear safety regime.

"Countries with whom India has signed nuclear deals like US, France and Russia have pressurized our government to purchase expensive nuclear reactors from suppliers based in their countries," the PIL said adding that the process of drafting of the Bill was initiated by Indian corporate lobbyist organization FICCI.

Further, the Act channels all the liability to the nuclear operator (which presently is the Government itself) and the victims are not allowed any recourse to sue the companies that supply nuclear reactors and other material.

The Act under Section 6 also limits the liability of the operator to Rs 1,500 crore, which is quite low, and states that the remaining damage may be made good by the Government at the exchquer`s cost. The Act also excludes the liability of the operators in certain circumstances, the petition said.

"Thus clearly the Act, by excluding the liability of the nuclear supplier, violates the principle of `polluter pays`, it said.

PTI