SC wants public debate on nuclear safety issue

Dec 6 - McClatchy-Tribune Regional News - Nikhil Kanekal Mint, New Delhi

The Supreme Court (SC) on Monday refrained from admitting a public interest case in which the petitioners sought the creation of an "independent regulatory mechanism" to oversee the safety of India's nuclear energy projects.

Prashant Bhushan, counsel for the petitioners, said the main concern was that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, who has been the driving force behind India's nuclear energy plans, is also in charge of the regulator, implying a conflict of interest. The department of atomic energy is directly under the Prime Minister's Office.

After enquiring if the Nuclear Safety Regulatory Authority (NSRA) Bill was pending before the ongoing session of Parliament, Chief Justice S.H. Kapadia said the court would prefer a "public debate" on the issue of nuclear safety, rather than for the court to take up the issue. "We are not experts," said Kapadia.

Adjourning the case for a month, the court told the petitioners they could suggest some regulatory models independent of the government adopted in countries such as the US, France, the UK and Canada, which it will then "recommend" to the government.

The NSRA Bill seeks "to establish an authority and such other regulatory bodies for regulation of radiation safety or nuclear safety, and achieving the highest standards of such safety."

The court, however, did not dismiss the petition, leaving it open to be dealt with in the future.

"We are not saying this matter is not important. It is a matter involving the Right to Life under Article 21. We are conscious of that. We want to know what mechanism for independent regulation is there," justice Kapadia told Bhushan.

Kapadia also defended the scientific community by arguing that it was being underestimated by the petitioners. "Ultimately, scientists are not bound by the government. If the government says 'set up a plant, they won't just do what the government says. They will take care."

India has 18 nuclear power plants, with seven more in the pipeline.

"The issue, Mr Bhushan, is that there is a divide within the scientific community. That is why there should be a public debate," said the court.

Bhushan then cited the credentials of the petitioners--two non-governmental organizations and 13 former public officials, academics and scientists--many of whom have served in key positions within the government vis-a-vis nuclear energy and its safety.

The bench ignored this and instead explained why it wanted Parliament and the government to take up the issue. "If they (government) are going to take action now and we issue notice, they may say 'the matter is sub judice' and withhold," said justice A.K. Patnaik.

The court also demarcated its turf by saying that some of the issues raised by the petition could be in the government's exclusive domain.

"So far as public safety is concerned, Article 21 is there. For all other issues, they may not be for a court of law to decide. They may be issues of policy. The Supreme Court is not Parliament," said justice Patnaik.