Responsabilidad civil por daños nucleares: un paso adelante tras la ley 11/2023, de 8 de mayo

Presence of environmental concerns, insufficient confidence regarding fossil fuels and the need for variety of resources are among important issues, which make consideration of modern technology such as nuclear energy inevitable. The overall aim of this study is to examine the peaceful use of nuclear energy based on international environmental law. Considering the ever-growing capabilities of nuclear energy, and legal and environmental problems in developing this technology, the need for this study seems obvious. This research is an applied, descriptive study based on questionnaire survey. The statistical population of the current study is authoritative researchers and students in the field of environmental and nuclear law in the doctorate level. Twenty-nine individuals were selected and studied by means of random sampling. The dependent variable of the study was peaceful use of nuclear energy. Findings showed that the current situation of international laws and regulations in peaceful usage of nuclear energy is unsuitable, therefore preventive, deterrent, and controlling laws and regulations must be considered. Factor Analysis showed that safety, responsibility, waste, environment, and cooperation among the most important considered points in international environmental laws and regulations in peaceful use of nuclear energy, in total were able to explain 79.14 % of the variance. In fact, creating obligatory legal procedures, and supporting a system of international cooperation regarding execution and planning, and accurate supervision on functions related to environmental and nuclear energy laws with sufficient supportive facilities seem essential.

Paradoxically, the peaceful use of nuclear energy and all the prospects it opens up for humanity often coexist with the prospect of nuclear proliferation and nuclear war. This difficult perception is understandable: the materials, knowledge, and expertise needed to produce nuclear weapons are generally no different from those needed to produce nuclear energy and conduct nuclear research.Therefore, ensuring the peaceful and safe use of nuclear energy has always been in the center of attention of the international community. The approach is determined by a complex of national and international measures. It is generally accepted that the primary responsibility for regulating the use of nuclear energy rests with national authorities, but it is also clear that other countries may also be affected. Thus, like many other human activities with potentially transboundary consequences, nuclear energy regulation requires a residual, and in some cases joint, responsibility on the part of the international community to ensure the harmonization of standards, coordination and pooling of resources and services, and regulatory cooperation this activity.In this regard, the IAEA and other international and regional organizations play the role of coordination centers. Article II of the IAEA Statute states that the organization shall seek to accelerate and increase the contribution of atomic energy to world peace, health and prosperity and shall provide, as far as possible, assistance upon request. IAEA supervision or control shall not be used to achieve any military objective.International peration in the field of nuclear energy over the past six decades has resulted in legally binding norms and advisory standards and regulations. This article outlines this global legal framework for the safe and peaceful development of nuclear energy. In particular, it concerns nuclear safety, radiation protection, radioactive waste management, transportation of radioactive materials, emergency assistance and planning, civil liability for nuclear damage, physical protection of nuclear material, armed attack on nuclear facilities, safeguards and controls carried out and provided by the IAEA.

The peaceful uses of nuclear energy present a challenge for the law in two totally opposite directions. On the one hand, certain States still want a better chance to use nuclear energy. For them, a major question is the promotion of, and access to, the use of nuclear energy. On the other hand, there are a number of risks involved in the use of nuclear energy. These concerns have triggered national and international legal and non-legal regulations restraining the use of, and access to, nuclear energy. The dangers to be dealt with can be summarized as follows: Radioactive materials discharged into the environment in the course of the production process of uranium and plutonium, the relevant raw material; Radioactive materials discharged into the environment as a result of accidents or malfunctioning of nuclear installations, or of nuclear propelled vehicles, or as a consequence of transports of nuclear materials; Final disposal of radioactive waste; Nuclear safety, in particular the risk of diversion of nuclear materials into the hands of criminals (‘nuclear terrorism’); Risk of diversion of nuclear materials or technology for weapons purposes. The first three concerns present major environmental problems. These environmental concerns coincide with health risks. Although these concerns have international dimensions, international legal answers to those problems have so far been incomplete. The basic answer of customary law relating to the risk of transfrontier nuclear pollution is the so-called no harm rule, recognized by the Trail Smelter arbitration. As to nuclear pollution, that rule needs further concretization, preferably by treaty law, which still is incomplete. There are treaties dealing with civil liability, obligatory insurance and communications or assistance in case of accidents. IAEA environmental standards for nuclear installations, transportation and waste disposal have so far not reached the status of legally binding norms. As to the content of the regulatory system, three main areas of achievement are highlighted in this Chapter: First, there are international norms addressing transboundary harm stemming both from general international (environmental) law and from specific treaties. Second, there exists an internationally binding liability regime based on operator liability, which shields the States against claims involving their own responsibility; its adequacy for protecting current victims and future generations is, however, debatable. There are, finally, multiple international standard setting procedures leading to a great array of soft law. The environmental and health risks involved in the production and use of nuclear energy are a long-term problem. The risk of radioactive pollution is not banned in a convincing manner. There is also no adequate answer for safe radioactive waste disposal, nowhere on the national level, far less on the international level. These problems affect the fate of future generations, thus prompting an enhanced responsibility for relevant decision-makers. Yet as in other problem areas the international community is slow in living up to the challenge.

Population growth, industrialization and technological advances increase the demand for energy. Due to problems such as global warming, environmental pollution and destruction, the trend towards alternative energy sources continues on a global scale. For this reason, the use of nuclear energy, one of the secondary energy sources, has tended to increase in recent years. Reasons such as the geographically uneven geographical distribution of resources that are raw materials for energy among countries and their exhaustibility, fluctuations in energy prices and the economical production of nuclear energy are among the reasons why countries in the world turn to nuclear energy. A number of accidents at nuclear power plants have had a negative impact on the perception of nuclear power plants, but for different reasons, nuclear energy is gaining popularity again. Nuclear power plants are the first thing that comes to mind when it comes to nuclear power, but it is also used effectively in medical treatments and applications of various branches of science as well as energy production. In global energy production; the fact that it aims to reduce carbon emissions by providing more energy production within the scope of sustainability, the continuous and uninterrupted continuation of electricity production using nuclear, the production of electricity at more affordable costs in nuclear power plants compared to other power plants (thermal, renewable, etc.), the fact that greenhouse gas emissions are almost negligible, and the use of nuclear technology in many fields such as physics, medicine, transportation, agriculture as well as energy production have made nuclear energy back on the agenda of countries in recent years. In nuclear energy, nuclear waste and their storage processes continue to be discussed as a problem in this process. For these reasons, the possibility of peaceful use of nuclear power has been questioned in academic platforms and various criteria have been determined. This article examines Türkiye's compliance with the criteria for the peaceful use of nuclear energy and clarifies the development process in this regard. Türkiye's legislation on nuclear energy, international conventions, nuclear safety, radiation control criteria and compliance with national legislation will be examined.

The sovereign right of States to peaceful use of nuclear energy is analysed in this chapter on the basis of current non-proliferation law and international environmental law. The exercise of this right depends on the implementation of certain obligations under international law. The high bar of the legality of peaceful nuclear energy is explained by the dual-use nature of the materials and technologies associated with nuclear energy and the transboundary nature of environmental protection. The notion of sovereignty as independence and superiority does not serve the challenges of peaceful nuclear energy and the modern understanding of the environment as an area of common concern. Against this background, a cooperative approach is suggested in order to successfully resolve the prevention and mitigation of nuclear accidents. The principles of international environmental law pose stringent requirements for the legal use of nuclear energy, which offer additional arguments for responsible behaviours of both States and non-States’ actors in cooperation with international organisations and in particular with the IAEA. The subject of sovereignty is closely linked with the responsibility and liability of States in case of nuclear environmental damage. The present nuclear liability regime should be strengthened by adopting an international legal instrument covering both civil and international liabilities.KeywordsSovereigntyPeaceful uses of nuclear energyNon-proliferation lawEnvironmental lawNuclear liabilityObligation to cooperate

This chapter takes a new approach to the right to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. The pros and cons of nuclear energy will be assessed in light of human rights standards, whereby civil as well as economic, social and cultural rights will be equally taken into account. Contrary to environmental law, the relevance of international human rights law has not yet fully been recognized in the assessment of nuclear energy. This is surprising since the welfare and development of the human being was one of the driving forces behind the inclusion of the right to peaceful use of nuclear energy in the NPT. It will be demonstrated that the appropriate use of nuclear energy can, indeed, contribute to the enjoyment of human rights, in particular through electricity production and its practical applications in agriculture, industry, medicine, biology and hydrology. Special attention will be paid to the right to development, the right to health, the right to a good standard of living, including adequate food and drinking water, as well as the right to life and the right to respect for private life. In these domains, States are under a positive obligation to pursue actively the fulfillment of these rights. The right to use nuclear energy is nevertheless not unlimited and essentially the same human rights set certain limits. For instance, they constitute a significant barrier to an unfettered exploitation of uranium, causing grave pollution of ground water by which miners and local populations, in particular indigenous communities, are equally affected. Further, radioactive waste disposal constitutes a huge challenge for the present and future generations. Finally, accidents such as Chernobyl and Fukushima have shown the destructive nature inherent in nuclear activities. States enjoy a wide margin of appreciation in the decision whether or not to embrace the nuclear avenue—the present Chapter does not purport to offer definitive solutions, but is rather meant to give some guidance and food for further reflexion.

The peaceful use of nuclear program, nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament are the main pillars of the NPT. These three key treaty elements are closely related one to another. The purpose of this article is to explain the necessity of export controls now, who established as international norms, the balance between the use of nuclear material and security from danger activities and noncompliance with international security measure regime. The methodology to be used in this paper, it will be analysis of literature and interpretative methods of international legal acts and declarations of states representatives which are involved in resolving nuclear international issues. Taken in consideration the existing literature on this issue, this paper modestly will fulfill the scientific gap in terms of interpretation of use of nuclear peaceful energy in NPT.

Nuclear energy literally burst on the world through the atomic bombings at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Ever since, the peaceful use of nuclear energy has been inseparable from nuclear weapons. The secrecy surrounding the early nuclear program, the vision of utter destruction from a nuclear war, and the tremendous dangers inherent in nuclear power production all have contributed to controversy. Few people claim to be neutral when the subject of nuclear power is raised. The books noted here constitute a representative cross section of the recent outpouring of materials on the controversial technology of nuclear energy. One has only to peruse the thinnest volume in the stack, Jerry Mansfield's The Nuclear Power Debate,' to sense the dimensions of the literature. And since the public history of nuclear energy spans just four decades, most works attempt to draw on the historical record. Although Mansfield set out to list books on the peaceful use of nuclear energy published within the last ten years, he also included many references to nuclear weapons and strategic policy.2 Everything is subjectively separated into pronuclear, antinuclear, and neutral categories, a task entailing value judgments about certain entries. If used

Increasing interest in the peaceful use of nuclear energy the establishment of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in 1956. As stated in its Statute, the Agency’s two main objectives are to seek to accelerate and enlarge the contribution of atomic energy to peace, health and prosperity throughout the world, and to ensure, so far as it is able, that assistance provided by it or at its request or under its supervision or control is not used in such a way as to further any military purpose. IAEA fosters and guides the development of peaceful uses of atomic energy, establishes standards for nuclear safety and environmental protection, aids member States through technical cooperation and fosters the exchange of scientific and technical information on nuclear energy.

Under the 10th Malaysia Plan (2010-2015) and the Economic Transformation Programme (ETP), nuclear energy was identified as a potential long-term option to be explored for electricity generation in Peninsular Malaysia. The energy sector in Malaysia currently faces several concerns including depleting domestic gas supply which will affect security and reliability of supply as well as overdependance on fossil fuels – mainly gas and imported coal, and nuclear energy may offer a possible solution to these issues as well as global climate change concern. Pursuing the nuclear option, Malaysia Nuclear Power Corporation (MNPC) is undertaking a series of comprehensive studies to facilitate an informed Government decision on the matter. This paper aims to discuss the many challenges towards the peaceful use of nuclear energy for electricity generation in the context of the New Energy Policy 2010 to achieve a balanced and sustainable energy mix. This effort will continue in the 11th Malaysia Plan (2016-2020) with emphasis on implementing a comprehensive communications plan and public awareness programme for the potential use of nuclear energy in the future. In analysing the challenges for the development of nuclear energy in Malaysia, the traditional triple bottom line (TBL) framework for sustainability, encompassing economic, social and environmental objectives is utilized. An additional factor, technical, is also included in the analysis to provide a more holistic view. It is opined that the main challenges of developing nuclear energy for electricity generation in a newcomer country like Malaysia can be attributed primarily to domestic non-technical factors compared to the technical factor.

Chapter 14 - Notes on some plant components

Reading the NPT as three interdependent promises—non-proliferation, peaceful use of nuclear energy, and the pursuit of negotiations toward disarmament—states and commentators have come to see the slow progress toward disarmament as a green light to relax the obligation to refrain from proliferating nuclear weapons. The ‘three pillars’ reading of the NPT has especially eroded observance by non-nuclear-weapon states of their obligation under the treaty’s Article III, the provision requiring them to submit their nuclear activities to safeguards in agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). A legal theory of continuous bargaining over peaceful use of nuclear energy and safeguards threatens to obscure non-proliferation, the NPT’s one foundation. Meanwhile, the TPNW gains support among politicians and the citizenry at large in countries with democratic governments and open societies. These developments place the NPT at risk and imperil the realistic approach to arms control that the NPT embodies.

The purpose of the study is to identify trends and compare the scope of multilateral and bilateral international legal regulation of relations between Russia and other Eurasian Economic Union members in the field of peaceful use of nuclear power (energy). The methodological basis of the research consists of general scientific and special legal methods. The application of these methods made it possible to subject the current national legislation in the field of nuclear energy to in-depth comparative legal analysis and to identify the prospects for its modernization. The result of the study was the absence of special provisions in the Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Union aimed at integration in the nuclear energy sector and the formation of a common nuclear energy market of the Eurasian Economic Union. The study’s novelty lies in the authors’ approach to the allocation and comparison of the scope and subject matter of existing international treaties of Russia with other Eurasian Economic Union members, regulating cooperation in the peaceful use of nuclear energy, which are not included in the Eurasian Economic Union law. According to the authors, despite the prospects and trends of forming the Eurasian Economic Union nuclear law noted by experts, Russia’s bilateral international agreements with other Eurasian Economic Union members will continue to play a special role in regulating relations in the nuclear energy sector.

In 2000 the public became aware that Iran had secretly started to establish a nuclear program which could be used for peaceful as well as for non-peaceful purposes. In February 2006, the Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) voted to report the countrys nuclear program to the UN Security Council due to Irans persistent failure to fully cooperate with the organization. Because Iran did not comply with the UN Security Councils subsequent call for a suspension of all uranium enrichment and reprocessing related activities, sanctions were imposed on the country by the Security Council in December 2006, March 2007 and March 2008. Whereas Iran insists on its rights under public international law to the use of all means of nuclear technology for peaceful purposes, calls for a reinterpretation of the Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT) that would lead to a restriction of the use of so called dual-use technologies (such as uranium enrichment) become louder.Both the technology of uranium enrichment as well as the technology of reprocessing nuclear materials can be used for civil, as well as for military purposes. This leads to uncertainties as to how to distinguish between the peaceful and non-peaceful use of nuclear technology. These uncertainties are not clearly resolved by the NPT. Whereas on the one hand, the NPT stipulates that nothing in the treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the parties unalienable right to research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, at the same time it specifies that each non-nuclear-weapon State Party undertakes not to receive control over nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices. While some commentators believe that the provisions of the NPT need to be interpreted in a manner which renders all sensitive dual-use technologies outside the scope of what is meant by a technology for peaceful purposes, such interpretations cannot be followed. This interpretation is solely based on a technologys objective characteristics and infers from the technologys mere potential for military use to its non-peaceful nature. Such interpretation would greatly restrict member states unalienable rights to the peaceful use of nuclear energy and is thus neither covered by the principle of sovereign equality of all states, which is decisive for the NPT, nor by the treatys history, wording, purpose and object or context. Rather, an interpretation according to the rules of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and the principle of sovereign equality of all states shows that only a member states intent is decisive for the distinction between peaceful and non-peaceful nuclear technologies.To establish this intent and thus a nuclear programs civil or military character, recourse may be made to the fulfilment of a member states obligations towards the IAEA. As the case of Iran shows, such conclusion can be difficult. One may consider this a loophole in the present non-proliferation regime. However, this loophole may only be reversed through treaty amendment, and not through a reinterpretation of the treaty based solely on a technologys objective capability to be used for civil as well as for military purposes.

The Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration (DOE/NNSA) provides advanced capabilities to simulate the uranium enrichment process to support international negotiations on the peaceful use of nuclear energy. Uranium isotope separation centrifuges connected in a cascade configuration can produce the low-enriched uranium needed for nuclear power. However, those same centrifuges connected in a different configuration can also produce highly enriched uranium for nuclear weapons. Having the capability to assess cascade operations and identify nefarious activities promotes the peaceful uses of nuclear energy while restricting nuclear weapons proliferation. DNN R&D's Nonproliferation Stewardship Program Adaptive Computing Environment and Simulations (ACES) project is creating a modern, sustainable ecosystem of physics-based models and data-analytics tools that enables analysts to model uranium enrichment systems, simulate operational scenarios, and apply various policy options to explore potential outcomes.