Fog hangs over nuclear 'breakthrough'

Experts not sure if a memorandum of law can supersede statute

January 28, 2015 02:19 am | Updated December 04, 2021 11:04 pm IST - Washington

U.S. nuclear suppliers have neither been informed of the details of the “breakthrough understanding” achieved in the India-U.S. civil nuclear agreement nor has a date been set to brief them on how the publicly funded insurance pool will satisfy the vendors on their concerns over Section 46 of the Indian Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act.

Experts close to the discussions, who spoke to The Hindu on condition of anonymity, said that even if the $244 million proposed for the pool were to be used to indemnify suppliers against claims under Section 17(b) of the liability law, they “don’t see how a memorandum of law could supersede the statute.”

In prior remarks, U.S. Ambassador to India Richard Verma was quoted as saying that the breakthrough understanding achieved during discussions between President Barack Obama and Prime Minister Narendra Modi in New Delhi over the weekend could operate “through a memorandum of law within the Indian system.”

This would be a necessary step to give U.S. nuclear suppliers confidence that, firstly, the insurance pool would help them meet the obligations, implied by Section 17(b) in the event of a nuclear accident, of “strict, no-fault liability” and victims’ right to recover damages from the supplier if the accident was caused by defective equipment or services.

Second, with Indian officials firmly backing away from any suggestion that the language of the liability law could be changed to accommodate U.S. nuclear suppliers’ concerns, experts noted that an effort to “read down” the meaning of Section 46, which gives victims the right to tort remedies regardless of whether they received compensation under no-fault liability, may be required.

However, doubt still hangs over the question of whether, at some point in time, any assurances given by the Indian side to U.S. suppliers in the near term would have to be followed up with a “legislative undertaking,” as Mr. Verma mentioned.

Ambiguity on this matter stems from the fact that typically it is only the Indian Parliament that enacts statutes and it is either Parliament or courts that are empowered to interpret them.

Top News Today

Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.