his ret to the 4 Istnonsion of the UN, General A

e z te Cuellar has Uggosted

the settina
p a
TEPMAT A mbly,
h
Who
an aocidontal nucioa war and to lessSe
may
a e laurnehings by hose"The Chernobyl syndror
the
clandestinely gain access
clandestineku SecrAleretaposita
"Nuclear
'chiling ry
V t iyhtly pointed
ou,
ramned the
t Cart e
AN

van remain i"ho nucleargenie manaco.

salo atom and a to escape.. Jclear
the dei
Ny
e. Tho spit sharply divided woreCape sson
tis well established rule ofinternational law that a so cannot co-exist" A
territory provided that its adverse effects do not f
State
nan another
may d0sover
State/nternational Law does Not permit any
avthig within its territory or clsewhere which may adverse
overeign to conduct arnh
mnecton, Nuclear Test case deserves a specialdect otha activity or t
nteatonal Court of Justice directed
dust
France not to
conduct States
In this case
the radio active eminating rom them caused health lth hazards
Australa and New Zealand. I,
nowever, the activities conduet to lear tests
emtvy do not adversely afect
other
nternational law.° For example, whenstates,
it will conducted
the
not cons by a State people
Aaiasthan),
India
neighbouring courntry was adverselyconducted nu. within
Raastn di.activity
no
in any of the affected for the est at Pokhta
Quity of any violation of the rules of neighbouring
international law.5states and as 0 increase n
ahat a State does within But such
intemational tort and such a its territory adversely affects other positie n will India
the
be
was
The above discussion
State will eliable to make State differe
makes it clear
aoversely aftected other States. The that accident and fire reparation
at to the aggu
ill constitue
make reparation to
States which were
former Sovietiet Union Nuclear Plant at Ch Staes
was,
adversely affected.
It may be noted here that the
therefore, clearly emcu
the
inadequacies and deficienciesaccident at
Chernobyl Nuclear Plant
Consequently special session of respect
a in
brought into tee
immediately called and on 26th International ofAtomic nuclear safety
and
Convention on Early
Notification ofSeptember, 1986,
environment
it Energy Agency (IAEA) WaS
)Convention on a
Nuclear Accident or adopted two
The first
ConventionAssistance in the
Event of Nuclear Conventions-
entered into force on 26th
came into
force on 27th AccidentRadiological
or Emergency, and
of the
State parties
to theFebruary, 1987. Under October, 1986 andRadiological
the second Emergency
ne states likely to be Convention the first Conventicn
activities but will not affected by
to
it. Thistransmit information of Convention, it is the
obligation
inaicaled that they will apply to nuclear
direction obligation is for nuclear acciaen
transmit the said weapons. The five military and non-mla
information. nuclear weapon
was The Convention in
This
Convention is a stepstars
signed on 29th Early Notification in
uie
has been ratified September, of a
Nuclear Accident in
by 118 1986. It
countries (116 became effective on 27th Radiological Emerger
effective
The Convention +
European Atomic October, Sofarit
Emergency
been y was
Was on the
Assistance
Energ9 and the
adopted iinn 10o
ratitied by 111adopted 1986. It e inin the event of a
64
66 Ed
countries. becamee effective on Nuclear Accident ofRadiologc
26 February, 1987. So far
b6 See SEditorial Entitled "The ithas
56. See K. Kapoor, "The Chernobyl
HuclearNuclear
NUci Test case Legaity
Test caso
lest eCase of Syndrome
ome", The Pioneer, 16
Bormb (Now (Australia
(Aust ralia Nuclearar Testing
esting May 1986.
68. Chhin TesteZenberger,Zeal and v.
"Tho v. France) the
Pokhran Explosion",
PoKnia
See S. K Yale
s
in

Lw national Law dnce) Judgment

France) Judgment o mher,
IJIL, Vol 14 (1974) p. 452
CJ. Aep
Kapoor, noteJournal Va he O Nuclear
Sea, AJIL War
of
ol 20
December, 1974A
1974, ( LC
Rep. 457.

55, at p. Vol. 49(1958) p. 49 M.S. M al, The

ydrogen

485. (1955)
p. 356; M.S. ougal aro
A
 DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENT 431
Under the above-mentioned Conventions, nuclear
weapons have not been included
Endeavours should, therefore, be made to include nuclear weapons also in respect of
transmission of nuclear accidents.
Reference may also be made here to the International Convention Nurlear
opened for signature on 20th September, 1994 at the thirty eighth sessionSafety
on
which was
from 13 to 23rd Sept, (held
1994) of the General Conference of International Atomic Energy
Agency (AEA). This is the first legal instrument, which addresses the issue of nuclear
power plants safety world-wide. The convention
and obliges the parties to establish and applies to land-based civil nuclear plants,
maintain proper legislative and regulatory
framework to govern safety.
Through the convention, States commit themselves to
fundamental safety principles for nuclear installations and
agree to participate in periodic
pre-review meetings on implementation of their obligations.
On 20th September, 1994, the convention was
signed 38 countries including
Canada, France, India, Pakistan, Republic of Korea, Russian by Federation, South Africa,
United Kingdom and the United States.
It is clear from the
foregoing that nuclear safety and environment are inter-related to
each other. With a view to ensure pollution free environment, special attention should be
given to nuclear safety. States making peaceful and other uses of nuclear energy have
some obligations towards international community. The progress made so far in this
connection is far fram satisfactory.
It has been rightly pointed out, "The right of private individuals to be guaranteed a
decent and safe environment is one of the newer rubrics of human rights law."55 Further,
"Proposals have been advanced to include the rights of individuals and non-governmental
entities to a pure and decent environment within the ambit of
present day human rights
Conventions, i.e., United Nations Human Rights Covenants and the European Convention
on Human Rights..Fortunately, the foundations are in place. When coupled with
existing regional and intenational Conventions, such as those relating to Ocean pollution,
it becomes clear that a massive corpus of law does in fact exist. It is becoming necessary
to bring together this body of law in order to deal effectively with the growing destruction of
environment. Secondly, additional treaty instruments are required, as an immediate
Solution "60

Terrorist activities have also posed a serious threat to nuclear establishments.

Several conventions have been concluded to face this challenge. In this connection,
International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings, 1997, International
Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism 1999 and International
Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism, 2005 deserve special
mention.
International Convention for Suppression of Terrorist Bombings, 1997 entered into
force on 23 May, 2001. As of 5/10/2011, 164 countries had become parties to this
convention. International Convention in Suppression tor Financing of Terrorism, 1999, it
entered into force on 10 April, 2002. As of June 2013, 182 countries had become parties to
this convention.
Reference may be made here to the Convention on Early Notification of a Nuclear
Accident of Radiological Emergency was adopted in 1986. It entered into force on 27
October, 1986. Moreover, Convention on Assistance in the Event of Nuclear Accident or
Radiological Emergency was also adopted in 1986. It entered into force on 26 February.
1987. So far 86 countries have ratified this convention.
Legality of the use by a State of Nuclear Weapons in Armed Conflict
and its effects on Health and Environment.-On 27th August, 1993, the World
Health Organization (WHO) requested the lnternational Court of Justice to give an
advisory opinions on the following question:

59. W. Paul Gormiey, "The Right to a Sate and Decent Environment", LJIL., Vol. 28 (1988) p. 1.
60. Ibid, at pp. 31-32.