Book Review Title: “Nuclear Energy and Liability in South Asia Institutions, Legal Frameworks and Risk Assessment within SAARC” Writer: Dr M.P. Ram Mohan Dr. M.P. Ram Mohan is Associate Professor at the Department of Policy Studies, TERI University and Adjunct Fellow at The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI), New Delhi, India. He is the founding President of the Nuclear Law Association, and a nominated member of the “Nuclear energy for peaceful applications committee”, Bureau of Indian Standards, Government of India. This book is based on his PhD dissertation. [Published by: The Energy and Resource Institute (TERI) University, New Delhi, India. (Springer India: 2015); 142 pages, Amazon listed price US$ 54.99, ISBN 978-81-322-2342-9] Reviewed by Air Commodore(R) Khalid Iqbal, Consultant IPRI Dr MP Ram Mohan in his book “Nuclear Energy and Liability in South Asia Institutions, Legal Frameworks and Risk Assessment within SAARC” assumes that a viable universal nuclear risk framework is either non-achievable or non-implementable. Thus, as an alternative, he proposes a regional approach to the issue; which he thinks is more promising. His mind set is preconditioned by Three-Mile Island incident, Chernobyl, Union Carbide (Bhopal) and Fukushima fiascos(p. v), as well as the standoff between the US and India, on the canvas of Agreement 123, regarding liability in case of nuclear power plant (NPP) accident. These mentioned nuclear and or other incidents are used by the writer as reference anchorages throughout his study; he refers to them time and again, ad nauseam. He examines existing provisions of international law and national laws of various countries regarding nuclear liability and transposes them on ongoing nuclear power programmes in South Asia to bring forth glaring incongruences; while at the same time, he reminds the states about their safety and security related obligation at national as well as international levels (pp.4-6). “The international nuclear liability regime today remains complicated and features sparse participation. National laws, on the other hand, are different from each other and evade major questions on trans-boundary liability” (p.7). Mohan states that despite absence of compatible trans-boundary legal cover, a large number of countries, especially in Asia, have enthusiastically embarked upon fresh setting-up and or up-gradation of their nuclear power generation programmes. He opines that as almost all countries of South Asia are moving speedily to expand their nuclear energy capacities, therefore, this region has a singular opportunity to evolve a region focused nuclear liability framework (p.8-11). He points out that: “Though there is a movement towards a regional agreements led by the EU and, reciprocity between Canada and the US, this mechanism as a way forward to other regions have not been given adequate attention” (p. 14). Writer shows satisfaction that the severity of problem is well home to most of the countries engaged in nuclear power production, this awareness could serve as foundation stone for creating trans-boundary regimes. According to Mohan “concerns arose from both the liability arising from the technology supplied and also from trans-boundary consequences in the aftermath of a nuclear accident. Importantly, countries began to worry about State liability and its extent in the event of a possible atomic reactor accident abroad” (p.27). However, “the supplier countries [have] ring fenced themselves from possible liability claims through the use of bilateral treaty provisions, domestic legislations and also through advocating adoption of unique principles, in particular liability channelling and limits on liability. Many countries have adopted these founding principles in their domestic legislations” (p. 47). Mohan does the national duty by projecting that: “The making of the ‘Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act 2010’ was one of the finest legislative endeavours in the recent times. The exercise was significant because nuclear energy and the consequences of pursuing such an energy form were debated extensively in the Parliament for the first time” (p.53). However, in the same breath, he had to acknowledge that: “The result was a liability law that had an exceptional domestic political acceptability, but in many ways appeared to defy conventional international practice. The international nuclear community, led by supplier countries and vendors has argued that the law should be amended to be compatible with the established practice of international nuclear liability law” (p.53). Book proposes a SAARC focused liability framework and supports it by the argument that: “India and Pakistan are set to expand their nuclear capacity substantially, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka will be the new entrants. Interestingly, all these developments are taking place without substantial public debate, nationally or regionally, and in the absence of any trans-boundary legal remedies and institutional structures” (p.72). Writer couldn’t be more accurate when he says that: “As a densely populated, geographically linked region with rich biodiversity, South Asia will face serious adverse impacts on life and livelihood, in case of a major nuclear disaster (p.72). He also correctly points out that: “South Asia has a history of discord, this adds to the seriousness of the risk dimension, and adequate mitigation response to a nuclear accident. To deal with such eventualities and to make the countries accountable; cooperation and multilateral agreements; commitments between the countries are essential—both for an effective response mechanism and to secure remedies through adequate liability and compensation regime” (p.72). Writer argues that the SAARC already has an appropriate institutional mechanism available to form a regional nuclear risk community because: “The SAARC has initiated major programmes on natural disasters and has had institutional and procedural success with the creation of response mechanisms” (p.92). Therefore its scope could be expanded to include response to nuclear disaster as well. He concludes the argument by saying that above all “it is fully within the SAARC’s Constitution—to create a nuclear energy risk community that will allow regional concern to be shared, discussed and a structure to put in place to respond to these challenges” (p.93) . Text proposes an elaborate technical criterion for ascertaining magnitude of risk, quantitatively, to approximate the levels of risks that each state of South Asia could face in case of hypothetically envisaged accidents (pp.26-37). While bringing to light the stumbling blocks in the way of evolving a universally acceptable liability frame work pertaining to nuclear accidents, writer is inspired to have one for South Asia under the auspices of “South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC)” (pp.88-89). However, keeping in view the lack-lustre performance of SAARC in relatively benign domains like trade and connectivity, writer expresses the reservation that consensus on this important issue is unlikely to come by. “It is highly unlikely, in view of the relationships, international legal requirements and political considerations, that there will be any substantive cooperation in setting up a regional cooperative nuclear power plant in the South Asia. However, in case of a nuclear accident, it is very likely that South Asia as a community will bear the brunt of the same. Keeping in view of this, the priority for the SAARC countries is to build a firm foundation for a responsible nuclear future” (p. 90-91). Book meticulously maps South Asian Nuclear Risk zone, “based on the international criteria mandated by IAEA, the USA, France, the UK, India, and experiences of impact from Chernobyl and Fukushima” (p.97). “Zones taken for the study are 30, 50 and 100 km as emergency zones; and 300, 500 and 1000 km as ingestion and conservative risk zones”(P.97). The mapping results throw-up a guess about trans-boundary risks in South Asia. “The results of the mapping exercise show in case of accident, depending on the intensity, the South Asian region can be classified as a nuclear risk zone. The emergency risk (30, 50 and 100 km) mapping shows probability of a trans-boundary risk between India and Pakistan; India and Sri Lanka; and India and Bangladesh. In the case of ingestion risk (300 km), results demonstrate existence of a trans-boundary impact in South Asia with the exception of Maldives; whereas a liberal interpretation with 500 and 1000 km would cover the whole SAARC region”(p. 117). However, these result appear an overstatement when compared IAEA criteria in the context of major evacuation emergency guidelines (P.99-102). Through wide spectrum and broad based interviews, writer gauges the possibility of developing a constituency that he chooses to call “South Asian Nuclear risk community” (p.121). “With this background, interviews were conducted with diplomatic missions of SAARC countries in Delhi, nuclear policy makers and officials from the SAARC institutions” (p.121). Results indicate that: “interviewees were clear that development of nuclear energy programmes should be seen as a sovereign decision taken in the best interest of the country, and no other country had the right to interfere. At the same time, every interviewee was unanimous that concerns regarding the proliferation of NPPs and the consequent risk of trans-boundary radiation impact should be seen as a regional issue” (p.132). Writer comes forth with the conclusion that: “SAARC nations may be willing to take the initial step in conceiving a proposal to establish a ‘SAARC Nuclear Risk Community’” (p.132). Interestingly, India emerged as “strongly opposed to the creation of a regional convention. And writer assume that: “Judging by India’s stand, it is likely that Pakistan too would hold the same view” (p.132). Writer acknowledges that though Paris and Vienna Conventions have come up with a pattern for compensatory laws in case of untoward nuclear incidents, there is no standardized adherence by member states. “…the 1997 Vienna Protocol and the 2004 Paris Protocol, which made significant changes to the old regime, have still not witnessed adherence by many nuclear energy countries. So much so, that the 1997 Protocol has not come into force despite the fact that the number of ratifications required was as low as five State parties; the 2004 Protocol has only seen Norway and Switzerland ratifying” (p.136). Book presents interesting conclusions and suggestions (Ch-7). It acknowledges that: “The international law on liability and compensation resulting from a trans-boundary nuclear accident, has developed remarkably over the last sixty years” (p. 135). And “changes such as enhanced compensation, enlargement of the geographical scope for claims, and expanded definition of damage etc. are fundamental in nature and have strengthened the regime” (P.135). However, “critical review of the provisions of the revised protocols reveals the gaps that threaten the very purpose behind the reforms—harmonisation” (p.135). As a result, “this goes against the very essence of universal applicability” (135). Writer closes the book with a way forward under the caption proposes “Future Scope of Work”, comprising: “Drafting a Framework Agreement on a SAARC Nuclear Energy Risk Community; A limited comparative public consultation exercise with the stakeholders in all the nuclear energy countries within South Asia; A full study of the possible impact on the environment and livelihood, and the consequences of a transboundary nuclear disaster in South Asia; a comprehensive work on regional nuclear risk assessment covering detailed weather conditions (air and water flow), seasonal variations etc. pertaining to the existing and new nuclear power plants; drafting a guidance document on the future of international nuclear liability principles”(p.139). Book is well structured into chapters, and is adequately indexed; however editing could have been better to avoid repetitions. It is pioneer work on the subject and it fills-in essential research gap regarding necessity of nuclear liability frame-work in the context of South Asia. It is equally useful for students, amateurs, and accomplished researchers. Hopefully, it would inspire the researchers, all over South Asia, to undertake further research on the areas suggested by Dr MP Ram Mohan towards the end of this book (p.139). [A variant of this Book Review was carried by IPRI Journal, Vol. XVI, No. 2 (2016)] 4