APSN Banner

Indonesian antinuclear society appeals to House to abrogate enactment of bill on nuclear power

Source
Kompas - February 26, 1997

The Indonesian Antinuclear Society (MAI) appealed to the House of Representative's to abrogate enactment of the Bill on Nuclear Power, which according to plan should take place today, Wednesday (26/2). Because the Bill which was discussed and passed hastily, still contains many weaknesses and could become legitimization to construct a nuclear power plant without referendum.

The appeal, embodied in a petition, was read out by a member of MAI in the lobby of the House of Representatives building on Tuesday (25/2). The MAI group which consisted of 12 persons, also unrolled banners proclaiming protests, while awaiting outcome of the effort by a few MAI members to meet with the Chairman of the Parliament/Consultative Congress Wahono.

Some of the banners, of various sizes and made of black cloth and carton, read: "We reject the Bill on Nuclear Power." Also "Go nuclear? No thanks", "Legislature candidates must be antinuclear", "Nuclear power generating plants safe? Why not in Jakarta?"

According to the MAI, although the government has repeatedly denied accusations that the Bill on Nuclear Power is a license to build Nuclear Electric Power Generating Plants without a referendum, many paragraphs in the bill point in that direction.

In general this bill has many weaknesses. Besides not referring to Law no.4/1982 concerning principal regulations concerning management of the environment, the bill also does not consider Law no.15/1985 on electric power, Law no.5/1984 on industry, Law no.23/1992 on health, Law no.8/1978 on prevention of nuclear arms proliferation, and regulations issued by the IAEA, as well as international conventions such as the Vienna Convention and the Paris convention.

Weaknesses of the bill

Among the various weaknesses is the uncertainty concerning the party responsible for nuclear damage caused by "some matters beyond the responsibility of the operator" (paragraph 29).

Another matter also considered not explained in the bill is the mechanism to submit claims when third parties become victims of nuclear damage in the second, third, and further generations, which represents genetic impairment.

Exclusive

According to the MAI, the process of drawing up this bill was very exclusive and did not involve parties which were competent, such as the Department of Environment, Department of Industry, Mining and Energy, Health, Finance, State Electricity Company, legal experts, independent nuclear experts, as well as the general public.

The brief discussion of the bill also gives rise to a large question mark. As is known, the meeting of the special committee (Pansus) only took 5 days (4-8 November 1996), while the meeting of the work committee (Panja) took 32 days (13 November-14 December 1996). Total time of discussion was only 37 days.

"This is very upsetting, keeping in mind that not a single member of the House is a nuclear expert, and therefore there is insufficient mastery of nuclear energy complexities," thus the MAI petition, signed by 25 NGOs, and demanding abrogation of the schedule for enactment of the Bill for an unlimited period.

The effort to meet the Chairman of the Parliament/Consultative Congress again failed because Wahono was abroad. The MAI group was finally received by the House Public Relations. (*)

Country