In recent developments, K. Sahadevan questioned the government stance on private participation in the nuclear energy sector, citing the effects of the civil liability law relating to nuclear damage, which has the potential effect of exculpating the private companies from liability in the event of a nuclear disaster, including General Electric, Areva, and Toshiba.
Sahadevan condemned the government's move, stating that allowing private companies into the nuclear energy field may not hold them accountable in case of accidents or disasters. This policy shift, proposed by Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman through changes to the Atomic Energy Act and civil liability law, is being seen as a step towards privatization and a move to appease the interests of large corporations.
Sahadevan mentioned that when Manmohan Singh was the prime minister, the party had withdrawn support from his government as protest against the nuclear deal between India and the United States. With the present attitude of this government, fear looms large that an accident would merely slap some nominal liability on the nuclear operators and companies involved. Sahadevan's statements are reflective of the increasing resistance to the government's approach as more and more people are asking questions about the dangers to national security and public safety from more private sector participation.
The proposed amendments have brought forth a much wider debate on the need for strict regulations and clear accountability in the nuclear industry. Sahadevan believes that the changes could lead to a situation where the victims of nuclear accidents are left without proper compensation, and the private companies benefiting from this sector are not held responsible for their actions.
The debate has also reached international attention, with civil society groups and anti-nuclear movements calling for a more rigorous legal framework to ensure that those responsible for nuclear accidents are held accountable. In the past, nuclear accidents around the world have shown that the impact can be severe, with wide-reaching consequences not just within the affected countries, but beyond their borders as well.
Opponents of the proposed changes argue that the government's approach could pave the way for greater risks, as private companies may not prioritize safety and disaster preparedness. Moreover, there is concern about the potential for private interests to override national security concerns, particularly in the context of nuclear energy, which has significant strategic implications.
In a nutshell, Sahadevan and other critics of the government's policies are asking for a more cautious approach. They argue that while private sector involvement in energy production can be beneficial, it should not come at the cost of safety and national security. They ask that the government not take this drastic step but look into its possibility and take effective measures so that private companies dealing with the nuclear sector are always regulated and liable to high levels of safety and responsibility.