Are courts precluded from granting fair compensation for nuclear mishaps: Supreme Court
Source Entity
The Indian Express
The Supreme Court of India is reviewing the SHANTI Act, 2025, to determine if it unconstitutionally limits judicial power regarding compensation for nuclear accidents. The bench is also examining potential conflicts of interest in the appointment process for the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board.
Legal Scrutiny of the SHANTI Act 2025
The Supreme Court of India has initiated a critical constitutional review of the Sustainable Harnessing and Advancement of Nuclear Energy for Transforming India (SHANTI) Act, 2025. This legislative framework, which officially replaced the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act of 2010, is now under the judicial microscope to determine the extent of its reach regarding the fundamental rights of citizens affected by potential nuclear incidents.
Judicial Oversight vs. Statutory Limitations
A three-judge bench, led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, has specifically tasked the Centre with clarifying whether the new Act effectively precludes constitutional courts from exercising their jurisdiction to award 'fair and just' compensation. This inquiry strikes at the heart of the separation of powers, questioning whether a legislative statute can strip the judiciary of its inherent duty to provide relief to victims in cases of catastrophic failure.
The Independence of the Regulator
Beyond compensation, the Court is addressing institutional integrity through its scrutiny of Section 17(4) of the SHANTI Act. The bench, which includes Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, has raised concerns regarding a potential conflict of interest in the mechanism used to appoint the Chairperson and Members of the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB). Ensuring that the regulator remains independent from the entities it governs is vital for public trust in nuclear safety protocols.
Historical Context and Legal Evolution
The transition from the 2010 Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act to the 2025 SHANTI Act represents a significant shift in India’s regulatory landscape. While the shift aims to advance nuclear energy, the current legal challenge highlights that such modernization must balance state interests with the constitutional mandates of accountability and transparency. The Court's intervention serves as a reminder that statutory law cannot exist in a vacuum, divorced from the constitutional protections afforded to the public.
Broader Implications for Nuclear Policy
The outcome of this petition will likely set a precedent for how future nuclear projects are managed in India. If the Court finds that the SHANTI Act restricts judicial recourse, it could lead to significant amendments to ensure that victims of nuclear mishaps are not left without a clear pathway to equitable compensation. Furthermore, the ruling on the AERB's appointment process will define the future of regulatory independence in the country's energy sector.
Conclusion
As the Centre prepares its response to the Supreme Court’s notice, the nation awaits a clarification that will define the boundaries of executive power versus judicial protection. The ongoing proceedings underscore the judiciary’s commitment to ensuring that the advancement of nuclear energy does not come at the cost of civil rights or regulatory impartiality.