Source: Zhongshi News Network
Author: Xie Yingshi
Among the questioning sounds of neighboring countries, the Fukushima nuclear waste water "finally" was determined to be discharged into the sea on the 24th.
According to the plan of the Japanese government, the discharge of Fukushima nuclear waste water will last more than 30 years. Some countries have criticized this as "malicious dumping" and "neighbors", but the current relevant international law seems to be helpless.Some people mention that it can find a weak solution in the multilateral convention of trade. I am afraid that it is also impatient, but there is doubts that cause trade disputes.
Looking back at history, resulting in disputes similar to the discharge of nuclear wastewater in Fukushima in Japan. Perhaps the concept from international marine pollution prevention has not yet been "connected to the sea and land". It is only focused on the sea.Lord, non -International Law Institute can cover.Such a lack of pollution and governance of neighborhood consciousness in sea and land may be unimaginable in the past, and it is now a living fact.
From the perspective of the context, the evolution of the prevention and control of marine pollution is related to geography and trade.The high cost of incorporating supervision and multinational cooperation not only involves the environment, but also involves security and sovereignty. The door is always closed and not easily opened.
There are still a certain concentration of nuclear waste water from the land to the ocean from land, which should be subject to international law constraints.The problem is that from the above -mentioned international environmental law, there is no set of clear rules for wastewater containing radiated nuclear species from the above international environmental law. Therefore, it has given the Japanese government a unilateral declaration of niche.Under the "scientific standard certification", it seems more reasonable.
Traditional international environmental law, including the International Marine Law, is solved by solving the problem of pollution emissions from land, and must still face the problem of "whether it does cause damage to the environment". This inspection standard is ""Legal standards" (regardless of international or domestic), it becomes a "natural danger" that cannot be leapfrogged by environmental damage compensation.You must find other solutions.
Before the empirical theory of environmental causality has not been resolved, even if the concentration of "monitoring" the concentration of the Fukushima nuclear waste water discharge in Fukushima in Japan is necessary, it may not be possible to prove how much concentration of nuclear waste water will cause ocean ecology and environmental damage to how many concentrations will cause ocean ecology and environmental damage.EssenceThe Japanese government passed the specific secret protection law in 2013 to list nuclear energy issues including the Fukushima nuclear incident as the secret of "national security".Dilemma.
In the discharge of Fukushima nuclear waste water into the sea, the "early warning principles" or "warning measures" often mentioned in the environmental field have to be considered.The so -called warning is that appropriate measures can not be taken to prevent it because scientific evidence has not proved the degree of harm.This not only involves "must be taken", but also premise on "damage assumptions".If the Japanese government can conduct goodwill communication on platforms such as the international convention and other platforms in accordance with the principle of warning, and adopt measures such as the mechanism of consulting, environmental impact assessment, and even disputes and relief in the international environment.The controversy and resolution of entering the sea will have a positive role and significance.
