Results 1 - 10 of 36
Results 1 - 10 of 36. Search took: 0.018 seconds
|Sort by: date | relevance|
[en] The use of the terms Nuclear Forensics and Nuclear Smuggling began in the early 1990s with the reporting of finds of nuclear material by law enforcement agencies and subsequent court cases. In the beginning scientists with the relevant skills were contacted by law enforcement agencies to provide them with the evidence to obtain a conviction in the court cases. In the years since more formal working partnerships have developed between the law enforcers and the scientific community to bring Nuclear Forensics practices in line with other scientific disciplines presenting evidence in court. There have been notable advances in the scientific techniques applied to nuclear forensics, and how the international nuclear forensic community has cooperated, both within itself and with the law enforcers. This document outlines the building blocks that nuclear forensics had available to build upon, and how it has progressed and developed in the last two decades. Examples are given of developments in international cooperation and technical progress. (author)
[en] The European Nuclear Energy Tribunal (ENET) already exists since 1 January 1960 under the auspices of the OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). The European Nuclear Energy Court was established with the Protocol of Security Control in the Field of Nuclear Energy of 20 December 1957. Also the Nuclear Energy Agency (Nuclear Energy Agency NEA) within the OECD was established with this protocol. The seat of the court is at the OECD headquarters in Paris.
[en] The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has dealt with the problems connected with nuclear weapons already in several cases, both in contentious cases and advisory opinions. The latest cases were instituted at the end of April 2014 when the Republic of the Marshall Islands submitted applications against nine nuclear weapon states, for their alleged failure to fulfil their obligations with respect to the cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and nuclear disarmament (Obligations concerning Negotiations relating to Cessation of the Nuclear Arms Race and to Nuclear Disarmament cases).The author offers a close analysis of the applications with special regard to the jurisdictional problems and some questions connected with the merits of the cases. The jurisdictional problems are emerging from the fact that from the nine states against which the Marshall Island instituted proceeding only three are parties to the Court’s optional clause system and the case of the other six states depends on whether these states will accept the Court’s jurisdiction for the cases instituted by the Marshall Islands. As regards the merits of the cases, the outcome of the cases will depend on how the Court will interpret the notion of nuclear disarmament, and whether it will accept that in contemporary international law there exists a customary norm of disarmament. (author)
[en] Nuclear forensic findings reflect the confidence placed in the measurement of nuclear material and other radioactive material data characteristics (i.e. signatures) and the ensuing interpretation of these results. The level of confidence depends upon the quality assurance system and quality control procedures of the laboratory, including the use of validated methods, certified reference materials and demonstrated competencies. Ensuring these factors are in place allows for improved reliability and defensibility of the findings, which is essential because the findings may be used as evidence in a court or to identify nuclear security vulnerabilities. In order to improve confidence in nuclear forensic findings, nuclear forensic scientists are validating methods, developing appropriate certified reference materials, and implementing appropriate quality assurance management systems. These efforts will improve both the defensibility of the findings as well as the sustainability of national nuclear forensic capabilities
[en] Already in 2003, the EU Commission presented a draft directive for access to courts regarding environmental issues, which was meant, above all, to serve the implementation of the Aarhus Convention (AC) ratified both by the EU and also by Germany. The objective of the convention is, amongst other things, to secure access to the courts. This is to be guaranteed both by the access of the 'members of the affected public' and also the access of the 'members of the public'. The latter is to be regulated in more detail by the draft directive presented in 2003. The draft, however, faced strong reservations on the side of the member states and has subsequently not yet been ratified. In the meantime, the topic 'access to the courts' regarding environmental associations and individual plaintiffs has gained topicality due to the legislative development of the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice and the Bundesverwaltungsgericht (German Federal Administrative Court), as well as the consultation process initiated by the EU Commission in July 2013 to improve access to the courts. Access to the courts is without doubt an essential pillar of democratic states under the rule of law. However, meanwhile a high level of environmental protection and possibilities for court action has been achieved in favour of the environment due to law-making and in particular also the ECoJ jurisdiction. Measures toward actio popularis through legislative or judiciary action could however constitute a completely misguided approach. (orig.)
[en] The tax levied on nuclear fuel in Germany does not contravene European law. This was the conclusion of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on 4 June. The ECJ has now, for the first time, made a clear decision on the admissibility of preliminary ruling proceedings referred to the ECJ and to the domestic constitutional court in parallel: Article 267 TFEU not only entitles the domestic court but even obliges it to submit issues that are decisive for the dispute to the European Court of Justice for interpretation or a decision on the applicability of European law. Such an obligation and the issue of incompatibility with European law did not depend on whether the same provision had been submitted to the domestic court for review or not. After all, even if a provision has been declared unconstitutional under domestic law it will still remain applicable for a certain period of time.
[en] Solar ourt yard is a court yard that includes a solar thermal equipment, as the solar cheap heater of construction materials, F imsol, that costs 2 to 6 USD /m2, and has a 10% of thermal efficiency. Is evaluated energetically and economically a solar heater Fimsol, is characterized its environmental impact, and its perspectives of domestic and industrial applications, as well as thermal support of solar dryers. (author)
[en] Highlights: • EIA process in Turkey is that public participation and opinion in environmental decision-making processes are not binding. • EIA process has to be transparent and participatory. These commissions need to include members from nongovernmental organizations. • Investors and EIA firms should not be in direct contact with each other. • An independent and impartial intermediary structure should be established. • Environment courts are of great importance just like specialized courts such as tax courts, labor courts and family courts. - Abstract: In Turkey, as a developing country, environmental impact assessment (EIA) is a critical key for environmental protection. EIA is not regulated in Turkey by means of law, but through a decree put into force on the basis of the relevant provision of the Environmental Law. The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) System, which embodies the “prevention principle” of the environmental law, is an important tool for environmental protection. This tool has a private importance for Turkey since it is a developing country, and it entered the Turkish law in 1983 with the Environmental Law. Besides, the EIA Regulation, which shows the application principles, became effective in 1993. Because Turkey is a candidate for European Union (EU), the EIA Regulation has been changed due to the EU compliance procedure, and its latest version became valid in 2014. This study aims to emphasize The EIA system in Turkey to supervise the efficiency of this procedure and point the success level. According to the methods, firstly In the introduction part, general EIA concept, its importance, and some notations are mentioned. Following that, the legislation, which builds the EIA system, has been analyzed starting from the 1982 Turkish Constitution. Then, the legislation rules are explained due to the basic steps of the EIA procedure and analysed court decisions. In order to shed light upon the application, the EIA final decisions given until today, the results, and their distributions to the industries are assessed.
[en] This section treats of the following Documents and legal texts: 1 - Canada: Nuclear Liability and Compensation Act (An Act respecting civil liability and compensation for damage in case of a nuclear incident, repealing the Nuclear Liability Act and making consequential amendments to other acts); 2 - Japan: Act on Compensation for Nuclear Damage (The purpose of this act is to protect persons suffering from nuclear damage and to contribute to the sound development of the nuclear industry by establishing a basic system regarding compensation in case of nuclear damage caused by reactor operation etc.); Act on Indemnity Agreements for Compensation of Nuclear Damage; 3 - Slovak Republic: Act on Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage and on its Financial Coverage and on Changes and Amendments to Certain Laws (This Act regulates: a) The civil liability for nuclear damage incurred in the causation of a nuclear incident, b) The scope of powers of the Nuclear Regulatory Authority (hereinafter only as the 'Authority') in relation to the application of this Act, c) The competence of the National Bank of Slovakia in relation to the supervised financial market entities in the financial coverage of liability for nuclear damage; and d) The penalties for violation of this Act)