70 / 350
JAKUB HANDRLICA
CYIL 4 ȍ2013Ȏ
a
financial obligation
arising from the Vienna system of nuclear third party liability,
13
but also due to the fact that they did not belong to the Organisation for Economic
Co-operation and Development (OECD) at that time and were, consequently, not
eligible to join the Paris Convention.
2.2 Nuclear liability conventions of the “second generation”
The international nuclear liability regimes established by the Paris and Vienna
Conventions retained most of their original features until the late 1980s. Victims
in the contracting parties to the Paris Convention would receive benefits available
under its provisions if a nuclear incident occurred in the territory of one of the
contracting parties to this convention. At the same time, victims in the contracting
parties to the Vienna Convention were entitled to benefits under that convention in
the event a nuclear incident occurred within one of its contracting parties.
14
However,
the Chernobyl accident (1986)
triggered public concern about international
civil liability and made lawmakers aware of considerable gaps existing in the international
legal framework. Several consequences of the independent and separate co-existence of
the two major international liability regimes were identified: Firstly, neither convention
applied to damage suffered in the territory of a contracting party to the other convention.
Furthermore, neither convention applied to nuclear incidents occurring in the territory
of a contracting party to the other convention. Moreover, both conventions applied
to nuclear incidents occurring and damage suffered on or above the high seas, which
might result in their simultaneous application.
Consequently, less than six months after the Chernobyl tragedy, experts from
both the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and the
International Atomic Energy Agency concluded that a
“joint protocol”
uniting the
Paris and Vienna Conventions would be the most practical and effective solution in
order to deal with the problems outlined above. The result was the adoption of the
Joint Protocol relating to the Application of the Vienna and Paris Convention of
1988
(hereinafter only
“the Joint Protocol”)
.
15
Further, in order to strengthen the liability regime of the Vienna Convention,
the
Protocol of 1997 to Amend the Vienna Convention of 1963
(hereinafter also
“the Protocol of 1997”)
16
was adopted under the auspices of the International Atomic
Energy Agency. Seven years later, the Contracting Parties to the Paris Convention
13
Lamm, V
.
The Unification of Nuclear Liability Law within the EU Member States from the Viewpoint
of a Party to the Vienna Convention,in
Pelzer, N. (ed.) Europäisches Atomhaftungsrechtim Umbruch
,
Nomos Verlag, Baden Baden, 2010, pp. 213
et seq.
14
Busekist, O
.
A Bridge Between Two Conventions on Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage: the Joint
Protocol Relating to the Application of the Vienna and the Paris Convention,
in OECD/IAEA (eds.)
International Nuclear Law in the Post – Chernobyl Period
, OECD, Paris, 2006, pp. 129
et seq.
15
The Joint Protocol relating to the Application of the Vienna Convention and Paris Convention of
21 September 1988 entered into force on 27 April 1992.
16
The Protocol to Amend theVienna Convention onCivil Liability for Nuclear Liability of 12 September 1997
entered into force on 3 October, 2003.