Open Petition to President on the nuclear deal.

[Guest guest]

To

Hon’ble President,

Mrs. Prativa Patil,

Government of India,

Rastrapati Bhawan,

New Delhi – 110 001.

 

(THIS IS AN OPEN PETITION)

 

 

 

SUB: INDO-US NUCLEAR DEAL AND PRINCIPLES & PURPOSES OF THE CHARTER OF UNITED NATIONS, HUMAN RIGHTS USAGE, SPIRIT OF DEMOCRACY.

 

 

Most Respected Madam,

 

I am a citizen of India, Human Rights Activist, passed Post Graduate Diploma in Human Rights from Indian Institute of Human Rights, New Delhi under the United Nations World Programme for Human Rights Education.

 

I am writing to voice my concern regarding the INDO-US NUCLEAR DEAL and its controversial impact on India’s Society, Politics and India’s future. I am to submit before you on the points of PRINIPLES AND PURPOSES OF THE CHARTER OF UNITED NATIONS, HUMAN RIGHTS USAGE and SPIRIT OF DEMOCRACY within Constitution of India to make treaty/agreement -

 

CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS

 

Article 110(1) of The Charter of the United Nations under head RATIFICATION AND SIGNATURE reads: ‘The Present Charter shall be ratified by the signatory states in accordance with their respective constitutional process’, and in Article 111 reads: ‘…..In faith where the representative of the Governments of the United Nations have signed the present Charter. Done at the city of San Francisco the twenty-sixth day of June, one thousand nine hundred and forty-five.’

 

NATIONAL COMMISSION TO REVIEW THE WORKING OF THE CONSTITUTION: TREATY MAKING POWER UNDER OUR CONSTITUTION

 

“Every state has entered into and is entering into treaties – be it multi-lateral or bilateral – which have a serious impact upon the economy and the social and political life of its society. In spite of the fundamental importance of the treaty-making power, it has unfortunately received very little attention in our country, though in many other countries, good amount of research and debate has gone into it. We in India cannot afford to ignore this subject any longer, particularly because of the experience W.T.O. treaties singed by our Government without consulting or without taking into confidence either the Parliament or the public or, for that matter, groups and institutions likely to be

affected adversely thereby. The Agreements signed on Intellectual Property Rights, trade, agriculture and services are so far-reaching that there is a body of interest – so much so that the Human Development Report, 1999 published by the U.N.D.P. has called for a review – a roll back – of the Agreement on Trade-related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) to protect the health the people and economies of the developing countriesâ€- quoted from ‘A Consultation Paper on Treaty-Making Power Under Our Constitution’ submitted by National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution on January 8, 2001.

 

“Many other agreements containing clauses having deleterious effects upon our economy have also been signed during the Uruguay Round of Trade Negotiations.â€

 

“….It is well known that British India had been following the British practice in the matter of treaty-making.†“…Within the British Empire there is well-established rule that the making of a treaty is an Executive act, while the performance of its obligations, if they entail alteration of the existing domestic law, requires legislative action.â€

“Treaties of importance are first brought to the attention of the Parliament and decision of ratification is kept pending in the absence of a clear decision, approval by Parliament. The Comprehensive Treaty on banning the Nuclear Tests (CTBT) is an example.

“Important treaties are placed before the Parliament. In some of the cases, discussion was also held and resolutions were passed approving such treaties. The Tashkent Declaration 1966, the Treaty of Peace, Friendship and Cooperation between India and USSR 1971 and the Shimla Agreement 1972 are the examples.

 

“Generally, in no country do all treaties require approval by the legislature. The Executive still maintains its hold on certain types of treaties such as, for instance, agreements relating to technical matters. But ….the following matters at least requires legislative approval. Treaties of cession, treaties requiring legislation for implementation, treaties involving financial burdens on the State, treaties of alliance and treaties entailing far-reaching political consequences..

 

“….There is an urgent and real need to democratize the process of treaty making. Under our constitutional system, it is not the prerogative (if we can use that expression) of the Executive. It is a matter within the competence of Parliament and it should exercise that power in the interest of the State and its citizens. In a democracy like ours, there is no room for non-accountability. The power of treaty making is so important and has such far-reaching consequences to the people and to our polity that the element of accountability should be introduced into the process.

 

“…..Of course, where a treaty etc. calls for secrecy, or has to be concluded urgently, a special procedure may be provided, subject to subsequent Parliamentary approval consistent with the requirements of secrecy.

 

“On 5th. March, 1993, Shri George Fernandes, Member of Parliament, Lok Sabha gave notice of intention to introduce the Constitution (Amendment) Bill, 1993 for amending Article 253 to provide that treaties and conventions be ratified by each House of Parliament by not less than one half of the membership of each House and by a majority of the legislature of not less than half the States.

 

“In February, 1992, Shri M.A. Baby, Member of Parliament, Rajya Sabha gave a notice of his intention to introduce the Constitution (Amendment) Bill, 1992 to amend Article 77 of the Constitution of India providing that ‘every agreement, treaty memorandum of understanding ……with any foreign country or international organization……..shall operate only after it has been approved by resolutions of both Houses of Parliament†– quoted from the above mentioned Consultation Paper.

 

“UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, which deals with the powers of the President, states, inter-alia that the President is empowered by and with the Advice and consent of the Senate to make treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur…..The President initiates and conducts negotiations of the treaties after signing them, places them before Senate for its Advice and Consent†– quoted from the above mentioned Consultation Paper.

 

OWN POLICY

In his first broadcast to the nation as head of the interim government on September 7, 1946, Pandit Jawharlal Nehru stressed the imperative of acting as ‘a free nation with our own policy and not merely as a satellite of another nation’.

 

COMMITMENT

According to News, the Prime Minister of India Mr. Manmohan Singh has repeated once again that the Government will seek the sense of Parliament after the Board of the INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY (IAEA) approves the Safeguards Agreement and the waiver is got from the NUCLEAR SUPPLIERS GROUP (NSG).

 

INDO-US NUCLEAR DEAL

 

 

 

 

 

One hundred ninth Congress of the United States of America, at the Second Session, Begun and held at he city of Washington on Tuesday, the third day of January, two thousand and six. AN ACT to exempt from certain requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, a proposed nuclear agreement for cooperation with India.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

TITLE I – UNITED STATES AND INDIA NUCLEAR COOPERATION

Sec.101. Short Title. This Title may be cited as the “Henry J. Hyde United States- India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act of 2006.â€

Section 102 sense of Congress that – sub-Section 6 reads: ‘it is in the interest of the United States to enter into an agreement for nuclear cooperation arrangement pursuant to section 123 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2153) with a country that has never been a State Party to the NPT if – (B) the country has a functioning and uninterrupted democratic system of government, has a foreign policy that is congruent to that of the United States, and is working with the United States on key foreign policy initiatives related to nonproliferation; sub-section 13 reads: ‘the United States should not seek to facilitate or encourage the continuation of nuclear exports to India by any other party if such exports are terminated under United States law; Section 103 – Statements of Policy: sub-section (b)

– With Respect to South Asia: – (4) Secure India’s full and active participation in United States efforts to dissuade, isolate, and if necessary, a sanction and contain Iran for its efforts to acquire weapons of mass destruction, including a nuclear weapons capability and the capability to enrich uranium or reprocess nuclear fuel, and the means to deliver weapons of mass destruction.

 

The 123 AGREEMENT ON NUCLEAR DEAL means the implementation of Section 123 of the U.S. Atomic Energy Act 1954 under title – Cooperation with other Nations. It is a bilateral Agreement and was SIGNED BETWEEN INDIA AND UNITED STATES IN JULY 2007.

The Henry J.. Hyde United States – India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act of 2006, also known as the Hyde Act, is the legal framework for a bilateral pact between the United States of America and Republic of India. This Act provides the legal basis for a 123 Agreement with India. The 123 Agreement requires a separate approval of the United States Congress of the exact terms and conditions for bilateral civilian nuclear cooperation.

 

This Agreement was not put before the Parliament of India before it was signed BUT the US Senate/Congress passed the Agreement on 27th. July, 2007. According to News, Prime Minister of India realized the importance of this Agreement and his gesture revealed that this Agreement might not be the sole matter of the EXECUTIVE POWER OF GOVERNMENT OF INDIA. In December 2007, both the house of Parliament discussed the 123 Agreement and it appeared - that majority Members of Parliament expressed reservations about the 123 Agreement and taken no resolution to give clearance to proceed further to implement the 123 Agreement.

 

After the 123 Agreement was signed as per the Indo-US nuclear deal, the next steps to be taken to operationalise the agreement are – India going to the IAEA for the Safeguards Agreement (India is a member of Board of Governors), the US approaching the Nuclear Suppliers Group for getting India a waiver from guidelines.

 

SPIRIT OF DEMOCRACY

After both the steps taken for operationalization of the deal, the Prime Minister of India promises to take the sense of Parliament. The Agreement, which has National importance and implications cannot be a matter of fait accompli in any democratic country and it is against the Principle, Purpose of Democracy. Left Parties of the UPA are against this Deal so the EXECUTIVE OF GOVERNMENT OF INDIA represents the minority members of the Parliament. So the decision making by a minority group for the NATIONAL INTEREST , is not the healthy signal of a Democratic country like ours.

 

In a democracy the final decision making power must rest with those elected by the people. Democracy based on consultation and discussion but not based on propaganda as done recently by Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, Government of India. This reduces the chances of rash or irresponsible decisions. Thus democracy improves the quality of decision-making. Democracy provides a method to deal with differences and conflicts. These differences are particularly sharp in a country like ours. A democratic government is a better government because it is a more accountable form of government.

 

ALLEGATION GAINST THIS AGREEMENT

The allegation against the INDO-US NUCLEAR AGREEMENT more commonly referred to as the 123 Deal is on the following points –

(1) it does not provide for full civilian nuclear cooperation,

(2) it does not meet the needs of energy security which will severely undermine the country’s independent foreign policy and strategic autonomy by cementing a strategic alliance with the United States,

(3) it is anti-people and will make India a strategic ally of US imperialism in South Asia to impose its hegemony,

(4) it is an outrageous instrument of recolonization of India and Third World,

(5) it is in gross violation of underlying principles of the International peace,

(6) nuclear power is prohibitively costly, intrinsically hazardous and potentially catastrophic,

(7) the Prime Minister gave assurance in Parliament in August, 2006 on safeguarding India’s interests in the nuclear deal. These were nullified by the Hyde Act passed by the US’s Congress in December, 2006,

(8) it is harmful for the people and the country’s sovereignty , (9)

(9) it is a consequence of an ill-conceived, ill-timed, ill-negotiated Agreement with the US administration,

(10) it will push India into a trap of slavery,

(11) specifically the 123 Agreement, indirectly endorsing the Hyde Act of 2006, has formed the basis of concern, since the provisions of the act – ‘militate against India’s sovereignty – in particular, in regard to the conduct of our foreign policy. When enforced, they will seriously impair our nuclear weapons programme, and thereby jeopardize our strategic objective’.

 

JOINT STATEMENT

The Indo-US Agreement was first laid out in the joint statement issued by the Prime Minister and US President on JULY 18, 2005 from Washington D.C. and further reiterated on MARCH 2, 2006 in another joint statement by them issued from New Delhi and signed the INDO-US AGREEMENT ON NUCLEAR DEAL and discussion in Parliament on MAY 12, 2006. Committee of Foreign Affairs of the US Senate/Congress passed the Agreement on JUNE 29, 2006. Government of India signed the HENRY HYDE ACT on DECEMBER 18, 2006.

 

The Henry J. Hyde United States – India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act of 2006, also known as the Hyde Act, is the legal framework for a bilateral pact between the United States of America and Republic of India. This Act provides the legal basis for a 123 Agreement with India. The 123 Agreement requires a separate approval of the United States Congress of the exact terms and conditions for bilateral civilian nuclear cooperation.

 

MORE POINTS

 

Some points came out in discussion on this Agreement as –

 

(1) the Government of India has been dragging its feet over the Iran Gas Pipeline Project as the behest of the US and in consideration of the Hyde Act,

(2) In the last three Five Year Plans, Electricity capacity additions has been of 20,000 MW per Plan less than what we had added in the Seventh Plan,

(3) if the deal is signed today, it will take about 8 years before any electricity is produced from imported reactors under the deal,

(4) the cost of electricity from such plants will be more than Rs.5/-, twice that from coal-fired plants,

(5) nuclear plants require imported Uranium, which is controlled by a small international cartel. The price of the Uranium has gone up by the 5 times in the last few years,

(6) with the most optimistic nuclear scenario that the government has projected, nuclear energy will at best meet only 8% of our electricity demand and about 4% of our total primary energy demand,

(7) the Government either deliberately or a failure of planning, did not invest in expanding the existing Uranium mines or opening new mines. The Atomic Energy Commission has made clear that we have enough Uranium for 10,000 MW of installed capacity against the current capacity of only about 4,100 MW; India has 61,000 tonnes of Uranium ores in its soil which can sustain a total PHWR capacity of 10,000 MW, against the current installed capacity of 4,100 MW,

(8) it appears that the spectre of Uranium shortage has been created only to push a deal that is not in India’s national interest.

(9) the Government is sought to push through a strategic alliance with the US.

EXPERIENCE

 

One might remember the Enron case. Once Enron started to produce power, its cost of Rs.5-7/- per unit and sank the Maharashtra State Electricity Board in recent past. No doubt India is growing with shortage of electricity.

 

A PICTURE OF ELECTRICITY

 

 

 

 

 

Year

 

Electricity

(source)

 

Present Generation

 

Target (year 2020)

 

 

2008

 

Nuclear Power

 

4,100 MW(3% of total)

 

20,000 MW (8% of total)

 

 

2008

 

Total (from all source)

 

135,000 MW (app.)

 

Might be 250,000 MW

 

According to information, the cost to get the 15,900 MW (20,000-4,100) Electricity from Nuclear Power is worth $150 billion i.e. about Rs.60,000/- crore (year 2008) with this 123 Agreement (one billion means 1,000 millions in US and France; $1=Rs.40/-app).

 

Electric generation might be targeted to 230,000 MW (year 2020) from other sources from present 130,900 MW (year 2008). The 123 Agreement once finalized, will bring in big money for the likes of General Electric and Westinghouse of US. All independent estimates point out that nuclear power is more expensive than other sources of energy – thermal, hydro and renewable etc. The argument that nuclear will help combat global warming is illusory, for it has been shown that for that to happen a new nuclear plant has to come up every week. The nuclear power is the social, health and environmental threat, and it poses threat to human and all forms of life. It will take 8

years time in India to produce electricity by imported reactor and uranium.. Cost of the uranium increased by 5 times during last few years.

 

A HISTORY: COOPERATION FROM USA TO INDIA

Starting in 1964, the US had provided nuclear technology and equipment to India not for weapons but for civilian nuclear reactors and other peaceful purposes. This cooperation had ended in 1974 after the Indians conducted a nuclear explosion (Pokhran I). Pursuant to the 1968 Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), India had been classified as a non-nuclear weapon state because it had not exploded a nuclear weapon before 1967.

 

RELEVANT MATTERS OF THIS DEAL

Under the President George W. Bush proposal at present, India would pay for the Uranium. In addition, it would continue its current moratorium on nuclear weapon testing and cooperate with US in other ways. US congress approved a Bill authorizing the negotiating of a new US-Indian nuclear Cooperation agreement. President Bush signed the Bill into law. This new statue amends the US Atomic Energy Act to authorize the US Government to supply India with low-enriched Uranium for India’s peaceful nuclear power reactors.

 

But in this Agreement - the administration of US did not submit the text of a formal nuclear cooperation agreement to Congress because none had yet been negotiated. The Administration’s Bill would have authorized a future agreement with India – leaving the final terms in considerable part to the US and Indian Governments to negotiate – without any requirement for final approval of terms of agreement by Congress.

 

The House-Senate Conference Committee of US is responsible for the final draft and at present agreed to statutory language against any future nuclear weapon test by India, though it expressed no opposition to future testing by the US. Both countries have signed the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), but neither has ratified that treaty. The Conference Committee of US submitted as –

 

“The Conference believes that there should be no ambiguity regarding the legal and policy consequences of any future Indian test of a nuclear explosive device. In that event, the President must terminate all export and re-export of US origin nuclear materials, nuclear equipment, and sensitive nuclear technology to India. The Conference expect the President to make full and immediate use of US rights to demand the return of all nuclear related items, materials, and sensitive nuclear technology that have been exported or re-exported to India if India were to test or detonate, or otherwise cause the test or detonation of, a nuclear explosive device

for any reason…â€

 

Bilateral relations between India and US whether in the political, diplomatic, military or economic realms, are presently at an all-time high. Separating its civilian nuclear facilities from its military ones, and placing the former under safeguards stipulated by the International Atomic Energy Agency, India would adhere to its voluntary moratorium on testing of nuclear weapons and cooperate with the US on a fissile material cut-off treaty.

 

The NSG is an international committee of about 45 industrialized countries that supply nuclear materials and technology to other countries. In March, 2006, at the meeting of the over 40 NSG members who were present, only France, Russia, U.K. and the US expressed support for accepting India into NSG and for approving the Bush-Singh agreement. 27 NSG members opposed the US-India proposed Agreement. Many took no position.

 

This Agreement will be subject to ratification by both countries in accordance with their respective constitutional procedures, and will come into force with effect from the date on which the instruments of ratification are exchanged.

 

CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS REVISITED

 

Article 1(2) of the CHARTER of UNITED NATIONS reads: The purpose of the UN: ‘to develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace.’ Article 2(1) reads: The organization and its members, in pursuit of the purposes stated in Article I shall act in accordance with the following Principles: ‘the organization is based on the principles of the sovereign equality of all its members.’

 

UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS

 

5th. Paragraph of the Preamble of the Declaration reads: ‘Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom.’

 

INTERNATIONAL COVENANT

 

Article 15(1)(b) of International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights reads: The State Parties to the preset Covenant recognize the right of everyone: ‘to enjoy the benefits of scientific progress and its application.’ Article 15(3) reads: ‘ The State Parties to the present Covenant undertake to respect the freedom indispensable for scientific research and creative activity.’

 

Article 20(1) of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights reads: ‘any propaganda for war shall be prohibited by law.’ Article 25(a) reads: Every citizen shall have the right and the opportunity, without any of the distinctions mentioned in Article 2 and without unreasonable restrictions: ‘to take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly or through freely chosen representatives.’

 

DECLARATIONS

 

Paragraph 7 of 1960 DECLARATION on GRANTING INDEPENDENCE to Colonial Countries and Peoples reads: Declares that: ‘All states shall observe faithfully and strictly the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal-Declaration of Human Rights and the present Declaration on the basis of equality, non-interference in the internal affairs of all states, and respect for the sovereign rights of all peoples and their territorial integrity.’

 

Section 5 of SAN JOSE DECLARATION, 1993 of the representatives of the Latin American and Caribeean Countries reads: ‘we consider that the defence and strengthening of representative democracy constitute the best guarantee of the effective enjoyment of all human rights, and stress that the rupture of the democratic order threatens human rights in the country concerned and has negative repercussions on the countries of the region, particularly neighbouring countries.’

 

7th. Paragraph of the VIENNA DECLARATION and Programme of Action adopted on June 25, 1993 by the World Conference on Human Rights reads: ‘Recalling also the determination expressed in the Preamble of the Charter of the United Nations to save succeeding generations from scourge of war, to establish conditions under which justice and respect for obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, to promote social progress and better standard of life in larger freedom, to practice tolerance and good neighbourliness, and to employ international machinery for the promotion of the economic and social advancement of all peoples.’

 

Section 8 of the above VIENNA DECLARATION reads: ‘Democracy, development and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms are interdependent and mutually reinforcing. Democracy is based on the freely expressed will of the people to determine their own political, economic, social and cultural systems and their full participation in all aspects of their lives. In the context of the above, the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms at the national and international levels should be universal and conducted without conditions attached. The international community should support the strengthening and promoting of democracy, development and respect for

human rights and fundamental freedoms in the entire world.’

 

CONCLUSION

 

In US side, to mature the INDO-US NUCLEAR AGREEMENT – (1) the Executive, (2) the Senate/Congress and (3) Conference Committee are involved BUT in Indian side, the EXECUTIVE who represents the minor group in Parliament is involved and without any resolution in Parliament in this matter.

 

“Hon’ble Shri Pranab Mukherjee M.P. …pointed out (in Parliament in 1994) that one of the reasons for the success of European Union and ASEAN as ‘economic blocs’ is that the decision makers of the constituent countries i.e. their executive, is by and large free to take decisions in matters of common interest. Ultimately, he suggested that there should be informed debate and discussion on the issue and that one should not rush with such measures†– National Commission to Review the working of the Constitution, Report submitted on January 8, 2001.

 

This philosophy prevails till date and the root cause of present suffering of our country. This philosophy weakened the spirit of Democracy in our country wherein this matter is related deeply with national interest such as national progress, national wealth and sustainable development.

 

I would, therefore, like to urge you to –

(1) advice to the GOVERNMENT OF INDIA to constitute a committee of Parliament to whom every treaty/agreement/convention proposed to be signed and/or proposed to be ratified shall be referred; this committee will point out pros and cons elaborately; this committee must decide whether the treaty/agreement/convention should be referred to Parliament or should be allowed to be signed by the Union Executive, AND submit the matter of INDO-US NUCLEAR DEAL before that committee;

(2) advice to the GOVERNMET OF INDIA to take into consideration the Principles and Purposes of the Charter of United Nations, Human Rights Usage and spirit of Democracy.

 

With due respect,

Yours faithfully,

15/07/2008.

Address: 18/20A, Dover Lane, Dipak De

Kolkata – 700 029. ( Human Rights Activist – acceptable to

E-mail: dipakdev National Human Rights Commission,

New Delhi; Studying M.Phil in Human

Rights; with the: Amnesty International

India with permission).

 

Copy of this PETITION to –

 

(1) Hon’ble Prime Minister, Mr. Manmohan Singh, Government of India, New Delhi for information and with the same urge as mentioned above.

(2) Chairman, National Human Rights Commission, New Delhi for information.

 

15/07/2008. Dipak De

(Human Rights Activist – studying

M.Phil in Human Rights).

"It is now 30 years since I have been confining myself to the treatment ofchronic diseases. During those 30 years I have run against so many histories of littlechildren who had never seen a sick day until they were vaccinated and who, in the severalyears that have followed, have never seen a well day since. I couldn't put my finger onthe disease they have. They just weren't strong. Their resistance was gone. They wereperfectly well before they were vaccinated. They have never been well since. "---Dr. William Howard Hay

Explore your hobbies and interests. Click here to begin.