Civil society voices alarm over privatisation, liability changes in SHANTI nuclear energy Bill

By A Representative 

Several civil society organisations, environmental groups and public interest advocates have criticised the SHANTI Nuclear Energy Bill, warning that it could expose India to serious nuclear safety, economic and national security risks. In a joint press statement issued on Friday, the groups alleged that the Bill was passed in Parliament without adequate scrutiny, debate or consultation with independent experts, and described the process as weakening democratic oversight.

According to the statement, the Bill was cleared without being referred to a Parliamentary Standing Committee and without hearings involving scientists, environmental specialists or affected communities. The organisations said the legislation, which seeks to accelerate nuclear power expansion by encouraging private investment, significantly restructures India’s nuclear sector by opening almost the entire nuclear fuel cycle to private participation.

The critics argued that privatising activities such as uranium mining, fuel fabrication, reactor operation and reprocessing could fragment state control over a sector closely tied to India’s strategic and security interests. They noted that the Atomic Energy Act, 1962 was designed to ensure sovereign oversight of the nuclear fuel cycle, and warned that the entry of profit-driven private entities could increase the risk of diversion or leakage of sensitive materials, as well as threats from espionage or sabotage.

A central concern raised in the statement relates to changes in nuclear liability provisions. The groups said the Bill weakens the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010 by sharply capping operator liability at levels they consider far below the potential costs of a major nuclear accident. They argued that limiting liability to between ₹100 crore and ₹3,000 crore would place the financial burden of any large-scale disaster on taxpayers while insulating corporate operators from full accountability.

The complete exemption of suppliers of nuclear equipment, systems and services from liability was described as particularly dangerous. According to the organisations, this could encourage domestic and foreign vendors to prioritise commercial interests over safety standards. They pointed to international nuclear disasters such as Chernobyl and Fukushima to underline that the long-term economic and environmental costs of accidents can run into hundreds of billions of dollars, far exceeding the liability limits proposed under the Bill.

The statement also warned of severe economic consequences if a serious nuclear accident were to occur in India. It said a meltdown at a large reactor could trigger mass evacuations, long-term displacement of communities and the collapse of agriculture, fisheries and tourism across a wide region. Long-term healthcare costs from radiation-related illnesses and potential shocks to financial markets and investor confidence were also highlighted as major risks.

Describing the legislation as a “reckless reform,” the organisations urged the government to reconsider the Bill. They called for the restoration of strong public control over the nuclear sector, the re-establishment of comprehensive liability provisions and a decisive policy shift towards renewable, decentralised and safer energy options. The statement concluded that India’s energy future should be guided by public interest, safety and accountability rather than high-risk, corporate-driven expansion.

The concerns were reiterated at a press conference addressed by representatives of several groups, including the National Alliance of People’s Movements, Friends of the Earth India, the People’s Union for Civil Liberties and senior legal advocates, who called for wider public debate on the Bill and its long-term implications.