Why Is Nuclear Testing Necessary

CHAPTER-2

NEED AND EXPANSION OF THE NUCLEAR TEST BAN TREATY

Need of the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty

After the 1945 of nuclear weapon test, it is for the first time in 1954 almost a decade to the 1945 incident that Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru, the then Prime Minister of India was the first to took initiative and proposed the suspension of the nuclear weapon test. After this the 1963 treaty came into existence but it did not provide the provision to ban the nuclear weapon test in underground level whereas atmosphere, outer space and underwater are put under restriction. Then comes the threshold test ban treaty of 1974 limited the yield of underground nuclear-weapon test s to 150 kilotons .

Around 2000 nuclear weapon tests explosion were registered in

It was inserted in the treaty so as to remove the question of high seas on which the nuclear tests were prohibited and the party conducting such tests would considered to be as least temporary control of the area in which the test were conducted .

When nuclear weapon test explosions or any nuclear explosions is carried out at high seas, issues arises; first to the legality of those explosions on the high seas and second the responsibility of the state under whose jurisdiction these nuclear weapon test is carried out. According to the convention of the high seas recognized by the UN, state cannot exercise its jurisdiction as it is there for the mankind, it serves the general purpose and one cannot put absolute control even the state itself, and further in testing of the nuclear weapons, it should be in a manner that it did not affect the rights of other states . But as far as the general principles of International law are concerned, it allowed the state to have its control over the high seas and should take the jurisdiction and liability if any nuclear weapon test explosion is carried

On the basis of it there were two opinions; one was against the testing of nuclear explosions on high seas as it was against the law of humanity and the law of the nations. Other was in favor by justifying the act of America as the necessary steps in this free world. This controversy on this issue was brought in the case of New Zealand v. France.

Case: New Zealand V. France

In the partial test ban treaty 1963, France is not a party to the convention and at the same time it has not complied with the provisions of the 1963 Partial Test Ban Treaty by testing the series of nuclear tests in the atmosphere centered on mururoa which is 1050 nautical miles from the Cook islands of New Zealand then in such case the legality of the nuclear test comes into picture.

The conduct of the France on the nuclear test carried out by it in the south-pacific region has given rise to concern and apprehension on the part of the people and the government of New Zealand and the territories associated with it. In furtherance to this New Zealand government tried to negotiate with France on this issue but it was of no use and when the case reaches of ICJ the question of competent jurisdiction has been raised by the France . At the end the cases was remove from the case list as ICJ has no